Editing Case study (section)

==Uses==
Case studies have commonly been seen as a fruitful way to come up with hypotheses and generate theories.<ref name=":6">{{Citation|last=Levy|first=Jack|title=Case Studies: Types, Designs, and Logics of Inference|work=Case Studies|year=2014|pages=II113|publisher=SAGE Publications Ltd|doi=10.4135/9781473915480.n26|isbn=978-1-4462-7448-4}}</ref><ref name=":3" /><ref name=":7">{{Cite book|last1=George|first1=Alexander L.|title=Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences|last2=Bennett|first2=Andrew|date=2005|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=978-0-262-30307-1|location=|oclc=944521872}}</ref><ref name=":17">{{Cite book|last=Gerring|first=John|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xECY0nnkTvMC|title=Case Study Research: Principles and Practices|date=2007|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-85928-8|pages=39–40|language=en}}</ref><ref name=":20" /> Case studies are useful for understanding outliers or deviant cases.<ref name=":21">{{Citation |last1=Widner |first1=Jennifer |title=Using Case Studies to Enhance the Quality of Explanation and Implementation: Integrating Scholarship and Development Practice |date=2022 |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/case-for-case-studies/using-case-studies-to-enhance-the-quality-of-explanation-and-implementation/FACFB9C877AAAD65909220E80E3074C7 |work=The Case for Case Studies: Methods and Applications in International Development |pages=1–26 |editor-last=Ortega Nieto |editor-first=Daniel |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-108-42727-2 |last2=Woolcock |first2=Michael |last3=Nieto |first3=Daniel Ortega |editor2-last=Widner |editor2-first=Jennifer |editor3-last=Woolcock |editor3-first=Michael}}</ref> Classic examples of case studies that generated theories includes Darwin's [[theory of evolution]] (derived from his travels to the Galapagos Islands), and [[Douglass North]]'s theories of economic development (derived from case studies of early developing states, such as England).<ref name=":17" />

Case studies are also useful for formulating [[concept]]s, which are an important aspect of theory construction.<ref name=":02">{{Cite journal|last=Mahoney|first=James|date=2010|title=After KKV: The New Methodology of Qualitative Research|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/world-politics/article/after-kkv-the-new-methodology-of-qualitative-research/4A72E003336B3D44D47B053513B43F53|journal=World Politics|language=en|volume=62|issue=1|pages=120–147|doi=10.1017/S0043887109990220|s2cid=43923978|issn=1086-3338|url-access=subscription}}</ref> The concepts used in qualitative research will tend to have higher conceptual validity than concepts used in quantitative research (due to [[Giovanni Sartori|conceptual stretching]]: the unintentional comparison of dissimilar cases).<ref name=":7" /> Case studies add descriptive richness,<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal|last=Collier|first=David|date=2011|title=Understanding Process Tracing|journal=PS: Political Science & Politics|volume=44|issue=4|pages=823–830|doi=10.1017/s1049096511001429|issn=1049-0965|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":10">{{Cite book|last1=Brady |first1=Henry E. |last2=Collier |first2=David|title=Rethinking social inquiry : diverse tools, shared standards|date=2010|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield Publishers|isbn=978-1-4422-0343-3|edition=2|location=|pages=|oclc=838295613}}</ref> and can have greater internal validity than quantitative studies.<ref name=":19">{{Cite book|last=Gerring|first=John|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xECY0nnkTvMC|title=Case Study Research: Principles and Practices|date=2007|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-85928-8|pages=43, 49|language=en}}</ref> Case studies are suited to explain outcomes in individual cases, which is something that quantitative methods are less equipped to do.<ref name=":8">{{Cite book|last1=Goertz|first1=Gary|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691149707.001.0001|title=A Tale of Two Cultures|last2=Mahoney|first2=James|date=2012-09-09|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-0-691-14970-7|location=|pages=221–227|doi=10.23943/princeton/9780691149707.001.0001}}</ref> Case studies have been characterized as useful to assess the plausibility of arguments that explain empirical regularities.<ref>{{Cite web|last1=Fearon|first1=James D.|last2=Laitin|first2=David D.|editor1-first=Robert E|editor1-last=Goodin|date=2011|title=Integrating Qualitative and Quantitative Methods|url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199604456.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199604456-e-052|url-status=live|website=The Oxford Handbook of Political Science|language=en|doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199604456.001.0001|isbn=978-0-19-960445-6|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140530035109/http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com:80/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199604456.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199604456-e-052 |archive-date=2014-05-30 }}</ref> By emphasizing context across cases, case studies can be useful in identifying scope conditions and evaluating to what extent concepts and theories apply across cases.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Simmons |first=Erica S. |last2=Smith |first2=Nicholas Rush |date=2025 |title=How Cases Speak to One Another: Using Translation to Rethink Generalization in Political Science Research |url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/how-cases-speak-to-one-another-using-translation-to-rethink-generalization-in-political-science-research/CC25A63B221A1644C892128BEDECBAFA#article |journal=American Political Science Review |language=en |doi=10.1017/S0003055425000140 |issn=0003-0554|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Through fine-grained knowledge and description, case studies can fully specify the causal mechanisms in a way that may be harder in a large-N study.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Bennett|first1=Andrew|last2=Elman|first2=Colin|date=2006|title=Qualitative Research: Recent Developments in Case Study Methods|journal=Annual Review of Political Science|language=en|volume=9|issue=1|pages=455–476|doi=10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.082103.104918|issn=1094-2939|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":5" /><ref>Braumoeller, Bear and Anne Sartori. 2004. "The Promise and Perils of Statistics in International Relations." in ''Cases, Numbers, Models: International Relations Research Methods''. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press: ch. 6.</ref><ref name=":6" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=Gerring|first=John|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xECY0nnkTvMC|title=Case Study Research: Principles and Practices|date=2007|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-85928-8|pages=42|language=en}}</ref><ref name=":21" /> In terms of identifying "causal mechanisms", some scholars distinguish between "weak" and "strong chains". Strong chains actively connect elements of the causal chain to produce an outcome whereas weak chains are just intervening variables.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Waldner|first=David|date=2015-06-22|title=Process Tracing and Qualitative Causal Inference|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09636412.2015.1036624|journal=Security Studies|volume=24|issue=2|pages=239–250|language=en|doi=10.1080/09636412.2015.1036624|s2cid=143163960|issn=0963-6412|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

Case studies of cases that defy existing theoretical expectations may contribute knowledge by delineating why the cases violate theoretical predictions and specifying the scope conditions of the theory.<ref name=":6" /> Case studies are useful in situations of causal complexity where there may be [[equifinality]], complex [[Interaction (statistics)|interaction effects]] and [[Path dependence|path dependency]].<ref name=":7" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=Gerring|first=John|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xECY0nnkTvMC|title=Case Study Research: Principles and Practices|date=2007|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-85928-8|pages=61–62|language=en}}</ref> They may also be more appropriate for empirical verifications of [[strategic interaction]]s in rationalist scholarship than quantitative methods.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Farrell|first1=Henry|last2=Finnemore|first2=Martha|date=2009|title=Ontology, methodology, and causation in the American school of international political economy|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290802524075|journal=Review of International Political Economy|volume=16|issue=1|pages=58–71|doi=10.1080/09692290802524075|issn=0969-2290|s2cid=145230528}}</ref> Case studies can identify necessary and insufficient conditions, as well as complex combinations of necessary and sufficient conditions.<ref name=":7" /><ref name=":8" /><ref>{{Cite book|last=Gerring|first=John|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xECY0nnkTvMC|title=Case Study Research: Principles and Practices|date=2007|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-85928-8|pages=54–55|language=en}}</ref> They argue that case studies may also be useful in identifying the scope conditions of a theory: whether variables are sufficient or necessary to bring about an outcome.<ref name=":7" /><ref name=":8" />

Qualitative research may be necessary to determine whether a treatment is as-if random or not. As a consequence, good quantitative [[Observational techniques|observational research]] often entails a qualitative component.<ref name=":20" />