Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are case studies more than sophisticated storytelling?: Methodological problems of qualitative empirical research mainly based on semi-structured interviews

  • Published:
Quality & Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Qualitative empirical research and case studies have, like any other scientific method, their strengths and weaknesses. But how valid are the findings stemming from such research, particularly when they are base on data gained from interviews? This paper primarily deals with the methodological problems throughout the whole research process. Areas of concerns are: (1) before collecting data and during the whole research process, (2) the process of collecting data, (3) internal validity and making sense of data, (4) external validity of the data and findings, (5) relation between the findings and social sciences as well as social practice. The analysis will reveal a mixed picture concerning the scientific value of qualitative case studies. There is some good news. There is more methodological freedom and room for creativity in qualitative research than it seems at first glance. On the other hand there is a need for a greater methodological awareness particularly concerning possible downsides of subjectivity, the generalisation of the findings, conscious and unconscious biases, influences of dominant ideologies and mainstream thinking. Above all, there is a great need for rational critique. There is great need for a more critical attitude towards (basic) assumptions—particularly, to challenge, question and criticise literally everything systematically and permanently and to put the findings sufficiently in relation to the wider historical context, i.e. epochal ideologies and societal structures. Social science research has to contribute much more to the discussion of values, interests, and ideologies that shape current and future social practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Achenbaum A.A. (2001). When good research goes bad. Mark. Res. 13(4): 13–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Altheide D.L. and Johnson J.M. (1998). Criteria for assessing interpretative validity in qualitative research. In: Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials, pp 283–312.   Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson M. (2003). Methodology for close up studies—struggling with closeness and closure. Higher Educ. 46(2): 167–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anastas J.W. (2004). Quality in qualitative evaluation: issues and possible answers. Res. Soc. Work Pract. 14(1): 57–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angen M.J. (2000). Evaluating interpretive inquiry: reviewing the validity debate and opening the dialogue. Qual. Health Res. 10(3): 378–395

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbour R.S. (2003). The newfound credibility of qualitative research? Tales of technical essentialism and co-option. Qual. Health Res. 13(7): 1019–1027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blichfeldt B.S. and Andersen J.R. (2006). Creating a wider audience for action research: learning from case-study research. J. Res. Pract. 2(1): 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman A. (2006). Paradigm peace and the implications for quality. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 9(2): 111–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caelli, K., Ray, L., Mill, J.: ‘Clear as mud’: Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. Int. J. Qual. Methods 2(2), Article 1, retrieved September 2, 2004 from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/pdf/caellietal.pdf (2003)

  • Collins E.C. (1992). Qualitative research as art: toward a holistic process. Theory into Pract. XXXI(2): 181–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deem R. (2001). Globalisation, new managerialism, academic capitalism and entrepreneurialism in universities: is the local dimension still important? Comp. Educ. 37(1): 7–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin N.K. (1998). The art and politics of interpretation. In: Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials, pp 313–344.   Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach T. (2003). Kritik und Neukonzeption der Allgemeinen Betriebswirtschaftslehre auf sozialwissenschaftlicher Basis. Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Diefenbach T. (2007). The managerialistic ideology of organisational change management. J. Organ. Change Manage. 20(1): 126–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drisko, J.W.: Strengthening qualitative studies and reports: Standards to promote academic integrity. J. Soc. Work Educ. 33(1), retrieved September 2, 2004 from EBSCO, item 9703102481 (1997)

  • Easterby-Smith M., Thorpe R. and Lowe A. (1991). Management Research. An Introduction. SAGE Publications, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden C. and Huxham C. (1996). Action research for management research. Br. J. Manage. 7: 75–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fine G.A. (1993). Ten lies of ethnography: moral dilemmas of field research. J. Contemp. Ethnogr. 22: 267–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser B.G. and Strauss A.L. (1967). The   Discovery   of   Grounded   Theory—Strategies   for   Qualitative  Research. de Gruyter, Hawthorne

    Google Scholar 

  • Henwood K. and Pidgeon N. (1994). Beyond the qualitative paradigm: a framework for introducing diversity within qualitative psychology. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 4: 225–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen J.L. and Rodgers R. (2001). Cumulating the intellectual gold of case study research. Public Adm. Rev. 61(2): 235–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karami A., Rowley J. and Analoui F. (2006). Research and knowledge building in management studies: an analysis of methodological preferences. Int. J. Manage. 23(1): 43–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Keating J. (1995). A framework for classifying and evaluating the theoretical contributions of case research in management accounting. J. Manage. Account. Res. 7: 66–86

    Google Scholar 

  • MacPherson I., Brooker R. and Ainsworth P. (2000). Case study in the contemporary world of research: using notions of purpose, place, process and product to develop some principles for practice. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 3(1): 49–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maso I. (1989). The necessity of being flexible. Qual. Quant. 23: 161–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meijer C., Verloop N. and Beijaard D. (2002). Multi-Method triangulation in a qualitative study on teachers’ practical knowledge: an attempt to increase internal validity. Qual. Quant. 36: 145–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R.: Das Elend des Historizismus, 5th edn. (translation of 2nd English edition of ‘The Poverty of Historicism’, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London 1960), J.C.B. Mohr (Siebeck), To¨bingen (1979)

  • Pyett P.M. (2003). Validation of qualitative research in the “real world”, Qual. Health Res. 13(8): 1170–1179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie J.E. (2001). Case series research: a case for qualitative method in assembling evidence. Physiother. Theory Pract. 17: 127–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wainwright, D.: Can sociological research be qualitative, critical and valid? Qual. Rep. 3(2), retrieved September 2, 2004, from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/wain.html (1997)

  • Whittemore R., Chase S.K. and Mandle C.L. (2001). Validity in qualitative research. Qual. Health Res. 11(4): 522–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, G.: A comparative discussion of the notion of “validity” in qualitative and quantitative research, Qualitative Report, 4(3/4), retrieved September 2, 2004, from http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-3/winter.html (2000)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, 199 Cathedral Street, Glasgow, G4 0QU, UK

    Thomas Diefenbach

Authors
  1. Thomas Diefenbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Diefenbach.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Diefenbach, T. Are case studies more than sophisticated storytelling?: Methodological problems of qualitative empirical research mainly based on semi-structured interviews. Qual Quant 43, 875–894 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-008-9164-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-008-9164-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation