legal case study research paper

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Law and Social Science

Volume 14, 2018, review article, the use of case studies in law and social science research.

• Lisa L. Miller 1
• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: Department of Political Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901, USA; email: [email protected]
• Vol. 14:381-396 (Volume publication date October 2018) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-120814-121513
• Copyright © 2018 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved

This article reviews classic and contemporary case study research in law and social science. Taking as its starting point that legal scholars engaged in case studies generally have a set of questions distinct from those using other research approaches, the essay offers a detailed discussion of three primary contributions of case studies in legal scholarship: theory building, concept formation, and processes/mechanisms. The essay describes the role of case studies in social scientific work and their express value to legal scholars, and offers specific descriptions from classic and contemporary works.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

• Armour J , Lele P 2009 . Law, finance, and politics: the case of India. Law Soc. Rev. 43 : 3 491– 526 [Google Scholar]
• Babbie ER 2012 . The Practice of Social Research Belmont, CA: Wadsworth [Google Scholar]
• Barker V 2009 . The Politics of Imprisonment: How the Democratic Process Shapes the Way America Punishes Offenders New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Becker HS 1992 . Cases, causes, conjunctions, stories, and imagery. See Ragin & Becker 1992 205– 16
• Bell J 2002 . Policing Hatred: Law Enforcement, Civil Rights, and Hate Crime New York: N.Y. Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Brady H , Collier D 2010 . Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards New York: Rowman & Littlefield [Google Scholar]
• Brereton D , Casper JD 1981 . Does it pay to plead guilty? Differential sentencing and the functioning of criminal courts. Law Soc. Rev. 16 : 1 45– 70 [Google Scholar]
• Bumiller K 1987 . Victims in the shadow of the law: a critique of the model of legal protection. Signs 12 : 3 421– 39 [Google Scholar]
• Burawoy M , Hendley K 1992 . Between Perestroika and privatisation: divided strategies and political crisis in a Soviet enterprise. Sov. Stud. 44 : 3 371– 402 [Google Scholar]
• Calavita K 1986 . Worker safety, law and society change: the Italian case. Law Soc. Rev. 20 : 2 189– 228 [Google Scholar]
• Campbell M 2011 . Politics, prison and law enforcement: an examination of “law and order” politics in Texas. Law Soc. Rev. 45 : 3 631– 65 [Google Scholar]
• Cheesman N 2011 . How an authoritarian regime in Burma used special courts to defeat judicial independence. Law Soc. Rev. 45 : 4 801– 30 [Google Scholar]
• Cichowski R 2007 . The European Court and Civil Society: Litigation, Mobilization and Governance Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Coleman C , Nee LD , Rubinowitz LS 2005 . Social movements and social change litigation: synergy in the Montgomery bus protest. Law Soc. Inq. 30 : 4 663– 736 [Google Scholar]
• Collier D , Brady H , Seawright J 2010 . Sources of leverage in causal inference: towards an alternative view of methodology. See Brady & Collier 2010 161– 200
• Collier D , Gerring J 2008 . Concepts and Method in Social Science: The Tradition of Giovanni Sartori New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
• Dudas J 2008 . The Cultivation of Resentment: Treaty Rights and the New Right Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Earl J 2008 . Review: “The Process is the Punishment”: thirty years later. Law Soc. Inq. 33 : 3 735– 78 [Google Scholar]
• Eisenstein J , Jacob H 1977 . Felony Justice: An Organizational Analysis of Criminal Courts New York: Little Brown [Google Scholar]
• Elster J 1989 . Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Elster J 2007 . Explaining Social Behavior: More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Ewick P , Silbey SS 1992 . Conformity, contestation, and resistance: an account of legal consciousness. New Engl. Law Rev. 26 : 3 731– 50 [Google Scholar]
• Ewick P , Silbey SS 1998 . The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Feeley M 1979 . The Process Is the Punishment: Handling Cases in a Lower District Court New York: Russell Sage Found. [Google Scholar]
• Ferrer A 2012 . Haiti, free soil, and antislavery in the revolutionary Atlantic. Am. Hist. Rev. 17 : 1 40– 66 [Google Scholar]
• Flemming RB , Nardulli PF , Eisenstein J 1993 . The Craft of Justice: Politics and Work in Criminal Court Communities Philadelphia: Univ. Pa. Press [Google Scholar]
• Galanter M 1974 . Why the “haves” come out ahead: speculations on the limits of legal change. Law Soc. Rev. 9 : 95– 160 [Google Scholar]
• George AL , Bennett G 2005 . Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Google Scholar]
• Gerring J 2007 . Case Study Research: Principles and Practices New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Gerring J 2012 . Mere description. Br. J. Political Sci. 42 : 2 721– 46 [Google Scholar]
• Ginsburg T 2003 . Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Goertz G 2006 . Social Science Concepts: A User's Guide Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Goertz G , Mahoney J 2012 . A Tale of Two Cultures: Qualitative and Quantitative Research in the Social Sciences Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Gómez LE 2016 . Connecting critical race theory with second generation legal consciousness work in Obasogie's Blinded by Sight . Law Soc. Inq . 41 : 4 1069– 77 [Google Scholar]
• Gould JB , Barclay S 2012 . Mind the gap: the place of gap studies in socio-legal scholarship. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 8 : 323– 35 [Google Scholar]
• Greenhouse CJ , Yngvesson B , Engle DM 1994 . Law and Community in Three American Towns Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Hedström P , Swedberg R 1996 . Social mechanisms. Acta Sociol 39 : 281– 308 [Google Scholar]
• Hedström P , Ylikoski P 2010 . Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 36 : 49– 67 [Google Scholar]
• Hendley K 1993 . The quest for rational labor allocation within Soviet enterprises: internal transfers before and during Perestroika. Beyond Sovietology: Essays in Politics and History S Solomon 125– 58 Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe [Google Scholar]
• Hendley K 2017 . Everyday Law in Russia Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Heumann M 1978 . Plea Bargaining Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Hilbink L 2011 . Judges Beyond Politics in Democracy and Dictatorship New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Hirschl R 2009 . Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Holzmeyer C 2009 . Human rights in the era of neoglobalization: the Alien Tort Claims Act and grassroots mobilization in Doe v . Unocal. Law Soc. Rev . 43 : 2 271– 304 [Google Scholar]
• Jacob H 1983 . Trial courts in the United States: the travails of exploration. Law Soc. Rev. 3 : 3 407– 24 [Google Scholar]
• Kagan R 2003 . Adversarial Legalism: The American Way of Law Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Kapiszewski D 2012 . High Courts and Economic Governance in Argentina and Brazil New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Kawar LC 2014 . Commanding Legality: The Juridification of Immigration Policymaking in France Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Kelemen RD , Sibbitt EC 2005 . Lex Americana? A response to Levi-Faur. Int. Organ. 59 : 2 463– 72 [Google Scholar]
• King G , Keohane RO , Verba S 1994 . Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Lemaitre J , Sandvik KB 2015 . Shifting frames, vanishing resources, and dangerous political opportunities: legal mobilization among displaced women in Columbia. Law Soc. Rev. 49 : 1 5– 38 [Google Scholar]
• Levi-Faur D 2005 . The political economy of legal globalization: juridification, adversarial legalism and responsive regulation. a comment. Int. Organ. 59 : 2 451– 62 [Google Scholar]
• Lipskey M 1979 . Street-Level Bureaucracy: The Individual in Public Services New York: Russell: Sage Found. [Google Scholar]
• Massoud MF 2013 . Law's Fragile State: Colonial, Authoritarian and Humanitarian Legacies in Sudan New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Mather L 1979 . Plea Bargaining or Trial: The Process of Criminal-Case Disposition Lexington, MA: Lexington Books [Google Scholar]
• McCann M 1992 . Reform litigation on trial. Law Soc. Inq. 17 : 4 715– 43 [Google Scholar]
• McCann M 1994 . Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Merry SE 1990 . Getting Justice and Getting Even: Legal Consciousness Among Working-Class Americans Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Miller LL 2008 . The Perils of Federalism: Race, Poverty, and the Politics of Crime Control New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Miller LL , Eisenstein J 2005 . The federal/state criminal prosecution nexus: a case study in cooperation and discretion. Law Soc. Inq. 30 : 2 239– 68 [Google Scholar]
• Milner N 1987 . The right to refuse treatment: four case studies of legal mobilization. Law Soc. Rev. 21 : 3 447– 86 [Google Scholar]
• Moustafa T 2007 . The Struggle for Constitutional Power: Law Politics, and Economic Development in Egypt Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Paris M 2001 . Legal mobilization and the politics of reform: lessons from school finance litigation in Kentucky, 1984–1995. Law Soc. Inq. 26 : 3 631– 84 [Google Scholar]
• Ragin CC , Becker HS 1992 . What Is a Case? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Rosenberg G 1991 . The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change? Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Roussell A 2015 . Policing the anticommunity: race, deterritorialization, in labor market reorganization in South Los Angeles. Law Soc. Rev. 49 : 4 813– 45 [Google Scholar]
• Ryan JP 1980 . Adjudication and sentencing in a misdemeanor court: The outcome is the punishment. Law Soc. Rev. 15 : 80– 107 [Google Scholar]
• Sarat A 1990 . The law is all over: power, resistance and the legal consciousness of the welfare poor. Yale J. Law Humanit. 2 : 343– 79 [Google Scholar]
• Sartori G 1970 . Concept misinformation in comparative politics. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 64 : 4 1033– 53 [Google Scholar]
• Scheingold SA 1984 . The Politics of Law and Order: Street Crime and Public Policy New York: Longman [Google Scholar]
• Scheingold SA 1991 . The Politics of Street Crime: Criminal Process and Cultural Obsession Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Scheppele KL 2003 . Constitutional negotiations: political contexts of judicial activism in post-Soviet Europe. Int. Sociol. 18 : 1 219– 38 [Google Scholar]
• Scheppele KL 2004 . Constitutional ethnography: an introduction. Law Soc. Rev. 38 : 3 389– 406 [Google Scholar]
• Schoenfeld H 2010 . Mass incarceration and the paradox of prison conditions litigation. Law Soc. Rev. 44 : 3/4 731– 67 [Google Scholar]
• Seawright J 2016 . Multi-Method Social Science: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Tools Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Seron C 1996 . The Business of Practicing Lives: The Work Lives of Small-Firm and Solo Attorneys Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Shapiro M 1983 . Courts: A Comparative Political Analysis Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Silbey SS 1981 . Making sense of the lower courts. Justice Syst. J. 6 : 1 13– 27 [Google Scholar]
• Silbey SS 2005 . After legal consciousness. Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 1 : 323– 68 [Google Scholar]
• Silverstein G 2009 . Law's Allure: How Law Shapes, Constrains, Saves, and Kills Politics New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• Skolnick JH 1967 . Justice Without Trial: Law Enforcement in Democratic Society Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons [Google Scholar]
• Swedlow B 2009 . Reason for hope? The spotted owl injunctions and policy change. Law Soc. Inq. 34 : 4 825– 67 [Google Scholar]
• Tarrow S 2010 . Bridging the quantitative-qualitative divide. See Brady & Collier 2010 101– 10
• Tezcür GM 2009 . Judicial activism in perilous times: the Turkish case. Law Soc. Rev. 43 : 2 305– 36 [Google Scholar]
• Tilly C 2001 . Mechanisms in political processes. Annu. Rev. Political Sci. 4 : 21– 41 [Google Scholar]
• Uggen C , Blackstone A 2004 . Sexual harassment as gendered expression of power. Am. Sociol. Rev. 69 : 1 64– 92 [Google Scholar]
• Valverde M 2012 . Everyday Law on the Streets: City Governance in an Age of Diversity Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press [Google Scholar]
• Yngvesson B 1993 . Virtuous Citizens, Disruptive Subjects: Order and Complaint in a New England Court New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

• Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, procedural justice and legal compliance, elaborating the individual difference component in deterrence theory, behavioral ethics: toward a deeper understanding of moral judgment and dishonesty, reproductive justice, the rise of international regime complexity, mass imprisonment and inequality in health and family life, procedural justice and policing: a rush to judgment, immigration law beyond borders: externalizing and internalizing border controls in an era of securitization, law and courts in authoritarian regimes, emotion and the law.

Tort Law: Cases, Perspectives, and Problems

• Colby-Sawyer College

• University of Maryland, Baltimore
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

• Temple University

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R

• Ramon L Jimenez

• Law Contemp Probl
• Margaret A. Berger
• William Mary Law Rev
• Benjamin C. Zipursky
• Emory Law J
• Lucinda Finley

• Neil LaFountain

• Katharine T. Bartlett
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

leiden lawmethods portal

Case study research.

Last update: April 07, 2022

A legal scholar who uses the term ‘case’ will probably first think of a legal case. From a socio-legal perspective, the understanding of this concept is, however, slightly different. Case study research is a methodology that is useful to study ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions in real-life.

Over the last forty years, researchers from sociology, anthropology and various other disciplines have developed the case study research methodology dramatically. This can be confusing for legal researchers. Luckily, both Webley and Argyrou have written an article on case study research specifically for legal researchers. Webley writes, for example, that this methodology allows us to know ‘how laws are understood, and how and why they are applied and misapplied, subverted, complied with or rejected’. Both authors rely upon the realist tradition of case study research as theorised by Yin. Yin defines the scope of a case study as: “An empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real-life context, when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident”.

Before you start collecting data for your case study, it is important to think about the theory and the concepts that you will want to use, as this will very much determine what your case will be about and will help you in the analysis of your data. You should then decide which methods of data collection and sources you will consult to generate a rich spectrum of data. Observations, legal guidelines, press articles… can be useful. Legal case study researchers usually also rely extensively on interviews. The meaning that interview participants give to their experiences with legal systems can uncover the influence of socio-economic factors on the law, legal processes and legal institutions.

Case studies strive for generalisable theories that go beyond the setting for the specific case that has been studied. The in-depth understanding that we gain from one case, might help to also say something about other cases in other contexts but with similar dynamics at stake. However, you need to be careful to not generalize your findings across populations or universes.

Argyrou, A. (2017) Making the Case for Case Studies in Empirical Legal Research. Utrecht Law Review, Vol.13 (3), pp.95-113

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006.) Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research, Qualitative Inquiry 12( 2), 219-245.

Gerring, J. (2004) What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for? American Political Science Review 98( 2), 341-354.

Simons, H. (2014) Case Study Research: In-Depth Understanding in Context. In P. Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research, Oxford University Press.

Webley, L. (2016) Stumbling Blocks in Empirical Legal Research: Case Study Research. Law and Method, 10.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

• Law and Method

• Submission of articles
• Notifications
• Methods courses
• Editorial team
• E-mail alerts
• October, 2016
• Stumbling Blocks in Empirical Legal Research: Case Study Research
• October 2016
• Artikel Stumbling Blocks in Empirical Legal Research: Case Study Research
• Artikel Statistical Analyses of Court Decisions: An Example of Multilevel Models of Sentencing
• Redactioneel Introduction Special Issue Stumbling Blocks in Empirical Legal Research

Citeerwijze van dit artikel: Lisa Webley, ‘Stumbling Blocks in Empirical Legal Research: Case Study Research’, 2016, oktober-december, DOI: 10.5553/REM/.000020

Dit artikel wordt geciteerd in

• Introduction

Such legal research employs an empirical method to draw inferences from observations of phenomena extrinsic to the researcher. Putting it simply, legal researchers often collect and then analyse material (data) that they have read, heard or watched and subsequently make claims about how what they have learned may apply in similar situations that they have not observed (by inference). 1 x For insight into the extent to which legal researchers undertake empirical research and the lack of clarity around empirical methods in law see Epstein, L. and King, G. (2002) ‘The Rules of Inference’ Vol. 69 No. 1 The University of Chicago Law Review 1-133 at 3-6, Part I. One such form of empirical method is the case study, a methodological term which has been used by some researchers to describe studies that employ a combination of data sources to derive in-depth insight into a particular situation, by others to denote a particular ideological approach to research recognizing that the study is situated within its real-world context. 2 x Yin, R. K. (2014) Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th edn.) Sage Publications, 12-14. It is consequently a flexible definition encompassing approaches to the data and the stance of the researcher, 3 x See Hamel, J. with Dufour, S. and Fortin, D. (1993) Qualitative Research Methods Volume 2 , Sage Publications, ch 1. but its malleability has led some researchers incorrectly to stretch the term to encompass any study that focuses on one or a restricted number of situations. 4 x See Gerring, J. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007 at 6. For a further discussion see Gerring, J. ‘What is a case study and what is it good for?’ (2004) Vol. 98 No 2 American Political Science Review 341-354. This looseness in definition in a legal context may perhaps be linked to confusion as between teaching and research case studies; some traditions in legal education employ a teaching method known also as ‘case study method’ which operates quite differently from its research counterpart. For a discussion of the differences between teaching and research case studies see Yin, 2014, 20 and for a discussion of teaching case studies see Ellet, W., (2007) The Case Study Handbook: How to Read, Discuss, and Write Persuasively About Cases , Boston MA, Harvard Business Review Press; Garvin, D. A. (2003) ‘Making the Case: Professional Education for the World of Practice.’ (Sept–Oct) Harvard Magazine 56-65. This has resulted in concerns that the definition has been co-opted as a means to explain any small n 5 x ‘n’ (number) is used to denote the number of observations in the study, N is used to describe the total number within the population when n denotes the sample observed. empirical study that has a focus on a particular subject, time-frame or location, and further that this has led to poor quality empirical research in law. 6 x For a discussion of the state of empirical research in law see Epstein and King, 2002. This is perhaps unsurprising, as law programmes tend to be very strong at teaching lawyers how to source, interrogate and then draw valid inferences from legal data sources such as cases and legislation, but less adept in the context of other types of data (for example survey data, interviews, non-legal documents and/or observation). 7 x See Webley, L. (2010) ‘Part III Doing Empirical Legal Studies Research Chapter 38 - Qualitative Approaches to ELS’ in Cane, P. and Kritzer, H. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Studies , Oxford, Oxford University Press. Case study method usually involves an array of research methods to generate a spectrum of numerical and non-numerical data that when triangulated provide a means through which to draw robust, reliable, valid inferences about law in the real world. 8 x For a discussion about the differences between numerical (quantitative) and non-numerical (qualitative) data see Webley, id; Epstein and King, 2002, at 2-3; King,G., Keohane, R. O., and Verba, S ., Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research , Princeton NJ, Princeton University Press, 1994 at 6. It is relatively underused in empirical legal research. This article aims to make a contribution to those new to the case study method. It will examine the purpose of and why one may wish to undertake a case study, and work through the key elements of case study method including the main assumptions and theoretical underpinnings of this method. It will then turn to the importance of research design, including the crucial roles of the academic literature review, the research question and the use of rival theories to develop hypotheses in case study method. It will touch upon the relevance of identifying the observable implications of those hypotheses, and thus the selection of data sources and modes of analysis to allow for valid analytical inferences to be drawn in respect of them. In doing so it will consider, in brief, the importance of case study selection and variations like single or multi case approaches. Finally, it will conclude with some thoughts about the strengths and weaknesses associated with undertaking research via a case study method. It will address frequent stumbling blocks encountered by researchers, as well as ways so as to militate against common problems that researchers encounter. The discussion is necessarily cursory given the length of this article, but the footnotes provide much more detailed sources of guidance on each of the points raised here. This article is an introduction to a case study method rather than an analytical work on the method.

• 1. Case Study Method: Purpose of a Case Study, Why Undertake One?

Case study method falls within the social science discipline and as such has scientific underpinnings. The case study examines phenomena in context, where context and findings cannot be separated. Case study design is also sometimes used to investigate how actors consider, interpret and understand phenomena (e.g., law, procedure, policy) and therefore allows the researcher to study perceptions of processes and how they influence behaviour, for example to understand judges’ sentencing choices in a Dutch police court. 9 x Mascini, P., van Oorschot, I., Weenink, D. and Schippers, G., (2016) ‘Understanding judges’ choices of sentence types as interpretative work: An explorative study in a Dutch police court’, (37) (1) Recht der Werkelijkheid 32-49. This may help to understand how laws are understood, and how and why they are applied and misapplied, subverted, complied with or rejected. This can flow back into the legal and policy making processes, court procedure, sentencing, punishment, diversion of offenders etc., and may have a high impact as a result. The conditions precedent for case study method have been succinctly explained by Yin as follows:

‘doing a case study would be the preferred method, compared to the others, in situations when (1) the main research questions are “how” or “why” questions; (2) a researcher has little or no control over behavioural events; and (3) the focus of study is a contemporary (as opposed to entirely historical) phenomenon.’ 10 x Yin, 2014: xxxi and further 16-17.

The key points to note here are that a case study is a real-world in-depth investigation of a current complex phenomenon. The research will take place in situ (rather than in the library or moot court room) where the researcher cannot control the behaviour of research participants.

The purpose of the study is to learn how or why something happens or is the way it is, and this is achieved by collecting and triangulating a range of data sources to test or explore hypotheses. 11 x Triangulation is the term used to explain that a research question is considered from as many different standpoints as possible, using as many different data types as possible to permit a holistic examination of the question to see which explanations, if any, remain consistent across all data sources. It caters for a wide range of modes of enquiry: the investigation may be exploratory (explore why or how something is the way it is), descriptive (describe why or how something is the way it is) or explanatory (determine which of a range of rival hypotheses, theories etc. explain why or how X is the way it is). 12 x Yin, 2014: 5-6. Some categorise case studies as those designed to be theory orientated, and those designed to be practice orientated. 13 x See Dul, J. and Hak, T. (2008) Case Study Methodology in Business Research , Oxford: Elsevier 8-11, 30-59. Thereafter the design scope is very broad; the data collected may be qualitative and/or quantitative, collected via a variety of methods, and the case study may be a single case or be made up of a small number of cases. The breadth of data collected may be illustrated by Latour’s ethnography of the Conseil d’Etat in France, which studied the connections between human and non-human actors to explore their relationship with ‘the legal’ and ‘the Law’ is assembled in that court context. 14 x Latour, B. (2010) The Making of Law: An Ethnography of the Conseil D’Etat , Cambridge: Polity Press. Case study method is a way of thinking about research and a process through which one seeks to produce reliable, fair findings. It can provide deep insight into a particular situation, whether particular in time, in location or in subject-matter. 15 x For a discussion of ethnomethodological aims to study practical life as experienced in context as an end in itself, as experience is subjective and situational, see Small, M.L. ‘‘How many cases do I need?’ On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research’ (2009) Vol. 10 (1) Ethnography 5, 18. It may allow for transferable findings in respect of the theoretical propositions/hypotheses being examined if not to a population as would often be the situation in much quantitative research. 16 x For greater insight on this point see Lipset, S. M., Trow, M. and Coleman, J.S. (1956) Union Democracy: The Internal Politics of the International Typographical Union , New York: New York Free Press at 419-420; Yin, 2014, 21. For a discussion of the problems inherent in aping quantitative terminology in qualitative work see, Small, 2009, 10, and at 19 for further reading on the logic of case study selection and further reading on extended case method. It aims to examine rival hypotheses, propositions, potential explanations previously advanced (exploratory study), or to test findings from a previous case study examining similar phenomena in a new instance (a replication or confirmation study). 17 x Gerring, 2007, 346.

As described so far it is a research method that appears to have a lot in common with experiments and tests of statistical significance. But case study method differs markedly from a big data survey or double-blind experiment in that it seeks explicitly a phenomenon in its natural environment and (in most instances) without means to control for variables, including the behaviour of any participants. 18 x Although note that there are some scholars who believe that case study method can include elements of experimental testing, for example, Gerring, J. and McDermott, R. (2007) ‘An Experimental Template for Case Study Research’ Vol. 51 No. 3 American Journal of Political Science 688-701. One such study in law that has been described by some, if not by the researchers themselves, as a case study did include an experimental design within the battery of methods employed see: Moorhead, R., Sherr, A., Webley, L., Rogers, S., Sherr, L., Paterson, A. & Domberger, S. (2001) Quality and Cost: Final Report on the Contracting of Civil Non-Family Advice and Assistance Pilot (Norwich: The Stationery Office). Experiments aim to control some factors so as to test hypotheses under different conditions, quantitative studies attempt to control for environmental factors through sampling techniques and data collection instrument design so as to minimise their biasing effects, but case study method does not involve control of the environment, or control for the environment, instead it aims to harness context and work within it. It examines in great detail one situation (referred to as a case or unit) or a very small number of situations, to use context as a means to particularise the findings. It also seeks to explain which elements of context may mean that some of the findings are applicable to other situations and if so under what conditions. A case study tells the researcher about the case and the extent to which previous explanations are sustained, in some instances it may also allow the researcher to make claims that some of the findings can be applied to another case or cases too, although this is heavily dependent on the research design and its execution. 19 x Campbell, D.T. Foreword in Yin, 2014 xviii. But it is rarely, if ever, a method that can be used by one to want to make universal claims. A case is not a proxy for a sample of a population in a survey, for example, it is a study of a phenomenon in itself rather than a means through which to view the whole world. Having said that, samples can be used to help select cases in a sound manner. 20 x Seawright, J. and Gerring, J. (2008) ‘Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options’ Vol. 61 No. 2 Political Research Quarterly 294-308.

Case studies are only one of a number of ways to undertake socio-legal or criminological research and it is important to give proper consideration to the full range of research methods prior to making a final decision to adopt a case study method. 21 x Yin, 2014: chapter 1. It may be better to employ a different one: legal history; doctrinal legal study (legal cases, legislation, regulatory documents); a policy study (policy documents, communiqués etc.); a statistical analysis (an analysis of the number of different types of legal cases that go before the courts, their key features and what role these play in chances of success for the plaintiff); a large-scale survey; stand-alone interviews; or an experiment in a simulated setting (asking lawyers to read through some scenarios and explain what advice they would give to a client in those situations). But a case study could employ a number of these methods in combination, so how then does one determine whether case study method is right for one’s study? It will largely depend on the nature of the research question to be answered and one’s appetite for undertaking in-depth research aimed at achieving thick description (detailed description of how or why something is as it is) 22 x For a discussion see: Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind . London: Hutchinson; Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry . Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; Holloway, I. (1997). Basic Concepts for Qualitative Research . London: Blackwell Science. and/or triangulated findings derived from a range of data sources that develop a new theory or test existing rival theories. It is an intensive study, it requires extremely good planning and design and a robust approach to data analysis too.

• 2. Case Study Method: Research Design

Research design is of paramount importance in achieving a successful case study, especially so given that the study focuses on one or a small number of situations and the researcher’s in-depth knowledge of and immersion within that case may lead more readily to confirmation bias than in some other forms of study. 23 x Confirmation or interpretive bias of data is something we all have grapple with, as the natural human tendency is to place more weight on evidence that confirms our view than on evidence that contradicts it. Strong research design can assist with counter-balancing this to some extent, including the transformation of any expected finding into a hypothesis that one then seeks to falsify rather than to confirm. Research design begins with the choice of research topic, usually then followed by a review of any relevant academic literatures (perhaps beyond the boundaries of one’s own discipline, for example sociology, criminology, political science) to determine an appropriate research question, noting all possible answers to the research question that are posited in the literature. 24 x See Yin, 2014, chapter 1 for more information on the role of the literature review. During this iterative phase the research question will be further refined, so that it may be articulated with precision, which is particularly important for much case study research as the link between the question and the chosen case or cases is usually explicit and explained, consequently a clear research question is considered by many to be an essential starting point to aid the selection of cases to be examined. The rival hypotheses, theories or propositions that may answer the question should, normally, be similarly delineated and clarified, those that remain plausible answers to the research question should be retained and be supplemented with any others that the researcher considers to be alternative viable explanations. Other approaches may be used that are more inductive than deductive, as in the case of many ethnographic case studies such as Latour’s, for example. This phase is an intellectually demanding one, but it sets the foundation for a strong study that is easier to execute at the point of data collection. The literature review also helps to ensure one is up-to-date, that one does not make the same mistakes that earlier researchers have reported as hazards, and to add a theoretical depth to one’s study that aids sophisticated analysis. It may also help to identify useful data collection methods and instruments too. And so time spent on the literature review may be very profitable. So far the discussion has been very general and therefore a little abstract. At this stage it may help to consider a hypothetical research proposal for case study research and work though it as the article progresses. The researcher in our hypothetical scenario is interested in undertaking research on recent reforms to the use of family mediation in the family justice system in England and Wales. She knows that it is now compulsory in most instances for the person who is initiating any court proceedings in a divorce to have participated in at least one mediation information and advice session with the aim of negotiating an outcome in relation to children, money and/or property prior to initiating proceedings in court. She is clear on the law and the procedural issues but not clear on how effective have been these changes, and this is her broad area of interest. After completing her literature review she understands that the key aims of the reforms were to reduce the number of cases going to court by increasing the number of cases that result in negotiated agreements between the divorcing spouses and in doing so to reduce the cost and the time involved in reaching outcomes in divorce cases, reduce the need for people to use lawyers in the negotiating process, to reduce acrimony between the divorcing spouses and to reduce the negative effects on children. Further, the reforms were intended to promote more durable outcomes between divorcing spouses that could be renegotiated effectively if the arrangements for the children needed to be updated to meet changing circumstances. But the researcher still needs to work these insights into a research question before making a final decision on whether a case study is the best method by which to conduct the research. The next sub-section will consider the framing of the research question, and will include examples of how our researcher may draft her question to maximise her chances of undertaking a great study on her area of interest.

A. The Research Question

The process of defining the research question may be a painful, frustrating one but it could also be creative too. It may be necessary to spend a considerable period of time reading the literature so as to narrow down the research topic or statement to a manageable, novel and/or important and scholarly question. 25 x For more assistance with legal research questions refer to Epstein, L. (1995) Studying Law and the Courts in Lee Epstein (ed) Contemplating Courts , Cong Q, 1, 3-5. Some argue it should also seek to address a real world problem, although that is a controversial component and suggests that knowledge for knowledge’s sake is not a legitimate aim. 26 x See King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, 15. The development of a research topic into a research question with reference to the academic literature is sometimes described as the phase in which the researcher has a conversation or dialogue with the literature. This dialogue grounds the study, it also informs the study design, including the case selection and data to be collected. The research question (a statement that ends with a question mark) is made up of two key elements: its substance, the topic or issue that you wish to address and the form of the question ‘who, what, where, how, why’. 27 x See Yin, 2014, at 11, and see further Campbell, J.P., Daft, R.L., Hulin, C. L. (1982) What to Study: Generating and Developing Research Questions (Studying Organizations) , Sage Publications, for further thoughts on research questions The substance of the research question is not simply the topic but the specifics of the topic – is your study to be a contemporary one or a historical one? In what context are you operating? What precisely are you endeavouring to study? The form of the question is also important: as indicated previously, case study method is considered to be better suited to research questions framed in ‘how’ or ‘why’ terms. Single case studies are considered to be an excellent means by which to uncover and understand the processes or mechanisms that influence particular variables (known as process tracing 28 x On process tracing see: Collier, D. ‘Understanding Process Tracing’ Vol. 44 Political Science and Politics 823-830 and George, A. L. and Bennett, A. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences , Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2005. For an excellent insight into how this has been used in a legal and policy context with reference to changes in Georgia’s tax laws see Ulriksen, M.S, and Dadalauri, N. ‘Single Studies and Theory-testing: The Knots and Dots of the Process-tracing Method’ (2014) International Journal of Social Research Methodology 1- 17. ), why or how different variables are related to each other, for example what influences legislative change or policy formation on a given topic in a given country at a particular time. They are also a sophisticated means through which to test empirically and deductively the congruence of rival explanations (theories or propositions), ‘to what extent’ or ‘how’ and ‘why’ different theories are borne out by the data. 29 x See Blatter, J. and Haverland, M. Designing Case Studies , Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan, 2012 at 145 who consider process tracing involves inductive reasoning to build theory and congruence testing involves deductive reasoning to test theories. The form of the initial research question can confound some researchers who initially phrase their question as a ‘what’ question and as a result unnecessarily rule out case study method. Questions can often be reframed, for example: ‘what have the prosecutorial authorities in England and Wales done to integrate victims of domestic violence into the criminal justice process?’ may be rephrased as ‘how have the prosecutorial authorities in England and Wales integrated victims of domestic violence into the criminal justice process?’. At this stage our hypothetical researcher is faced with some choices: should she consider ‘how have the reforms to family mediation used in the divorce context affected the durability and suitability of post-divorce arrangements in England and Wales?’ This would focus on the agreements whether agreed or adjudicated, their longevity, the extent to which they could be made to work after the divorce and how any amendments to arrangements were sought. Alternatively, she could ask ‘how have the reforms to family mediation affected the way in which divorces are conducted in England and Wales?’ This would examine the steps people took so as to get divorced but may also consider the divorcing couples’ perceptions about the process to assist with examining the policy to reduce acrimony, it could also address how much time and money they spent in the process and it could also elicit data on how constructive was their relationship and negotiations subsequent to the initial agreement or adjudication. It could also bring in the role of lawyers and/or consider the children’s experience of the divorce process too. The research design would then follow the focus of the question. Case studies are much easier to design when the research question is expressed clearly, the theory is used to provide possible answers that may be explored or tested and the boundaries of the study are articulated. Some people find it helps to break down a draft research question into its substance and its form, and describe the purpose of the study in a couple of lines too, 30 x Epstein and King suggest a range of possible purposes, at 59, including: to explore something that has not previously been studied; to attempt to settle a debate that has been ongoing within the literature; to examine a well-considered question but in a new way; to collect and analyse new data to seek to confirm or refute previous findings; to analyse an existing data set in a new or better way to seek to confirm or refute previous findings or to develop new ones. and then compare the extent to which all three are congruent and precise before moving on to the next phase of the design process. We shall consider the important role of theory in the next sub-section.

B. The Theory

Case studies afford the opportunity to observe a sequence of events or factors, to evaluate which produce an outcome and why, 31 x Peters, B.G. Comparative Politics: Theory and Method , Basingstoke, Palgrave, 1998 at 14. and to do so in their natural environment. One of the challenges for legal researchers, less so for criminological or sociological researchers who are often trained more fully in this regard, is the need to engage with theory before moving on to the next stage of research design. By theory I mean the explanations that have been posited in the academic literature for why or how something is the way that it is, or claims that suggest relationships between certain things. 32 x But interestingly, stance, or more accurately epistemology is of less significance to this research method than to many others. Case study method links the research question, research design, analysis and logic of inference to such an extent that is can accommodate a range of epistemological traditions from the realist to relativist/interpretivist. And thus scholars who consider that there are facts independent of our interpretation of them (in essence, hard facts operating in an objective reality) and scholars who consider all ‘facts’ to be local interpretations constructed through our own lenses, are able to operate within a case study framework. Having said that their choice of data sources, and their approach to data generation and analysis may well vary considerably. In this context a theory is a relatively precise speculative answer to a research question, which may have been developed by undertaking a study or by analysing others’ studies (a meta-analysis). And theories can be converted into hypotheses when considered in the light of a new research question. The use of theory is exemplified by Uriksen and Dadalauri’s case study on tax policy reform in Georgia which aimed to answer why and how Georgia initiated and managed to implement quite radical and substantial tax reforms between 1991 and 2005 and in doing so sought to interrogate theoretical explanations about the nature of policy reform in developing countries and further to develop a model that could be tested in other post-Soviet states. 33 x Ulriksen and Dadalauri, ibid. See further Dadalauri, N. Tax Policy Formation and the Transnationalizationof the Public Policy Arena; A Case Study of Georgia , Aarhus, Politica, 2011) Georgia was selected as a crucial case. The reasoning for this and also for the methods employed in this study are elegantly set out in the article cited above. In our hypothetical case study it may be possible, for example, to test the theory that mediated agreements lead to less acrimonious relationships between the divorced couple than do lawyer negotiated agreements. One could examine the theory that family mediation is a cheaper and faster alternative to lawyer negotiated settlements and that those mediated agreements are more durable and better suited to family circumstances. In doing so, one may test existing theories and/or to develop a new theory. Or one could test in the chosen context a single theory that is dominant or particularly novel. Our researcher could undertake further reading of the literature to add to these hypotheses and to refine them and eliminate those that are no longer plausible in the light of more detailed investigation. This is known as setting out ‘priors’, prior explanations raised in the academic literature. 34 x On the importance of the identification of priors see Beach, D. and Pedersen, R.B., ‘What is process tracing actually tracing? The three variants of process tracing methods and their uses and limitations’ Sept 1-4 2011 The American Political Science Association Annual Meeting , Seattle, WA as cited by Ulriksen and Dadalauri, ibid; and further Gerring, 2007 ibid. The researcher’s next task would be to consider what she would expect to observe in the study, were any of these hypotheses true (the observable implications of the hypotheses), for example, our researcher would expect to see that divorces conducted using family mediation would be settled through mediation, that the settlement process would cost less and be concluded quicker than in lawyer-led divorces, and that those that used family mediation would be more able to engage in constructive dialogue post-divorce and to renegotiate arrangements in respect of children without the need to resort to lawyers or to the courts. The researcher may also draw up a hypothesis that the agreements would be more durable and the outcomes for children more positive. This pre-emptive delineation of as many possible observable implications, and how they could be measured, would allow the researcher to plan how to conduct the study and to adopt an appropriate design more likely to lead to a robust answer to the research question. 35 x For more assistance on extracting observable implications and considering their measurement see Epstein and King, 2002, 70-76. But one needs to be able to articulate the theory converted into hypotheses with clarity, in order for an observation protocol to be developed. Further, it helps the research design if the researcher is able to pose rival theories or explanations so as to design the study to test for plausible alternative explanations too. For example, one of the rival theories in the family mediation study is that the kind of people who use mediation through to conclusion and the kind of people who either refuse to do so or who drop out without reaching a settlement are different, and those drawn to mediation are more consensus driven and better able to communicate with their spouse than are those who do not. This rival hypothesis would alert the researcher to the need to design the study to examine those who do conclude mediated agreements and those who do not in order to analyse this rival claim. A case study allows for the examination of complex interrelationships between variables in situ, and the theory helps to identify what those variables are.

C. The Selection of the ‘Case’ or ‘Cases’

Definitionally this is when it gets somewhat complicated, as ‘case’ can easily become confused with a ‘legal case’ and further a ‘case‘ can sometimes be confused with the same word used in a different context in quantitative research, a case meaning a single observation or a single data point. This has led some, such as Gerring, to suggest that it may be more accurate to refer to a case study as a unit study so as to underline that this type of study examines multiple things within one unit rather than examining one data source in one context. 36 x See Gerring, 2004, 342. See further King, Keohane, and Verba, 1994, 76-77. The selection of the case or cases is a profound one in any study of this kind. A case may be selected because it is critical to the research question, it is typical, atypical, it provides a longitudinal opportunity (study over time), or it is revelatory meaning that it allows insight where previously this has not be possible. 37 x See Yin, 2014, 51. The nature of the case, its boundaries and features and why it was selected should be set out clearly. 38 x Gerring, 2004, 344. There are often difficulties in establishing the boundaries of the case, the phenomenon under study, and the context that provides a background to the phenomenon but is not itself the object of enquiry. Gerring articulates this as the formal case (the phenomenon) and the informal cases (the penumbra of phenomena which are the context but which will need to be explored in a less formal way so as to distinguish the boundaries of the formal case). The informal units are peripheral, but may have bearing on the formal unit or case, and by considering these informal units at the beginning of the study, and close to its conclusion it will help the researcher to work out what is particular about the unit, and what is transferable to other units. The selection of the case should be guided by the extent to which this location in space, focus and/or time lends itself to construct validity, internal validity, external validity and reliability of design in respect to the research question. 39 x See Yin, 2014, chapter 2. Case studies are particularly prone to selection bias, meaning that the case is selected on the basis of the dependent variable rather than on the basis of the independent variable – selected because of an effect that has been noted rather than its cause when the nature of the cause is the real object of many ‘how’ or ‘why’ research study questions. 40 x See Geddes, B. Paradigms and Sand Castle: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics , Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2005. For example, in a legal context if we wanted to examine rival explanations for how a particular legislative reform, for example the introduction of same sex marriage in England and Wales, has had an impact on community cohesion between different religious and community groups, it may seem, on the face of it, a good idea to select a town like Brighton with a vibrant LGBT community as the case to be studied. After-all, the uptake of same-sex marriage has been very high in Brighton and so it could be considered to be a key site of study. However, Brighton is well known as a LGBT friendly town and people drawn to live there would tend to be very positive about the introduction of same-sex marriage. If the reason for the study was to consider whether tensions have emerged between community and religious groups with different views on marriage, then Brighton would not likely give much opportunity to examine these issues. It was LGBT friendly before the reform and it continues to be. And community and religious groups have worked well together before and after the change in the law. By selecting the case on the basis of the effect of the changed legal landscape, the high numbers of gay and lesbian marriages, we may have selected a case that is atypical or simply a poor unit within which to view the causes or the influences that led to the legislative reform. Researchers are prone to make this mistake when undertaking a deductive study to test the congruence of rival hypotheses in a context where they have insufficient knowledge about the independent variable (the causes) that gave rise to, say, the change in the law. There may be other factors to consider too: in our family mediation study, the researcher may choose to steer away from London as the case study location, if she is interested in ‘typical’ divorces given that London has a much greater than average number of high net worth divorces that include very large sums of money and property portfolios, in addition to many divorces involving non-British couples who married abroad. A solid grasp of the literature can help to alleviate this possibility of incorrect case selection along with detailed consideration of the relevant features of a range of possible case studies prior to final selection. Does selecting a multiple-case study limit the likelihood of such problems, further should the study be at one point in time or a repeated measure at different periods of time? A case study may be designed so as to allow for cross sectional analysis between two or more cases, and further a temporal variation may be introduced into this form of analysis too. Our researcher could study family mediation over time: the same divorces pre, during and post settlement and then later again to examine durability. Single, multiple or cross-sectional case studies often serve different purposes. Multiple case studies are more likely to be used when the causal relationship between an independent and dependent variables are being analysed, so that the interaction of the variables in different environments can be examined comparatively in different contexts (in an experimental protocol one would be able to manipulate the conditions so as to test the variables and thus the different hypotheses). For example, if the study was examining the relationship between violent crime rates and criminal justice sentencing policy to examine whether tougher criminal penalties for violent crime lead to a reduction in violent crime rates, and if tougher criminal penalties for lesser offences led to greater imprisonment levels and greater recidivism including an escalation of violent crime, then a multi-jurisdictional case study may allow for a better assessment of those by permitting different combinations of variables to be compared as against each other. In our family mediation study, the researcher may choose to use London as a crucial case study (with its unusual profile of divorcing spouses with a very wide range of asset values) alongside a more typical rural and a more typical urban location to consider the hypotheses under different conditions. However, it may also be possible to test the hypotheses in a single case study by charting the relationship between the variables over time, with particular attention being paid to the points in time when sentencing policy changed or crime rates dropped or raised, or when family mediation was first introduced, when it became established as a compulsory part of the system. 41 x But the difficulty with multi case studies is that specified conditions or features within individual cases may have more influence on the variables being studied than the variables that one are analysing across the studies. This may lead one to draw erroneous conclusions about causality. This single case study also illustrates the independent variable problem: to what extent are violent crime rates and/or sentencing policy more likely attributable to other societal changes evident at different points in time than each other? Without knowledge of this it is difficult to proceed. Sometimes the extent to which a case study is referred to as single or multiple is a matter of nomenclature, for example, Elliott and Kling’s study 42 x Elliott, M. and Kling, R. ‘Organizational Usability of Digital Libraries: Case Study of Legal Research in Civil and Criminal Courts’ (1997) Vol 48 (11) Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1023-1035. on the organisational usability of digital libraries, a case study of legal research in civil and criminal courts, could be described as a single case study (as in their study) because it addresses digital libraries in one context – legal research in courts – it is also geographically bounded to the Los Angeles County, but data is collected from a number of courts and thus it could be argued to be a multiple case study if each court were considered to be a case. The important distinction, however, is how that data are treated: if the data are pooled and analysed as a single unit then the case study is generally considered to be a single unit or single case study, if the data are analysed comparatively as between the sites of collection then it would generally be considered to be a multiple unit or multiple case study. Where comparisons are being made over time but within a unit then the terminology is often that of a single unit as data is both compared and pooled too. Single case study research is considered to be an excellent vehicle for exploratory and developmental research (as evidenced by the Georgia tax policy study and Dnes analysis of the nature of a particular type of contract – franchise contracts in the UK 43 x See Dnes, A.W. ‘A Case-Study Analysis of Franchise Contracts’ (1993) Vol. 28 Journal of Legal Studies 367-393. or Latour’s Conseil d’Etat study mentioned above 44 x See Latour, B. (2010) above. ), confirmatory research necessitates a design that allows the researcher robustly to test a small number of hypotheses forensically and it may be advisable to consider a multiple case study method to achieve this aim. 45 x Although note that Gerring, 2004, at 347 indicates that a single case study may credibly make causal claims, if, for example, the case has been selected as it is particularly representative of others or it is a critical or crucial case, see further: Eckstein, H. (1975) ‘Case Studies and Theory in Political Science’ in Regarding Politics: Essays on Political Theory, Stability, and Change, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992). The family mediation case study conducted in London and a more typical urban and rural area is a good example of this, given that the types of divorce cases are likely to be quite different, the context is also different too, and so cost, duration, durability and acrimony could be tested under different conditions to see whether they held true in all conditions or were context or divorce type dependent. Sometimes researchers are inclined to use a multiple case study approach in the expectation that more cases (units) will provide more data and more comparable data that can be used to derive robust findings. However, data collected across multiple case studies is less rather than more likely to be comparable as the conditions within the case study cannot be manipulated or controlled by the researcher and yet environment is expected to have an impact on the data. 46 x Gerring indicates that researchers tend to face the choice between knowing more about less or less about more, 2014, 348. Where more than one case is selected, each subsequent addition should provide a more complete and accurate picture in respect of the research question, instead of attempting to provide greater representativeness (as indicated above, this is not the purpose of case study method). 47 x See Small, 2009, 24-26. If one wishes to make comparisons between case studies it is important to adhere closely to comparative methodology in the definition of the cases to be selected, the analysis of the relevant similarities and differences between those cases, the data to be collected, compared and why, and the likely limitations of the cross unit comparison. 48 x See Gerring, 2004 at 348. For guidance on comparative methodology in a legal context see: Van Hoecke, M. (2004) Epistemology and Methodology of Comparative Law , Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing. Multiple cases studies are more difficult to accomplish successfully, and it is advisable to work out clearly what each of the case studies will contribute to answering the research question before finalising those to be the subject of the enquiry. The most appropriate design will be dependent on the research question selected and the hypotheses or propositions under investigation through the case study method. 49 x For a detailed discussion see Gerring, 2004 at 343.

D. The Selection of Data Sources, Data Generation and Collection

Strong research design logically links the research question(s) with the hypotheses, with the data generation and collection methods, which in turn should be logically linked with the data analysis methods employed too. By now the researcher is likely to have a very good idea of the types of data that may be relevant to the study (derived from documents, people, extant statistics, other artefacts like images), 50 x Yin sets out six sources of evidence: documents, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant observation, physical artefacts, Yin, 2014, 105-118, and four principles of data collection: multiple sources of data; creation of a case study database; maintain the chain of evidence; exercise care when using data from electronic sources, at 118-129. having identified the substance, form and purpose of the question, the rival hypotheses that may contribute to answering the question, and the observable implications of those hypotheses and how they may be measured. Our researcher having drawn her broad question as ‘how have the reforms to family mediation affected the way in which divorces are conducted?’ and narrowed down the case study to a geographic location(s) or a type of divorcing couples or divorce context, will have considered the possible data sources as including the spouses, their children, the family mediators and lawyers, court files, mediation and lawyer negotiated agreements, official statistics and more. And so it should be possible to chart how the data collection and data analysis methods all fit together so as to allow the observable implications to be explored, the hypotheses proved, amended, or disproved and a rounded, reliable answer to the research question be achieved. But this design phase may also go beyond the identification and selection of data sources, it requires choices to be made about how data will be collected and measured. 51 x See Yin, 2014, chapter 3 for more information on what one needs to do before data collection begins, and chapter 4 on data collection itself. Each choice that is made, consciously, or unconsciously, will have an effect on the data that is captured and the reliability and validity of that data. And this in turn will affect the outcome of the study. Consequently, the design should be scrutinised to uncover the biases that may become entrenched within it, the study redesigned where necessary to eliminate or limit bias and any remaining biases be taken into account during the later analysis and reporting phases. 52 x See Small, 2009, 12-15. This will require a degree of reflection on data type (strengths and weaknesses in allowing observable implications to be explored), data selection (all data, if not all then what process is being used to select it and how may that skew the findings, known as selection bias); data collection (how is the data being derived, and is it raw data or is it material that requires a judgement to be made, for example how will we measure ‘satisfaction or ‘acrimony’ or ‘durability of an agreement’, how reliable and valid is the data collection instrument 53 x For a discussion of reliability and validity in measurement see Webley, 2010 and further Epstein and King, 2002, 80-99. ) and later too data analysis. It is also worth piloting each data collection exercise with a small number of observations so as to allow defects to be worked out, and experience in the field to allow for redesign too. And then one should collect as much data on each of the possible observable implications as is practicable, including data of different types generated or collected via different methods so as to allow for triangulation in respect of each hypothesis. For example, in Elliott and King’s study they collected data via observation, participant observation and interviews, analysed court documents and legal technology documents; 54 x Elliott and Kling, ibid at 1025. in Dnes’ study the data included franchise agreements and contracts, financial accounts and other financial data, interviews; 55 x Dnes, ibid at 369-370. and in Dadalauri’s study data were derived from primary sources (policy proposals, experts’ recommendations and the minutes of parliamentary sessions) and secondary sources (reports, media briefs, statistical sources) plus from semi-structured interviews with key actors in the policy process. 56 x Ulrikesn and Dadalauri, ibid at 13. Case study method necessitates a measure of flexibility in research design to allow for new knowledge to shape and improve the starting design, but that does not reduce the need for a robust design plan at the inception of the study. The design needs to be scrupulously documented, including challenges faced and amendments made so as to aid others to analyse the validity of the research design and to assess the extent to which the study findings are reliable and robust. 57 x For a discussion see King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, 12. Epstein and King suggest that legal scholars give the same attention to the recording, storage and analysis of data as they would expect of the police and prosecutors when securing the chain of evidence in a criminal case. 58 x Epstein and King, 2002, 24. And it is to data analysis that we now turn.

• 3. Case Study Method: Use of the Data, Inferences and Finding Meaning

Case study findings are reached through a process of logical valid inferences regardless of whether the data collected and analysed is qualitative, quantitative or both. 59 x For a discussion on this point see King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, chapter 1 ‘The Science in Social Science’. But first the data must usually be described in summary form, before being subjected to further analysis to consider what the data indicates about the various hypotheses and their observable implications in this case context. Subsequently, it is possible to attempt to derive descriptive inferences that suggest what these data on observable instances indicate about non-observables ones, in other words what findings one considers to be transferable to a non-observed context. The analysis may also allow for causal inferences to be made, that explain what effects would be expected to occur if certain conditions were fulfilled in this or another context. This is not dissimilar to data analysis in other types of empirical legal research and therefore it is considered only briefly here. However, case study method is structured with triangulation of data at the fore, allowing the researcher to reach robust findings reached by integrating analysis from multiple data points gathered using different methods. This section will briefly address data analysis, the drawing of inferences and the importance of demonstrating one’s working out, in turn.

A. Data Analysis

The first stage of data analysis is often validly to summarise the data collected in the light of the research question and hypotheses and anticipated observable implications, to summarise the numbers (mean, median, mode, standard deviation, range) and to summarise the text (for example, categorise and consider relationships between categories, or code and consider the frequency or codes). 60 x See Epstein and King, 2002, 25-29 for more information on quantitative data description. Different types of data will often be analysed using different methods or traditions, as illustrated by the way in which legal cases are analysed according to traditions accepted by lawyers, which is distinct from legal analysis of legislation, and policy analysis of policy documents: survey data would be analysed statistically, text based data (interviews, documents etc.) via the mode of analysis selected to interrogate and derive meaning from language, for example via grounded theory method, thematic coding, content analysis, hermeneutics etc. 61 x For a discussion of the different methods of text based data analysis see Yin, 2014, chapter 5 or Webley, 2010. There are a range of general strategies open to the researchers, some of which focus on the theoretical propositions, others aim to develop thick description, others still examine plausible rival explanations. 62 x See Yin, 2014, 136-142. Findings are considered robust where they are evidenced via multiple stands of data and its analysis. The use of multiple data sources to test each hypothesis allows the researcher to build up a thoroughly nuanced picture of the extent to which each hypothesis is sustained, needs to be refined, or rejected. The analysis will be conducted in the light of the research question parameters and also the hypotheses being examined by the research, as exemplified by the discussion in the Georgia tax policy case study. 63 x Ulriksen and Dadalauri, ibid. This process is likely to be iterative, in that data will often be analysed as one phase of data collection is complete and any lessons learned from that may lead to some reframing of the research question, reconsideration of the hypotheses, and amendments to the next phase of data collection yet to begin. The key is that, as with all social science methods, amendments to the question and methods, the analysis of the data and the inferences drawn from the data should be publicly explained and in sufficient detail so that they are replicable by others on the basis of the information provided in the write-up of the study; King, Keohane and Verba remind us that inferences lead to uncertain conclusions – inferences are not proven facts, they are propositions being advanced that are available to be tested by others. 64 x King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, 8. Conclusions remain tentative until replicated validly and consistently. The science and the rules of inference are important in allowing us to judge the validity and reliability of the findings, and these are closely interwoven with the research design and execution of the study.

B. Inferences

Case studies are often considered to be more useful when seeking to derive descriptive rather than causal inferences, as the researcher is not able to manipulate the environment so as to test propositions in such a way as to be sure that causal relationships have satisfactorily been established. Descriptive inferences are ‘the process of using the facts we know to learn about facts we do not know’ , by describing something that has been observed and inferring under what circumstances a similar pattern or occurrence may occur in a carefully defined unobserved situation. 65 x Epstein and King, 2002, 29. For example, if in our hypothetical family mediation study we learned that greater numbers of the divorcing clients who we interviewed/observed before the introduction of the compulsory mediation information and assessment meetings were aware that there was state funding available for family mediation, compared with the divorcing clients who we interviewed/observed after the introduction of these meetings then we may infer that this finding was likely to apply to divorcing clients outside our observed group too (all other things being equal). We do not know for certain that is accurate, as we only have data from our study participants, but our description of our findings has led us to infer something about those outside our observation group. Many doctoral candidates and early career academics baulk at the suggestion that descriptive inference is a valuable mode of analysis, as they associate ‘descriptive’ with the less positive feedback that they may have received in earlier work. But the pursuit of descriptive inferences is not a low-level aspiration in a context in which little is known about the case under scrutiny. Descriptive inferences allow for categorisation of findings which may lead on to further theory building and theory testing, categorisation goes to the heart of analysis development. So our finding above begs the question ‘why is this so?’ and we could either extend our study to answer this sub-question, or leave that for a later study. In some instances the inferences a researcher wishes to draw may be causal ones that infer an effect that will be caused by a set of defined factors occurring together. As an example, in our family mediation study we may wish to examine whether family mediation is more likely to be successful for couples with relatively similar educational backgrounds, medium to high incomes with both spouses in full-time employment, when compared with those who have unequal educational backgrounds, incomes and job-statutes and with low incomes. Where causal inferences are the point of the study, it may be possible to develop these with a well-chosen cross-case multi-case case study design. However, a causal inference first requires the identification of a causal mechanism (the process by which dependent variable A is affected by independent variable B, for example the causal mechanism for a defendant in the UK to be released from pre-trial detention (variable A) is a bail hearing in court (variable B)). 66 x See Epstein and King, 2002, 34-37 for help distinguishing between causal mechanisms and variables and causal effects. Case studies are often a really good means by which these mechanisms, or processes, may be uncovered – known as ‘process tracing’ whereby the researcher charts in detail the relationships between two or more variables and explores these connections to deduce those that are causal and those more likely to be coincidental. 67 x See Gerring, 2004, 348 and further Roberts, C., The Logic of Historical Explanation, Pennsylvania State University Press 1996, 66. Further, a single case study may allow a researcher to interrogate extant explanations that suggest causal implications, in other words to test predictions about what will happen in particular situations (assuming those situations are observable as part of the case study). This is known as ‘pattern-matching’. 68 x See Gerring, 2004, 348 and further Campbell, D. T. [1975] “‘Degrees of Freedom’ and the Case Study” in E. Samuel Overnman (ed) Methodology and Epistemology in Social Science , Chicago, University of Chicago Press: 1988, 380. This is where clarity about the purpose of the study becomes particularly important, as certain conditions will need to have been built into the research design for some analytical techniques. 69 x Yin, 2014, 142-168, provides five different analytical techniques: pattern-matching; explanation building; time-series analysis; logic models; and cross-case synthesis and suggests that after this phase the researcher will likely move on to work through all plausible alternative conclusions to examine whether the most likely conclusion is the only conclusion. The study will need to be designed with a very clear and narrow focus to achieve its aims. As indicated above, case studies may be entirely self-contained studies that provide in-depth knowledge of a single unit of analysis, but more often than not the researcher will wish for those findings to be considered applicable to situations that she/he has not observed. The challenge is to explain which findings are particular to the case study and which elements of the findings are relevant beyond the case study’s boundaries. 70 x Gerring, 2004, 345. It may be difficult to define this with precision, but where there is ambiguity it is safer to over explain and to over report the ambiguity and the possible range of inferences and their limitations rather than to over simplify and obfuscate the difficulty in reaching definitive findings. 71 x See Gerring, 2004, 346. Legal researchers are sometimes criticised for being vague in their explanations of the target of their inferences (to which other unobserved situations do these findings apply, and why?), or worse still their claims in the absence of evidence to prove that their inference is generalizable to a wide variety of situations. 72 x Epstein and King, 2002, 31. This may be a function of lawyers’ professional training as advocates, who in presentation would seek to persuade others to accept their position and who would gloss over inconvenient precedents. But lawyers are also trained to be forensic in seeking out the weaknesses of their arguments as well as those of their opponents and by harnessing these skills in the presentation of their case study findings; they should be able to display the highest standards of scientific reporting. Some of the ambiguities associated with inferences may be avoided if, as Gerring suggests, the scholar specifies clearly which propositions apply to which novel circumstances and exhibit and explain the evidence upon which this contention is based. 73 x Gerring, J. (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 90-99. In other words, do the findings relate only to this case, are they intended to relate more broadly to similar cases and if so what marks out other situations as similar? Is similarity about time frame, location, a certain set of markers such types of participants, socio-economic, legal or political factors? And what is one’s evidence in support of this? The burden of proof always rests with the researcher. We shall turn to this in the next sub-section.

C. Reporting Findings

It can be challenging to know how to report one’s findings in an article or thesis, which is unsurprising when one considers that little attention is paid to this aspect of scholarship on doctoral legal programmes in many jurisdictions. 74 x See further Epstein and King, 2002. For assistance in how to report on cases studies and writing up and presentational considerations, including audience and purpose, see Yin, 2014, chapter 6. The rule is that one must provide as much detail as possible, at least enough to allow someone else to be able to replicate the study using only the information provided. Further, there needs to be sufficient discussion of the decisions taken, challenges faced and the consequent limitations of the findings so as to allow others to evaluate the reliability of one’s findings. As King et al. note: report uncertainty, be sceptical about causality, and consider rival hypotheses. 75 x King et al, 1996, 30-33. The process of interrogating one’s own decisions and inferences and reporting on them in full in the article or thesis may allow one to avoid the invidious charge made of many other legal scholars’ work. 76 x Epstein and King, 2002, 6-7. One suggestion is that legal scholars may wish to look for the weakest link in their chain of reasoning, something which lawyers are trained to do in a legal context, and then estimate how certain they are of their findings taking that weakness into account. 77 x Epstein and King, 2002, 50. However, other aspects of our professional training sometimes come into conflict with this approach: a research study is not an act of advocacy, and training as a lawyer may derail the process of empirical enquiry when lawyers unconsciously act for the client in their head and seek to persuade the outside world that their client’s view is a valid one, rather than to act as a legal social-scientist and demonstrate to other social scientists the extent to which their findings are valid, robust, reliable, and subject to limitation. 78 x See further Miller, A. S. ‘The Myth of Objectivity in Legal Research and Writing’ (1969) Vol. 18 Catholic University Law Review 290. For example, a researcher who is more in favour or less in favour of family mediation may inadvertently confirm their stance and steps need to be taken to lessen this risk. This role conflict is particularly problematic given that empirical legal research may lead to legal reform affecting large sections of the population and the findings confidently exhorted in the literature may be used to justify policy changes. 79 x Epstein and King, 2002, 8-10. Further, even if the research were not to be read outside of an academic environment, it is incumbent on all academics to produce research that is reliable and robust, lawyers are quick to critique legal scholarship that had been poorly executed and socio-legal scholarship should be treated no differently.

• 4. Conclusions: Why (Not to) Use Case Study Method?

Case study method is a powerful and engaging approach to research that has real utility in socio-legal and criminological research even if it has to-date been relatively little used. Our reticence to use it may be explained by the need for a researcher to be sufficiently adept with a range of social science research methods; (non-legal) empirical methods have historically had little treatment within undergraduate legal courses and relatively little attention even at a postgraduate level. 80 x Genn, H., Partington, M, and Wheeler, S. (2006) Law in the Real World: Improving Our Understanding of How Law Works Final Report and Recommendations , London: The Nuffield Foundation. Further, doctoral supervisors may feel inadequate to the task of supervising doctoral students proposing to undertake research through case study method and steer them towards a more standard mixed method approach such as a survey coupled with some interviews, or away from non-legal empirical methods altogether. But with some training, and a high degree of planning it is perfectly possible to undertake a good quality case study in a legal context and we can learn much from them. They are also an ideal means to focus on the particular and yet to draw analytical inferences to similar contexts too, something which lawyers are trained to do throughout their studies and a skill which they can bring to bear on a broader range of data than they otherwise often do. However, case study method is far more than focusing on a single situation, or ‘case’, it is far more than providing a temporal or physical boundary to our research endeavour. It requires us to adopt a structured and reflective approach to research design in many instances, to consider pre-emptively possible explanations (hypotheses) and rival propositions and to engage with theory at an early stage in a study. In a legal context case studies are generally, if not exclusively, more effective when: seeking to make descriptive rather than causal inferences; examining issues in depth rather than broadly and when the researcher is seeking to examine multiple sources of data so as to make comparisons within a case rather than between multiple cases. Further, they are also often more effective for seeking causal mechanisms rather than causal effects; for research that is exploratory rather than confirmatory; and when variations within the case selected are important for the study of the phenomenon. 81 x Gerring, 2004, 352. They are extremely useful when analysing how those involved in law and policy-making, the application of legal rules and procedures perceive these processes, how they react to them and how this influences the effectiveness of those rules, processes and procedures. The research process is an iterative and creative one that engages lawyers’ considerable analytical skills. As such case study method is worthy of a larger presence within the legal academic empirical tool-kit.

1 For insight into the extent to which legal researchers undertake empirical research and the lack of clarity around empirical methods in law see Epstein, L. and King, G. (2002) ‘The Rules of Inference’ Vol. 69 No. 1 The University of Chicago Law Review 1-133 at 3-6, Part I.

2 Yin, R. K. (2014) Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th edn.) Sage Publications, 12-14.

3 See Hamel, J. with Dufour, S. and Fortin, D. (1993) Qualitative Research Methods Volume 2 , Sage Publications, ch 1.

4 See Gerring, J. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2007 at 6. For a further discussion see Gerring, J. ‘What is a case study and what is it good for?’ (2004) Vol. 98 No 2 American Political Science Review 341-354. This looseness in definition in a legal context may perhaps be linked to confusion as between teaching and research case studies; some traditions in legal education employ a teaching method known also as ‘case study method’ which operates quite differently from its research counterpart. For a discussion of the differences between teaching and research case studies see Yin, 2014, 20 and for a discussion of teaching case studies see Ellet, W., (2007) The Case Study Handbook: How to Read, Discuss, and Write Persuasively About Cases , Boston MA, Harvard Business Review Press; Garvin, D. A. (2003) ‘Making the Case: Professional Education for the World of Practice.’ (Sept–Oct) Harvard Magazine 56-65.

5 ‘n’ (number) is used to denote the number of observations in the study, N is used to describe the total number within the population when n denotes the sample observed.

6 For a discussion of the state of empirical research in law see Epstein and King, 2002.

7 See Webley, L. (2010) ‘Part III Doing Empirical Legal Studies Research Chapter 38 - Qualitative Approaches to ELS’ in Cane, P. and Kritzer, H. (eds.) Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Studies , Oxford, Oxford University Press.

8 For a discussion about the differences between numerical (quantitative) and non-numerical (qualitative) data see Webley, id; Epstein and King, 2002, at 2-3; King,G., Keohane, R. O., and Verba, S ., Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research , Princeton NJ, Princeton University Press, 1994 at 6.

9 Mascini, P., van Oorschot, I., Weenink, D. and Schippers, G., (2016) ‘Understanding judges’ choices of sentence types as interpretative work: An explorative study in a Dutch police court’, (37) (1) Recht der Werkelijkheid 32-49.

10 Yin, 2014: xxxi and further 16-17.

11 Triangulation is the term used to explain that a research question is considered from as many different standpoints as possible, using as many different data types as possible to permit a holistic examination of the question to see which explanations, if any, remain consistent across all data sources.

12 Yin, 2014: 5-6.

13 See Dul, J. and Hak, T. (2008) Case Study Methodology in Business Research , Oxford: Elsevier 8-11, 30-59.

14 Latour, B. (2010) The Making of Law: An Ethnography of the Conseil D’Etat , Cambridge: Polity Press.

15 For a discussion of ethnomethodological aims to study practical life as experienced in context as an end in itself, as experience is subjective and situational, see Small, M.L. ‘‘How many cases do I need?’ On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research’ (2009) Vol. 10 (1) Ethnography 5, 18.

16 For greater insight on this point see Lipset, S. M., Trow, M. and Coleman, J.S. (1956) Union Democracy: The Internal Politics of the International Typographical Union , New York: New York Free Press at 419-420; Yin, 2014, 21. For a discussion of the problems inherent in aping quantitative terminology in qualitative work see, Small, 2009, 10, and at 19 for further reading on the logic of case study selection and further reading on extended case method.

17 Gerring, 2007, 346.

18 Although note that there are some scholars who believe that case study method can include elements of experimental testing, for example, Gerring, J. and McDermott, R. (2007) ‘An Experimental Template for Case Study Research’ Vol. 51 No. 3 American Journal of Political Science 688-701. One such study in law that has been described by some, if not by the researchers themselves, as a case study did include an experimental design within the battery of methods employed see: Moorhead, R., Sherr, A., Webley, L., Rogers, S., Sherr, L., Paterson, A. & Domberger, S. (2001) Quality and Cost: Final Report on the Contracting of Civil Non-Family Advice and Assistance Pilot (Norwich: The Stationery Office).

19 Campbell, D.T. Foreword in Yin, 2014 xviii.

20 Seawright, J. and Gerring, J. (2008) ‘Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options’ Vol. 61 No. 2 Political Research Quarterly 294-308.

21 Yin, 2014: chapter 1.

22 For a discussion see: Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind . London: Hutchinson; Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry . Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications; Holloway, I. (1997). Basic Concepts for Qualitative Research . London: Blackwell Science.

23 Confirmation or interpretive bias of data is something we all have grapple with, as the natural human tendency is to place more weight on evidence that confirms our view than on evidence that contradicts it. Strong research design can assist with counter-balancing this to some extent, including the transformation of any expected finding into a hypothesis that one then seeks to falsify rather than to confirm.

24 See Yin, 2014, chapter 1 for more information on the role of the literature review.

25 For more assistance with legal research questions refer to Epstein, L. (1995) Studying Law and the Courts in Lee Epstein (ed) Contemplating Courts , Cong Q, 1, 3-5.

26 See King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, 15.

27 See Yin, 2014, at 11, and see further Campbell, J.P., Daft, R.L., Hulin, C. L. (1982) What to Study: Generating and Developing Research Questions (Studying Organizations) , Sage Publications, for further thoughts on research questions

28 On process tracing see: Collier, D. ‘Understanding Process Tracing’ Vol. 44 Political Science and Politics 823-830 and George, A. L. and Bennett, A. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences , Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2005. For an excellent insight into how this has been used in a legal and policy context with reference to changes in Georgia’s tax laws see Ulriksen, M.S, and Dadalauri, N. ‘Single Studies and Theory-testing: The Knots and Dots of the Process-tracing Method’ (2014) International Journal of Social Research Methodology 1- 17.

29 See Blatter, J. and Haverland, M. Designing Case Studies , Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan, 2012 at 145 who consider process tracing involves inductive reasoning to build theory and congruence testing involves deductive reasoning to test theories.

30 Epstein and King suggest a range of possible purposes, at 59, including: to explore something that has not previously been studied; to attempt to settle a debate that has been ongoing within the literature; to examine a well-considered question but in a new way; to collect and analyse new data to seek to confirm or refute previous findings; to analyse an existing data set in a new or better way to seek to confirm or refute previous findings or to develop new ones.

31 Peters, B.G. Comparative Politics: Theory and Method , Basingstoke, Palgrave, 1998 at 14.

32 But interestingly, stance, or more accurately epistemology is of less significance to this research method than to many others. Case study method links the research question, research design, analysis and logic of inference to such an extent that is can accommodate a range of epistemological traditions from the realist to relativist/interpretivist. And thus scholars who consider that there are facts independent of our interpretation of them (in essence, hard facts operating in an objective reality) and scholars who consider all ‘facts’ to be local interpretations constructed through our own lenses, are able to operate within a case study framework. Having said that their choice of data sources, and their approach to data generation and analysis may well vary considerably.

33 Ulriksen and Dadalauri, ibid. See further Dadalauri, N. Tax Policy Formation and the Transnationalizationof the Public Policy Arena; A Case Study of Georgia , Aarhus, Politica, 2011) Georgia was selected as a crucial case. The reasoning for this and also for the methods employed in this study are elegantly set out in the article cited above.

34 On the importance of the identification of priors see Beach, D. and Pedersen, R.B., ‘What is process tracing actually tracing? The three variants of process tracing methods and their uses and limitations’ Sept 1-4 2011 The American Political Science Association Annual Meeting , Seattle, WA as cited by Ulriksen and Dadalauri, ibid; and further Gerring, 2007 ibid.

35 For more assistance on extracting observable implications and considering their measurement see Epstein and King, 2002, 70-76.

36 See Gerring, 2004, 342. See further King, Keohane, and Verba, 1994, 76-77.

37 See Yin, 2014, 51.

38 Gerring, 2004, 344. There are often difficulties in establishing the boundaries of the case, the phenomenon under study, and the context that provides a background to the phenomenon but is not itself the object of enquiry. Gerring articulates this as the formal case (the phenomenon) and the informal cases (the penumbra of phenomena which are the context but which will need to be explored in a less formal way so as to distinguish the boundaries of the formal case). The informal units are peripheral, but may have bearing on the formal unit or case, and by considering these informal units at the beginning of the study, and close to its conclusion it will help the researcher to work out what is particular about the unit, and what is transferable to other units.

39 See Yin, 2014, chapter 2.

40 See Geddes, B. Paradigms and Sand Castle: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics , Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2005.

41 But the difficulty with multi case studies is that specified conditions or features within individual cases may have more influence on the variables being studied than the variables that one are analysing across the studies. This may lead one to draw erroneous conclusions about causality. This single case study also illustrates the independent variable problem: to what extent are violent crime rates and/or sentencing policy more likely attributable to other societal changes evident at different points in time than each other? Without knowledge of this it is difficult to proceed.

42 Elliott, M. and Kling, R. ‘Organizational Usability of Digital Libraries: Case Study of Legal Research in Civil and Criminal Courts’ (1997) Vol 48 (11) Journal of the American Society for Information Science 1023-1035.

43 See Dnes, A.W. ‘A Case-Study Analysis of Franchise Contracts’ (1993) Vol. 28 Journal of Legal Studies 367-393.

44 See Latour, B. (2010) above.

45 Although note that Gerring, 2004, at 347 indicates that a single case study may credibly make causal claims, if, for example, the case has been selected as it is particularly representative of others or it is a critical or crucial case, see further: Eckstein, H. (1975) ‘Case Studies and Theory in Political Science’ in Regarding Politics: Essays on Political Theory, Stability, and Change, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992).

46 Gerring indicates that researchers tend to face the choice between knowing more about less or less about more, 2014, 348.

47 See Small, 2009, 24-26.

48 See Gerring, 2004 at 348. For guidance on comparative methodology in a legal context see: Van Hoecke, M. (2004) Epistemology and Methodology of Comparative Law , Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing.

49 For a detailed discussion see Gerring, 2004 at 343.

50 Yin sets out six sources of evidence: documents, archival records, interviews, direct observations, participant observation, physical artefacts, Yin, 2014, 105-118, and four principles of data collection: multiple sources of data; creation of a case study database; maintain the chain of evidence; exercise care when using data from electronic sources, at 118-129.

51 See Yin, 2014, chapter 3 for more information on what one needs to do before data collection begins, and chapter 4 on data collection itself.

52 See Small, 2009, 12-15.

53 For a discussion of reliability and validity in measurement see Webley, 2010 and further Epstein and King, 2002, 80-99.

54 Elliott and Kling, ibid at 1025.

55 Dnes, ibid at 369-370.

56 Ulrikesn and Dadalauri, ibid at 13.

57 For a discussion see King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, 12.

58 Epstein and King, 2002, 24.

59 For a discussion on this point see King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, chapter 1 ‘The Science in Social Science’.

60 See Epstein and King, 2002, 25-29 for more information on quantitative data description.

61 For a discussion of the different methods of text based data analysis see Yin, 2014, chapter 5 or Webley, 2010.

62 See Yin, 2014, 136-142.

63 Ulriksen and Dadalauri, ibid.

64 King, Keohane and Verba, 1994, 8.

65 Epstein and King, 2002, 29.

66 See Epstein and King, 2002, 34-37 for help distinguishing between causal mechanisms and variables and causal effects.

67 See Gerring, 2004, 348 and further Roberts, C., The Logic of Historical Explanation, Pennsylvania State University Press 1996, 66.

68 See Gerring, 2004, 348 and further Campbell, D. T. [1975] “‘Degrees of Freedom’ and the Case Study” in E. Samuel Overnman (ed) Methodology and Epistemology in Social Science , Chicago, University of Chicago Press: 1988, 380.

69 Yin, 2014, 142-168, provides five different analytical techniques: pattern-matching; explanation building; time-series analysis; logic models; and cross-case synthesis and suggests that after this phase the researcher will likely move on to work through all plausible alternative conclusions to examine whether the most likely conclusion is the only conclusion.

70 Gerring, 2004, 345.

71 See Gerring, 2004, 346.

72 Epstein and King, 2002, 31.

73 Gerring, J. (2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 90-99.

74 See further Epstein and King, 2002. For assistance in how to report on cases studies and writing up and presentational considerations, including audience and purpose, see Yin, 2014, chapter 6.

75 King et al, 1996, 30-33.

76 Epstein and King, 2002, 6-7.

77 Epstein and King, 2002, 50.

78 See further Miller, A. S. ‘The Myth of Objectivity in Legal Research and Writing’ (1969) Vol. 18 Catholic University Law Review 290.

79 Epstein and King, 2002, 8-10.

80 Genn, H., Partington, M, and Wheeler, S. (2006) Law in the Real World: Improving Our Understanding of How Law Works Final Report and Recommendations , London: The Nuffield Foundation.

81 Gerring, 2004, 352.

• ↑ Back to top

Journal code: 23527927

Journal title: Law and Method

Journal id: 114364

Report an error Suggestions? Disclaimer © Boom juridisch

Legal Research

• Statutory Law
• Regulations
• Secondary sources
• Citing Legal Resources

Case Law Resources

An interdisciplinary, international, full-text database of over 18,000 sources including newspapers, journals, wire services, newsletters, company reports and SEC filings, case law, government documents, transcripts of broadcasts, and selected reference works.

• Google Scholar for Case Law Google Scholar offers an extensive database of state and federal cases, including U.S. Supreme Court Opinions, U.S. Federal District, Appellate, Tax, and Bankruptcy Court Opinions, U.S. State Appellate and Supreme Court Opinions, Scholarly articles, papers, and reports. To get started, select the “case law” radio button, and choose your search terms.
• Caselaw Access Project The Caselaw Access Project (CAP), maintained by the Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab, includes "all official, book-published United States case law — every volume designated as an official report of decisions by a court within the United States...[including] all state courts, federal courts, and territorial courts for American Samoa, Dakota Territory, Guam, Native American Courts, Navajo Nation, and the Northern Mariana Islands." As of the publication of this guide, CAP "currently included all volumes published through 2020 with new data releases on a rolling basis at the beginning of each year."
• CourtListener Court Listener is a free and publicly accessible online platform that provides a collection of legal resources and court documents, including court opinions and case law from various jurisdictions in the United States. It includes PACER data (the RECAP Archive), opinions, or oral argument recordings.
• FindLaw Caselaw Summaries Archive FindLaw provides a database of case law from the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, as well as several state supreme courts. It includes U.S. Supreme Court Opinions, U.S. Federal Appellate Court Opinions and U.S. State Supreme, Appellate and Trial Court Opinions. Search for case summaries or by jurisdiction.
• FindLaw Jurisdiction Search FindLaw provides a database of case law from the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, as well as several state supreme courts. It includes U.S. Supreme Court Opinions, U.S. Federal Appellate Court Opinions and U.S. State Supreme, Appellate and Trial Court Opinions. Search for case summaries or by jurisdiction.
• Justia Justia offers cases from the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, and U.S. District Courts. Additionally, you may find links to many state supreme court and intermediate courts of appeal cases. Content includes U.S. Supreme Court Opinions, U.S. Federal Appellate & District Court Opinions, Selected U.S. Federal Appellate & District Court dockets and orders and U.S. State Supreme & Appellate Court Opinions.
• PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) PACER is a nationwide database for accessing federal court documents, including case dockets. It covers U.S. District Courts, Bankruptcy Courts, and the U.S. Court of Appeals. Users can search for and access federal case dockets and documents for a fee.
• Ravel Law Public Case Access "This new Public Case Access site was created as a result of a collaboration between the Harvard Law School Library and Ravel Law. The company supported the library in its work to digitize 40,000 printed volumes of cases, comprised of over forty million pages of court decisions, including original materials from cases that predate the U.S. Constitution."
• The RECAP Archive Part of CourtListener, RECAP provides access to millions of PACER documents and dockets.

State Courts

• LLI Listing by Jurisdiction The Legal Information Institute provides a comprehensive list of states and links to their legal resources and websites.
• State Court Websites This page provides a list of various state court system websites by state.
• Pennsylvania Judiciary Web Portal The Pennsylvania Judiciary Web Portal provides the public with access to various aspects of court information, including appellate courts, common pleas courts and magisterial district court docket sheets; common pleas courts and magisterial district court calendars; and PAePay.
• Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Opinions

US Supreme Court

• US Reports he opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States are published officially in the United States Reports.
• US Reports through HeinOnline
• << Previous: Start
• Next: Statutory Law >>
• Last Updated: Aug 28, 2024 9:09 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.cmu.edu/legal_research

Tort Law: Cases, Perspectives, and Problems

Santa Clara Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07-29

TORT LAW: CASES, PERSPECTIVES, AND PROBLEMS, LexisNexis, 2007

71 Pages Posted: 28 Jun 2007

Thomas C. Galligan

Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge - Paul M. Hebert Law Center

Phoebe A. Haddon

Rutgers University-Camden, Rutgers Law School

Frank L. Maraist

Frank mcclellan.

Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law

Michael L. Rustad

Suffolk University Law School

Nicolas Terry

Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

Stephanie M. Wildman

Santa Clara University - School of Law; The Writers Grotto

Thomas C. Galligan, Jr. (Colby-Sawyer College), Phoebe A. Haddon (Temple), Frank L. Maraist (Louisiana State), Frank M. McClellan (Temple), Michael L. Rustad (Suffolk), Nicolas P. Terry (St. Louis), and Stephanie M. Wildman (Santa Clara) are pleased to announce the Fourth Edition of Tort Law: Cases, Perspectives, and Problems available from LexisNexis. The authors have dramatically revised the Fourth Edition of this unique casebook. Chapter One is unique among American torts casebooks in its examination of how the dominant twenty-first century tort theories influence judicial decisionmaking and scholarship. That chapter explains six key perspectives on tort law: Law and Economics; Corrective Justice; Critical Race Theory; Critical Feminism; Pragmatism; and Social Justice. This chapter references the famous McDonald's hot coffee litigation as a case study to illustrate these perspectives in action. Subsequent chapters continue to work through that case study and continually reference the perspectives to explain or challenge the decided cases. This new edition presents the important cases, statutes, empirical data, and competing tort theories in a problems-oriented format designed to help students acquire a sophisticated understanding of tort law through active learning. As before, the text includes a large number of problems. Now, however, problem sets at the end of each substantive chapter organize the updated and considerably expanded Problems. This extensively rewritten and reorganized edition includes the classic common law torts cases, but also presents updated and teachable, cutting-edge decisions that will demand student interest and hold their attention. Particular care has been to take account of the most recent commentaries on tort law, such as the growing importance of the Restatement (Third) of Torts. The authors seek to provide students with innovative cases and problems, empowering them with practical skills. By exposing students to the most important contemporary tort law theories, the Fourth Edition of this casebook encourages students to go beyond passively memorizing case holdings and the voyeuristic experience of reading appellate opinions and truly gain perspectives on tort law. The Table of Contents, Preface, and Chapter 1 are available to download here.

Keywords: Torts, Legal Education, Legal Educator, Discrimination

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Thomas C. Galligan (Contact Author)

Louisiana state university, baton rouge - paul m. hebert law center ( email ).

440 Law Center Building Baton Rouge, LA 70803 United States

Rutgers University-Camden, Rutgers Law School ( email )

Camden, NJ United States

Temple University - James E. Beasley School of Law ( email )

1719 N. Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19122 United States

Suffolk University Law School ( email )

120 Tremont Street Boston, MA 02108-4977 United States

Nicolas P. Terry

Indiana university robert h. mckinney school of law ( email ).

530 W. New York St Indianapolis, IN 46202 United States

Santa Clara University - School of Law ( email )

500 El Camino Real Santa Clara, CA 95053 United States 408-554-5440 (Fax)

The Writers Grotto ( email )

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on ssrn, paper statistics, related ejournals, social sciences education ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Saint Louis University School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series

Subscribe to this free journal for more curated articles on this topic

Santa Clara University School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series

Legal education ejournal, law educator: courses, materials & teaching ejournal.

Subscribe to this journal for more curated articles on this topic

Torts & Product Liability Law eJournal

• Browse All Articles
• Newsletter Sign-Up

• 09 Sep 2024

McDonald’s and the Post #MeToo Rules of Sex in the Workplace

As #MeToo cast a spotlight on harassment in the workplace, former McDonald's CEO Stephen Easterbrook went from savior to pariah. Drawing from a series of case studies, Lynn Paine outlines seven lessons all corporate boards can take away from the scandal to improve culture and prevent abuse of power.

• 06 Aug 2024

What the World Could Learn from America's Immigration Backlash—100 Years Ago

Immigration concerns are shaping elections around the world, but these fears have been around for centuries. Mining data from US history, Marco Tabellini explores how immigration has actually changed communities, and offers advice for policymakers trying to move forward.

• 26 Mar 2024
• Cold Call Podcast

How Do Great Leaders Overcome Adversity?

In the spring of 2021, Raymond Jefferson (MBA 2000) applied for a job in President Joseph Biden’s administration. Ten years earlier, false allegations were used to force him to resign from his prior US government position as assistant secretary of labor for veterans’ employment and training in the Department of Labor. Two employees had accused him of ethical violations in hiring and procurement decisions, including pressuring subordinates into extending contracts to his alleged personal associates. The Deputy Secretary of Labor gave Jefferson four hours to resign or be terminated. Jefferson filed a federal lawsuit against the US government to clear his name, which he pursued for eight years at the expense of his entire life savings. Why, after such a traumatic and debilitating experience, would Jefferson want to pursue a career in government again? Harvard Business School Senior Lecturer Anthony Mayo explores Jefferson’s personal and professional journey from upstate New York to West Point to the Obama administration, how he faced adversity at several junctures in his life, and how resilience and vulnerability shaped his leadership style in the case, "Raymond Jefferson: Trial by Fire."

• 27 Feb 2024
• Research & Ideas

Why Companies Should Share Their DEI Data (Even When It’s Unflattering)

Companies that make their workforce demographics public earn consumer goodwill, even if the numbers show limited progress on diversity, says research by Ryan Buell, Maya Balakrishnan, and Jimin Nam. How can brands make transparency a differentiator?

• 22 Feb 2024

How to Make AI 'Forget' All the Private Data It Shouldn't Have

When companies use machine learning models, they may run the risk of inadvertently sharing sensitive and private data. Seth Neel explains why it’s important to understand how to wipe AI’s spongelike memory clean.

• 10 Oct 2023

In Empowering Black Voters, Did a Landmark Law Stir White Angst?

The Voting Rights Act dramatically increased Black participation in US elections—until worried white Americans mobilized in response. Research by Marco Tabellini illustrates the power of a political backlash.

• 26 Sep 2023

The PGA Tour and LIV Golf Merger: Competition vs. Cooperation

On June 9, 2022, the first LIV Golf event teed off outside of London. The new tour offered players larger prizes, more flexibility, and ambitions to attract new fans to the sport. Immediately following the official start of that tournament, the PGA Tour announced that all 17 PGA Tour players participating in the LIV Golf event were suspended and ineligible to compete in PGA Tour events. Tensions between the two golf entities continued to rise, as more players “defected” to LIV. Eventually LIV Golf filed an antitrust lawsuit accusing the PGA Tour of anticompetitive practices, and the Department of Justice launched an investigation. Then, in a dramatic turn of events, LIV Golf and the PGA Tour announced that they were merging. Harvard Business School assistant professor Alexander MacKay discusses the competitive, antitrust, and regulatory issues at stake and whether or not the PGA Tour took the right actions in response to LIV Golf’s entry in his case, “LIV Golf.”

• 06 Jun 2023

The Opioid Crisis, CEO Pay, and Shareholder Activism

In 2020, AmerisourceBergen Corporation, a Fortune 50 company in the drug distribution industry, agreed to settle thousands of lawsuits filed nationwide against the company for its opioid distribution practices, which critics alleged had contributed to the opioid crisis in the US. The $6.6 billion global settlement caused a net loss larger than the cumulative net income earned during the tenure of the company’s CEO, which began in 2011. In addition, AmerisourceBergen’s legal and financial troubles were accompanied by shareholder demands aimed at driving corporate governance changes in companies in the opioid supply chain. Determined to hold the company’s leadership accountable, the shareholders launched a campaign in early 2021 to reject the pay packages of executives. Should the board reduce the executives’ pay, as of means of improving accountability? Or does punishing the AmerisourceBergen executives for paying the settlement ignore the larger issue of a business’s responsibility to society? Harvard Business School professor Suraj Srinivasan discusses executive compensation and shareholder activism in the context of the US opioid crisis in his case, “The Opioid Settlement and Controversy Over CEO Pay at AmerisourceBergen.”

• 17 Jan 2023

Good Companies Commit Crimes, But Great Leaders Can Prevent Them

It's time for leaders to go beyond "check the box" compliance programs. Through corporate cases involving Walmart, Wells Fargo, and others, Eugene Soltes explores the thorny legal issues executives today must navigate in his book Corporate Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions.

• 29 Nov 2022

How Will Gamers and Investors Respond to Microsoft’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard?

In January 2022, Microsoft announced its acquisition of the video game company Activision Blizzard for $68.7 billion. The deal would make Microsoft the world’s third largest video game company, but it also exposes the company to several risks. First, the all-cash deal would require Microsoft to use a large portion of its cash reserves. Second, the acquisition was announced as Activision Blizzard faced gender pay disparity and sexual harassment allegations. That opened Microsoft up to potential reputational damage, employee turnover, and lost sales. Do the potential benefits of the acquisition outweigh the risks for Microsoft and its shareholders? Harvard Business School associate professor Joseph Pacelli discusses the ongoing controversies around the merger and how gamers and investors have responded in the case, “Call of Fiduciary Duty: Microsoft Acquires Activision Blizzard.”

• 28 Apr 2022

Can You Buy Creativity in the Gig Economy?

It's possible, but creators need more of a stake. A study by Feng Zhu of 10,000 novels in the Chinese e-book market reveals how tying pay to performance can lead to new ideas.

• 04 Jan 2022
• What Do You Think?

Firing McDonald’s Easterbrook: What Could the Board Have Done Differently?

Letting a senior leader go is one of the biggest—and most fraught—decisions for a corporate board. Consider the recent CEO scandal and legal wrangling at McDonald's, says James Heskett. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 20 Sep 2021

How Much Is Freedom Worth? For Gig Workers, a Lot.

In the booming gig economy, does the ability to set your schedule outweigh having sick leave and overtime? Felix Oberholzer-Gee and Laura Katsnelson turn to DoorDash drivers to find out. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 17 Sep 2021

The Trial of Elizabeth Holmes: Visionary, Criminal, or Both?

Eugene Soltes explains why the fraud case against the Theranos cofounder isn't as simple as it seems, and why a conviction probably wouldn't deter unethical behavior from others. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 23 Aug 2021

Why White-Collar Crime Spiked in America After 9/11

The FBI shifted agents and other budget resources toward fighting terrorism in certain parts of the country, and financial fraud and insider trading ran rampant, according to research by Trung Nguyen. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 23 Feb 2021

Examining Race and Mass Incarceration in the United States

The late 20th century saw dramatic growth in incarceration rates in the United States. Of the more than 2.3 million people in US prisons, jails, and detention centers in 2020, 60 percent were Black or Latinx. Harvard Business School assistant professor Reshmaan Hussam probes the assumptions underlying the current prison system, with its huge racial disparities, and considers what could be done to address the crisis of the American criminal justice system in her case, “Race and Mass Incarceration in the United States.” Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 19 Oct 2020
• Working Paper Summaries

Bankruptcy and the COVID-19 Crisis

Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on bankruptcy filing rates in the United States, this study finds that large businesses, small businesses, and consumers experience very different effects of the crisis.

• 12 Aug 2020

Why Investors Often Lose When They Sue Their Financial Adviser

Forty percent of American investors rely on financial advisers, but the COVID-19 market rollercoaster may have highlighted a weakness when disputes arise. The system favors the financial industry, says Mark Egan. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

• 26 Jun 2020

Weak Credit Covenants

Prior to the 2020 pandemic, the leveraged loan market experienced an unprecedented boom, which came hand in hand with significant changes in contracting terms. This study presents large-sample evidence of what constitutes contractual weakness from the creditors’ perspective.

• 23 Mar 2020

Product Disasters Can Be Fertile Ground for Innovation

Rather than chilling innovation, product accidents may provide companies an unexpected opportunity to develop new technologies desired by consumers, according to Hong Luo and Alberto Galasso. Open for comment; 0 Comments.

Business development

• Billing management software
• Court management software
• Legal calendaring solutions

Practice management & growth

• Project & knowledge management
• Workflow automation software

Corporate & business organization

• Business practice & procedure

Legal forms

• Legal form-building software

Legal data & document management

• Data management
• Data-driven insights
• Document management
• Document storage & retrieval

Drafting software, service & guidance

• Contract services
• Drafting software
• Electronic evidence

Financial management

• Outside counsel spend

Law firm marketing

• Attracting & retaining clients
• Custom legal marketing services

Legal research & guidance

• Anywhere access to reference books
• Due diligence
• Legal research technology

Trial readiness, process & case guidance

• Case management software
• Matter management

Recommended Products

Conduct legal research efficiently and confidently using trusted content, proprietary editorial enhancements, and advanced technology.

Accelerate how you find answers with powerful generative AI capabilities and the expertise of 650+ attorney editors. With Practical Law, access thousands of expertly maintained how-to guides, templates, checklists, and more across all major practice areas.

A business management tool for legal professionals that automates workflow. Simplify project management, increase profits, and improve client satisfaction.

• All products

Tax & Accounting

Audit & accounting.

• Accounting & financial management
• Audit workflow
• Engagement compilation & review
• Guidance & standards
• Internal audit & controls
• Quality control

Data & document management

• Certificate management
• Data management & mining
• Document storage & organization

Estate planning

• Estate planning & taxation
• Wealth management

Financial planning & analysis

• Financial reporting

Payroll, compensation, pension & benefits

• Payroll & workforce management services
• Healthcare plans
• Billing management
• Client management
• Cost management
• Practice management
• Workflow management

Professional development & education

• Product training & education
• Professional development

Tax planning & preparation

• Financial close
• Income tax compliance
• Tax automation
• Tax compliance
• Tax planning
• Tax preparation
• Sales & use tax
• Transfer pricing
• Fixed asset depreciation

Tax research & guidance

• Federal tax
• State & local tax
• International tax
• Tax laws & regulations
• Partnership taxation
• Research powered by AI
• Specialized industry taxation
• Credits & incentives
• Uncertain tax positions

Unleash the power of generative AI through an accounting and tax research tool. Find answers faster with dialogue-based research and quick, on-point search results.

Provides a full line of federal, state, and local programs. Save time with tax planning, preparation, and compliance.

Automate work paper preparation and eliminate data entry

Trade & Supply

Customs & duties management.

• Customs law compliance & administration

Global trade compliance & management

• Global export compliance & management
• Global trade analysis
• Denied party screening

Product & service classification

• Harmonized Tariff System classification

Supply chain & procurement technology

• Foreign-trade zone (FTZ) management
• Supply chain compliance

Software that keeps supply chain data in one central location. Optimize operations, connect with external partners, create reports and keep inventory accurate.

Automate sales and use tax, GST, and VAT compliance. Consolidate multiple country-specific spreadsheets into a single, customizable solution and improve tax filing and return accuracy.

Risk & Fraud

Risk & compliance management.

• Regulatory compliance management

Fraud prevention, detection & investigations

• Fraud prevention technology

Risk management & investigations

• Investigation technology
• Document retrieval & due diligence services

Search volumes of data with intuitive navigation and simple filtering parameters. Prevent, detect, and investigate crime.

Identify patterns of potentially fraudulent behavior with actionable analytics and protect resources and program integrity.

Analyze data to detect, prevent, and mitigate fraud. Focus investigation resources on the highest risks and protect programs by reducing improper payments.

News & Media

Who we serve.

• Broadcasters
• Governments
• Marketers & Advertisers
• Professionals
• Sports Media
• Corporate Communications
• Health & Pharma
• Machine Learning & AI

Content Types

• All Content Types
• Human Interest
• Business & Finance
• Entertainment & Lifestyle
• Reuters Community
• Reuters Plus - Content Studio
• Advertising Solutions
• Sponsorship
• Verification Services
• Action Images
• Reuters Connect
• World News Express
• Reuters Pictures Platform
• API & Feeds
• Reuters.com Platform

Media Solutions

• User Generated Content
• Reuters Ready
• Ready-to-Publish
• Case studies
• Reuters Partners
• Standards & values
• Leadership team
• Reuters Best
• Webinars & online events

Around the globe, with unmatched speed and scale, Reuters Connect gives you the power to serve your audiences in a whole new way.

Reuters Plus, the commercial content studio at the heart of Reuters, builds campaign content that helps you to connect with your audiences in meaningful and hyper-targeted ways.

Reuters.com provides readers with a rich, immersive multimedia experience when accessing the latest fast-moving global news and in-depth reporting.

• Reuters Media Center
• Jurisdiction
• Practice area
• View all legal
• Organization
• View all tax

Featured Products

• Blacks Law Dictionary
• Thomson Reuters ProView
• Recently updated products
• New products

Shop our latest titles

ProView Quickfinder favorite libraries

• Visit legal store
• Visit tax store

APIs by industry

• Risk & Fraud APIs
• Tax & Accounting APIs
• Trade & Supply APIs

Use case library

• Legal API use cases
• Risk & Fraud API use cases
• Tax & Accounting API use cases
• Trade & Supply API use cases

Related sites

United states support.

• Account help & support
• Communities
• Product help & support
• Product training

International support

• Legal UK, Ireland & Europe support

New releases

• Westlaw Precision
• 1040 Quickfinder Handbook

Join a TR community

• ONESOURCE community login
• Checkpoint community login
• CS community login
• TR Community

Free trials & demos

• Westlaw Edge
• Practical Law
• Checkpoint Edge
• Onvio Firm Management
• Proview eReader

How to do legal research in 3 steps

Knowing where to start a difficult legal research project can be a challenge. But if you already understand the basics of legal research, the process can be significantly easier — not to mention quicker.

Solid research skills are crucial to crafting a winning argument. So, whether you are a law school student or a seasoned attorney with years of experience, knowing how to perform legal research is important — including where to start and the steps to follow.

What is legal research, and where do I start? 

Black's Law Dictionary defines legal research as “[t]he finding and assembling of authorities that bear on a question of law." But what does that actually mean? It means that legal research is the process you use to identify and find the laws — including statutes, regulations, and court opinions — that apply to the facts of your case.

In most instances, the purpose of legal research is to find support for a specific legal issue or decision. For example, attorneys must conduct legal research if they need court opinions — that is, case law — to back up a legal argument they are making in a motion or brief filed with the court.

Alternatively, lawyers may need legal research to provide clients with accurate legal guidance . In the case of law students, they often use legal research to complete memos and briefs for class. But these are just a few situations in which legal research is necessary.

Why is legal research hard?

Each step — from defining research questions to synthesizing findings — demands critical thinking and rigorous analysis.

1. Identifying the legal issue is not so straightforward. Legal research involves interpreting many legal precedents and theories to justify your questions. Finding the right issue takes time and patience.

2. There's too much to research. Attorneys now face a great deal of case law and statutory material. The sheer volume forces the researcher to be efficient by following a methodology based on a solid foundation of legal knowledge and principles.

3. The law is a fluid doctrine. It changes with time, and staying updated with the latest legal codes, precedents, and statutes means the most resourceful lawyer needs to assess the relevance and importance of new decisions.

Legal research can pose quite a challenge, but professionals can improve it at every stage of the process . 

Step 1: Key questions to ask yourself when starting legal research

Before you begin looking for laws and court opinions, you first need to define the scope of your legal research project. There are several key questions you can use to help do this.

What are the facts?

Always gather the essential facts so you know the “who, what, why, when, where, and how” of your case. Take the time to write everything down, especially since you will likely need to include a statement of facts in an eventual filing or brief anyway. Even if you don't think a fact may be relevant now, write it down because it may be relevant later. These facts will also be helpful when identifying your legal issue.

What is the actual legal issue?

You will never know what to research if you don't know what your legal issue is. Does your client need help collecting money from an insurance company following a car accident involving a negligent driver? How about a criminal case involving excluding evidence found during an alleged illegal stop?

No matter the legal research project, you must identify the relevant legal problem and the outcome or relief sought. This information will guide your research so you can stay focused and on topic.

What is the relevant jurisdiction?

Don't cast your net too wide regarding legal research; you should focus on the relevant jurisdiction. For example, does your case deal with federal or state law? If it is state law, which state? You may find a case in California state court that is precisely on point, but it won't be beneficial if your legal project involves New York law.

Where to start legal research: The library, online, or even AI?

In years past, future attorneys were trained in law school to perform research in the library. But now, you can find almost everything from the library — and more — online. While you can certainly still use the library if you want, you will probably be costing yourself valuable time if you do.

When it comes to online research, some people start with free legal research options , including search engines like Google or Bing. But to ensure your legal research is comprehensive, you will want to use an online research service designed specifically for the law, such as Westlaw . Not only do online solutions like Westlaw have all the legal sources you need, but they also include artificial intelligence research features that help make quick work of your research

Step 2: How to find relevant case law and other primary sources of law

Now that you have gathered the facts and know your legal issue, the next step is knowing what to look for. After all, you will need the law to support your legal argument, whether providing guidance to a client or writing an internal memo, brief, or some other legal document.

But what type of law do you need? The answer: primary sources of law. Some of the more important types of primary law include:

• Case law, which are court opinions or decisions issued by federal or state courts
• Statutes, including legislation passed by both the U.S. Congress and state lawmakers
• Regulations, including those issued by either federal or state agencies
• Constitutions, both federal and state

Searching for primary sources of law

So, if it's primary law you want, it makes sense to begin searching there first, right? Not so fast. While you will need primary sources of law to support your case, in many instances, it is much easier — and a more efficient use of your time — to begin your search with secondary sources such as practice guides, treatises, and legal articles.

Why? Because secondary sources provide a thorough overview of legal topics, meaning you don't have to start your research from scratch. After secondary sources, you can move on to primary sources of law.

For example, while no two legal research projects are the same, the order in which you will want to search different types of sources may look something like this:

• Secondary sources . If you are researching a new legal principle or an unfamiliar area of the law, the best place to start is secondary sources, including law journals, practice guides , legal encyclopedias, and treatises. They are a good jumping-off point for legal research since they've already done the work for you. As an added bonus, they can save you additional time since they often identify and cite important statutes and seminal cases.
• Case law . If you have already found some case law in secondary sources, great, you have something to work with. But if not, don't fret. You can still search for relevant case law in a variety of ways, including running a search in a case law research tool.

Once you find a helpful case, you can use it to find others. For example, in Westlaw, most cases contain headnotes that summarize each of the case's important legal issues. These headnotes are also assigned a Key Number based on the topic associated with that legal issue. So, once you find a good case, you can use the headnotes and Key Numbers within it to quickly find more relevant case law.

• Statutes and regulations . In many instances, secondary sources and case law list the statutes and regulations relevant to your legal issue. But if you haven't found anything yet, you can still search for statutes and regs online like you do with cases.

Once you know which statute or reg is pertinent to your case, pull up the annotated version on Westlaw. Why the annotated version? Because the annotations will include vital information, such as a list of important cases that cite your statute or reg. Sometimes, these cases are even organized by topic — just one more way to find the case law you need to support your legal argument.

Keep in mind, though, that legal research isn't always a linear process. You may start out going from source to source as outlined above and then find yourself needing to go back to secondary sources once you have a better grasp of the legal issue. In other instances, you may even find the answer you are looking for in a source not listed above, like a sample brief filed with the court by another attorney. Ultimately, you need to go where the information takes you.

Step 3: Make sure you are using ‘good’ law

One of the most important steps with every legal research project is to verify that you are using “good" law — meaning a court hasn't invalidated it or struck it down in some way. After all, it probably won't look good to a judge if you cite a case that has been overruled or use a statute deemed unconstitutional. It doesn't necessarily mean you can never cite these sources; you just need to take a closer look before you do.

The simplest way to find out if something is still good law is to use a legal tool known as a citator, which will show you subsequent cases that have cited your source as well as any negative history, including if it has been overruled, reversed, questioned, or merely differentiated.

For instance, if a case, statute, or regulation has any negative history — and therefore may no longer be good law — KeyCite, the citator on Westlaw, will warn you. Specifically, KeyCite will show a flag or icon at the top of the document, along with a little blurb about the negative history. This alert system allows you to quickly know if there may be anything you need to worry about.

Some examples of these flags and icons include:

• A red flag on a case warns you it is no longer good for at least one point of law, meaning it may have been overruled or reversed on appeal.
• A yellow flag on a case warns that it has some negative history but is not expressly overruled or reversed, meaning another court may have criticized it or pointed out the holding was limited to a specific fact pattern.
• A blue-striped flag on a case warns you that it has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court or the U.S. Court of Appeals.
• The KeyCite Overruling Risk icon on a case warns you that the case may be implicitly undermined because it relies on another case that has been overruled.

Another bonus of using a citator like KeyCite is that it also provides a list of other cases that merely cite your source — it can lead to additional sources you previously didn't know about.

Perseverance is vital when it comes to legal research

Given that legal research is a complex process, it will likely come as no surprise that this guide cannot provide everything you need to know.

There is a reason why there are entire law school courses and countless books focused solely on legal research methodology. In fact, many attorneys will spend their entire careers honing their research skills — and even then, they may not have perfected the process.

So, if you are just beginning, don't get discouraged if you find legal research difficult — almost everyone does at first. With enough time, patience, and dedication, you can master the art of legal research.

Thomson Reuters originally published this article on November 10, 2020.

Related insights

Westlaw tip of the week: Checking cases with KeyCite

Why legislative history matters when crafting a winning argument

Case law research tools: The most useful free and paid offerings

Request a trial and experience the fastest way to find what you need

Legal Research Strategy

Preliminary analysis, organization, secondary sources, primary sources, updating research, identifying an end point, getting help, about this guide.

This guide will walk a beginning researcher though the legal research process step-by-step. These materials are created with the 1L Legal Research & Writing course in mind. However, these resources will also assist upper-level students engaged in any legal research project.

How to Strategize

Legal research must be comprehensive and precise.  One contrary source that you miss may invalidate other sources you plan to rely on.  Sticking to a strategy will save you time, ensure completeness, and improve your work product. 

Follow These Steps

Running Time: 3 minutes, 13 seconds.

Make sure that you don't miss any steps by using our:

• Legal Research Strategy Checklist

If you get stuck at any time during the process, check this out:

• Ten Tips for Moving Beyond the Brick Wall in the Legal Research Process, by Marsha L. Baum

Understanding the Legal Questions

A legal question often originates as a problem or story about a series of events. In law school, these stories are called fact patterns. In practice, facts may arise from a manager or an interview with a potential client. Start by doing the following:

• Read anything you have been given
• Analyze the facts and frame the legal issues
• Assess what you know and need to learn
• Note the jurisdiction and any primary law you have been given
• Generate potential search terms

Jurisdiction

Legal rules will vary depending on where geographically your legal question will be answered. You must determine the jurisdiction in which your claim will be heard. These resources can help you learn more about jurisdiction and how it is determined:

• Legal Treatises on Jurisdiction
• LII Wex Entry on Jurisdiction

This map indicates which states are in each federal appellate circuit:

Getting Started

Once you have begun your research, you will need to keep track of your work. Logging your research will help you to avoid missing sources and explain your research strategy. You will likely be asked to explain your research process when in practice. Researchers can keep paper logs, folders on Westlaw or Lexis, or online citation management platforms.

Organizational Methods

Tracking with paper or excel.

Many researchers create their own tracking charts.  Be sure to include:

• Search Date
• Topics/Keywords/Search Strategy
• Citation to Relevant Source Found
• Save Locations
• Follow Up Needed

Consider using the following research log as a starting place: 

• Sample Research Log

Tracking with Folders

Westlaw and Lexis offer options to create folders, then save and organize your materials there.

• Lexis Advance Folders
• Westlaw Edge Folders

Tracking with Citation Management Software

For long term projects, platforms such as Zotero, EndNote, Mendeley, or Refworks might be useful. These are good tools to keep your research well organized. Note, however, that none of these platforms substitute for doing your own proper Bluebook citations. Learn more about citation management software on our other research guides:

• Guide to Zotero for Harvard Law Students by Harvard Law School Library Research Services Last Updated Aug 9, 2024 424 views this year
• Zotero by Daniel Becker Last Updated Sep 12, 2024 28781 views this year

Types of Sources

There are three different types of sources: Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary.  When doing legal research you will be using mostly primary and secondary sources.  We will explore these different types of sources in the sections below.

Secondary sources often explain legal principles more thoroughly than a single case or statute. Starting with them can help you save time.

Secondary sources are particularly useful for:

• Learning the basics of a particular area of law
• Understanding key terms of art in an area
• Identifying essential cases and statutes

Consider the following when deciding which type of secondary source is right for you:

• Scope/Breadth
• Depth of Treatment
• Currentness/Reliability

For a deep dive into secondary sources visit:

• Secondary Sources: ALRs, Encyclopedias, Law Reviews, Restatements, & Treatises by Catherine Biondo Last Updated Apr 12, 2024 6885 views this year

Legal Dictionaries & Encyclopedias

Legal dictionaries.

Legal dictionaries are similar to other dictionaries that you have likely used before.

• Black's Law Dictionary
• Ballentine's Law Dictionary

Legal Encyclopedias

Legal encyclopedias contain brief, broad summaries of legal topics, providing introductions and explaining terms of art. They also provide citations to primary law and relevant major law review articles.  

Here are the two major national encyclopedias:

• American Jurisprudence (AmJur) (Westlaw)
• American Jurisprudence (Lexis)
• Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS)

Treatises are books on legal topics.  These books are a good place to begin your research.  They provide explanation, analysis, and citations to the most relevant primary sources. Treatises range from single subject overviews to deep treatments of broad subject areas.

It is important to check the date when the treatise was published. Many are either not updated, or are updated through the release of newer editions.

To find a relevant treatise explore:

• Legal Treatises by Subject by Catherine Biondo Last Updated Apr 12, 2024 6391 views this year

American Law Reports (ALR)

American Law Reports (ALR) contains in-depth articles on narrow topics of the law. ALR articles, are often called annotations. They provide background, analysis, and citations to relevant cases, statutes, articles, and other annotations. ALR annotations are invaluable tools to quickly find primary law on narrow legal questions.

This resource is available in both Westlaw and Lexis:

• American Law Reports on Westlaw (includes index)
• American Law Reports on Lexis

Law Reviews & Journals

Law reviews are scholarly publications, usually edited by law students in conjunction with faculty members. They contain both lengthy articles and shorter essays by professors and lawyers. They also contain comments, notes, or developments in the law written by law students. Articles often focus on new or emerging areas of law and may offer critical commentary. Some law reviews are dedicated to a particular topic while others are general. Occasionally, law reviews will include issues devoted to proceedings of panels and symposia.

Law review and journal articles are extremely narrow and deep with extensive references. 

To find law review articles visit:

• Law Journal Library on HeinOnline
• Law Reviews & Journals on LexisNexis
• Law Reviews & Journals on Westlaw

Restatements

Restatements are highly regarded distillations of common law, prepared by the American Law Institute (ALI). ALI is a prestigious organization comprised of judges, professors, and lawyers. They distill the "black letter law" from cases to indicate trends in common law. Resulting in a “restatement” of existing common law into a series of principles or rules. Occasionally, they make recommendations on what a rule of law should be.

Restatements are not primary law. However, they are considered persuasive authority by many courts.

Restatements are organized into chapters, titles, and sections.  Sections contain the following:

• a concisely stated rule of law,
• comments to clarify the rule,
• hypothetical examples,
• explanation of purpose, and
• exceptions to the rule  

To access restatements visit:

• American Law Institute Library on HeinOnline
• Restatements & Principles of the Law on LexisNexis
• Restatements & Principles of Law on Westlaw

Primary Authority

Primary authority is "authority that issues directly from a law-making body."   Authority , Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).   Sources of primary authority include:

• Constitutions
• Statutes 

Regulations

Access to primary legal sources is available through:

• Bloomberg Law
• Free & Low Cost Alternatives

Statutes (also called legislation) are "laws enacted by legislative bodies", such as Congress and state legislatures.  Statute , Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).

We typically start primary law research here. If there is a controlling statute, cases you look for later will interpret that law. There are two types of statutes, annotated and unannotated.

Annotated codes are a great place to start your research. They combine statutory language with citations to cases, regulations, secondary sources, and other relevant statutes. This can quickly connect you to the most relevant cases related to a particular law. Unannotated Codes provide only the text of the statute without editorial additions. Unannotated codes, however, are more often considered official and used for citation purposes.

For a deep dive on federal and state statutes, visit:

• Statutes: US and State Codes by Mindy Kent Last Updated Apr 12, 2024 5133 views this year
• 50 State Surveys

Want to learn more about the history or legislative intent of a law?  Learn how to get started here:

• Legislative History Get an introduction to legislative histories in less than 5 minutes.
• Federal Legislative History Research Guide

Regulations are rules made by executive departments and agencies. Not every legal question will require you to search regulations. However, many areas of law are affected by regulations. So make sure not to skip this step if they are relevant to your question.

To learn more about working with regulations, visit:

• Administrative Law Research by AJ Blechner Last Updated Apr 12, 2024 864 views this year

Case Basics

In many areas, finding relevant caselaw will comprise a significant part of your research. This Is particularly true in legal areas that rely heavily on common law principles.

Running Time: 3 minutes, 10 seconds.

Unpublished Cases

Up to  86% of federal case opinions are unpublished. You must determine whether your jurisdiction will consider these unpublished cases as persuasive authority. The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure have an overarching rule, Rule 32.1  Each circuit also has local rules regarding citations to unpublished opinions. You must understand both the Federal Rule and the rule in your jurisdiction.

• Federal and Local Rules of Appellate Procedure 32.1 (Dec. 2021).
• Type of Opinion or Order Filed in Cases Terminated on the Merits, by Circuit (Sept. 2021).

Each state also has its own local rules which can often be accessed through:

• State Bar Associations
• State Courts Websites

First Circuit

• First Circuit Court Rule 32.1.0

Second Circuit

• Second Circuit Court Rule 32.1.1

Third Circuit

• Third Circuit Court Rule 5.7

Fourth Circuit

• Fourth Circuit Court Rule 32.1

Fifth Circuit

• Fifth Circuit Court Rule 47.5

Sixth Circuit

• Sixth Circuit Court Rule 32.1

Seventh Circuit

• Seventh Circuit Court Rule 32.1

Eighth Circuit

• Eighth Circuit Court Rule 32.1A

Ninth Circuit

• Ninth Circuit Court Rule 36-3

Tenth Circuit

• Tenth Circuit Court Rule 32.1

Eleventh Circuit

• Eleventh Circuit Court Rule 32.1

D.C. Circuit

• D.C. Circuit Court Rule 32.1

Federal Circuit

• Federal Circuit Court Rule 32.1

Finding Cases

Headnotes show the key legal points in a case. Legal databases use these headnotes to guide researchers to other cases on the same topic. They also use them to organize concepts explored in cases by subject. Publishers, like Westlaw and Lexis, create headnotes, so they are not consistent across databases.

Headnotes are organized by subject into an outline that allows you to search by subject. This outline is known as a "digest of cases." By browsing or searching the digest you can retrieve all headnotes covering a particular topic. This can help you identify particularly important cases on the relevant subject.

Running Time: 4 minutes, 43 seconds.

Each major legal database has its own digest:

• Topic Navigator (Lexis)
• Key Digest System (Westlaw)

Start by identifying a relevant topic in a digest.  Then you can limit those results to your jurisdiction for more relevant results.  Sometimes, you can keyword search within only the results on your topic in your jurisdiction.  This is a particularly powerful research method.

One Good Case Method

After following the steps above, you will have identified some relevant cases on your topic. You can use good cases you find to locate other cases addressing the same topic. These other cases often apply similar rules to a range of diverse fact patterns.

• in Lexis click "More Like This Headnote"
• in Westlaw click "Cases that Cite This Headnote"

to focus on the terms of art or key words in a particular headnote. You can use this feature to find more cases with similar language and concepts.  ​

Ways to Use Citators

A citator is "a catalogued list of cases, statutes, and other legal sources showing the subsequent history and current precedential value of those sources.  Citators allow researchers to verify the authority of a precedent and to find additional sources relating to a given subject." Citator , Black's Law Dictionary (11th ed. 2019).

Each major legal database has its own citator.  The two most popular are Keycite on Westlaw and Shepard's on Lexis.

• Keycite Information Page
• Shepard's Information Page

Making Sure Your Case is Still Good Law

This video answers common questions about citators:

For step-by-step instructions on how to use Keycite and Shepard's see the following:

Additional Shepard's Resources

• Shepard's Video Tutorial
• Shepard's Handout
• Shepard's Editorial Phrase Dictionary
• Shepard's Signal Indicators & Analysis Phrases
• Shepard's Citation Services User Guide
• Lexis+ Support and Training Additional online videos and handouts for Lexis+.

Additional KeyCite Resources

• How to Ensure I'm Citing Good Law (Westlaw Video)
• KeyCite Handout
• KeyCite Editorial Phrase Dictionary
• Understanding Next Generation KeyCite
• How to Check the Status of a Case with KeyCite
• Westlaw Precision Support Additional videos and handouts to support your Westlaw research.

Using Citators For

Citators serve three purposes: (1) case validation, (2) better understanding, and (3) additional research.

Case Validation

Is my case or statute good law?

• Parallel citations
• Prior and subsequent history
• Negative treatment suggesting you should no longer cite to holding.

Better Understanding

Has the law in this area changed?

• Later cases on the same point of law
• Positive treatment, explaining or expanding the law.
• Negative Treatment, narrowing or distinguishing the law.

Track Research

Who is citing and writing about my case or statute?

• Secondary sources that discuss your case or statute.
• Cases in other jurisdictions that discuss your case or statute.

Knowing When to Start Writing

For more guidance on when to stop your research see:

• Terminating Research, by Christina L. Kunz

Contact Us!

  Ask Us!  Submit a question or search our knowledge base.

Chat with us!  Chat   with a librarian (HLS only)

Email: [email protected]

 Contact Historical & Special Collections at [email protected]

  Meet with Us   Schedule an online consult with a Librarian

Hours  Library Hours

Classes  View  Training Calendar  or  Request an Insta-Class

 Text  Ask a Librarian, 617-702-2728

 Call  Reference & Research Services, 617-495-4516

This guide is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License .

You may reproduce any part of it for noncommercial purposes as long as credit is included and it is shared in the same manner. 

• Last Updated: Aug 27, 2024 5:19 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.harvard.edu/law/researchstrategy

Harvard University Digital Accessibility Policy

How to write a case brief for law school: Excerpt reproduced from Introduction to the Study of Law: Cases and Materials,

Third Edition (LexisNexis 2009) by Michael Makdisi & John Makdisi

C. HOW TO BRIEF

The previous section described the parts of a case in order to make it easier to read and identify the pertinent information that you will use to create your briefs. This section will describe the parts of a brief in order to give you an idea about what a brief is, what is helpful to include in a brief, and what purpose it serves. Case briefs are a necessary study aid in law school that helps to encapsulate and analyze the mountainous mass of material that law students must digest. The case brief represents a final product after reading a case, rereading it, taking it apart, and putting it back together again. In addition to its function as a tool for self-instruction and referencing, the case brief also provides a valuable “cheat sheet” for class participation.

Who will read your brief? Most professors will espouse the value of briefing but will never ask to see that you have, in fact, briefed. As a practicing lawyer, your client doesn’t care if you brief, so long as you win the case. The judges certainly don’t care if you brief, so long as you competently practice the law. You are the person that the brief will serve! Keep this in mind when deciding what elements to include as part of your brief and when deciding what information to include under those elements.

What are the elements of a brief? Different people will tell you to include different things in your brief. Most likely, upon entering law school, this will happen with one or more of your instructors. While opinions may vary, four elements that are essential to any useful brief are the following:

(a) Facts (name of the case and its parties, what happened factually and procedurally, and the judgment)

(b) Issues (what is in dispute)

(c) Holding (the applied rule of law)

(d) Rationale (reasons for the holding)

If you include nothing but these four elements, you should have everything you need in order to recall effectively the information from the case during class or several months later when studying for exams.

Because briefs are made for yourself, you may want to include other elements that expand the four elements listed above. Depending on the case, the inclusion of additional elements may be useful. For example, a case that has a long and important section expounding dicta might call for a separate section in your brief labeled: Dicta. Whatever elements you decide to include, however, remember that the brief is a tool intended for personal use. To the extent that more elements will help with organization and use of the brief, include them. On the other hand, if you find that having more elements makes your brief cumbersome and hard to use, cut back on the number of elements. At a minimum, however, make sure you include the four elements listed above.

Elements that you may want to consider including in addition to the four basic elements are:

(e) Dicta (commentary about the decision that was not the basis for the decision)

(f) Dissent (if a valuable dissenting opinion exits, the dissent’s opinion)

(g) Party’s Arguments (each party’s opposing argument concerning the ultimate issue)

(h) Comments (personal commentary)

Personal comments can be useful if you have a thought that does not fit elsewhere. In the personal experience of one of the authors, this element was used to label cases as specific kinds (e.g., as a case of vicarious liability) or make mental notes about what he found peculiar or puzzling about cases. This element allowed him to release his thoughts (without losing them) so that he could move on to other cases.

In addition to these elements, it may help you to organize your thoughts, as some people do, by dividing Facts into separate elements:

(1) Facts of the case (what actually happened, the controversy)

(2) Procedural History (what events within the court system led to the present case)

(3) Judgment (what the court actually decided)

Procedural History is usually minimal and most of the time irrelevant to the ultimate importance of a case; however, this is not always true. One subject in which Procedure History is virtually always relevant is Civil Procedure.

When describing the Judgment of the case, distinguish it from the Holding. The Judgment is the factual determination by the court, in favor of one party, such as “affirmed,” “reversed,” or “remanded.” In contrast, the Holding is the applied rule of law that serves as the basis for the ultimate judgment.

Remember that the purpose of a brief is to remind you of the important details that make the case significant in terms of the law. It will be a reference tool when you are drilled by a professor and will be a study aid when you prepare for exams. A brief is also like a puzzle piece.

The elements of the brief create the unique shape and colors of the piece, and, when combined with other pieces, the picture of the common law takes form. A well-constructed brief will save you lots of time by removing the need to return to the case to remember the important details and also by making it easier to put together the pieces of the common law puzzle.

D. EXTRACTING THE RELEVANT INFORMATION: ANNOTATING AND HIGHLIGHTING

So now that you know the basic elements of a brief, what information is important to include under each element? The simple answer is: whatever is relevant. But what parts of a case are relevant? When you read your first few cases, you may think that everything that the judge said was relevant to his ultimate conclusion. Even if this were true, what is relevant for the judge to make his decision is not always relevant for you to include in your brief. Remember, the reason to make a brief is not to persuade the world that the ultimate decision in the case is a sound one, but rather to aid in refreshing your memory concerning the most important parts of the case.

What facts are relevant to include in a brief? You should include the facts that are necessary to remind you of the story. If you forget the story, you will not remember how the law in the case was applied. You should also include the facts that are dispositive to the decision in the case. For instance, if the fact that a car is white is a determining factor in the case, the brief should note that the case involves a white car and not simply a car. To the extent that the procedural history either helps you to remember the case or plays an important role in the ultimate outcome, you should include these facts as well.

What issues and conclusions are relevant to include in a brief? There is usually one main issue on which the court rests its decision. This may seem simple, but the court may talk about multiple issues, and may discuss multiple arguments from both sides of the case. Be sure to distinguish the issues from the arguments made by the parties. The relevant issue or issues, and corresponding conclusions, are the ones for which the court made a final decision and which are binding. The court may discuss intermediate conclusions or issues, but stay focused on the main issue and conclusion which binds future courts.

What rationale is important to include in a brief? This is probably the most difficult aspect of the case to determine. Remember that everything that is discussed may have been relevant to the judge, but it is not necessarily relevant to the rationale of the decision. The goal is to remind yourself of the basic reasoning that the court used to come to its decision and the key factors that made the decision favor one side or the other.

A brief should be brief! Overly long or cumbersome briefs are not very helpful because you will not be able to skim them easily when you review your notes or when the professor drills you. On the other hand, a brief that is too short will be equally unhelpful because it lacks sufficient information to refresh your memory. Try to keep your briefs to one page in length. This will make it easy for you to organize and reference them.

Do not get discouraged. Learning to brief and figuring out exactly what to include will take time and practice. The more you brief, the easier it will become to extract the relevant information.

While a brief is an extremely helpful and important study aid, annotating and highlighting are other tools for breaking down the mass of material in your casebook. The remainder of this section will discuss these different techniques and show how they complement and enhance the briefing process.

Annotating Cases

Many of you probably already read with a pencil or pen, but if you do not, now is the time to get in the habit. Cases are so dense and full of information that you will find yourself spending considerable amounts of time rereading cases to find what you need. An effective way to reduce this time is to annotate the margins of the casebook. Your pencil (or pen) will be one of your best friends while reading a case. It will allow you to mark off the different sections (such as facts, procedural history, or conclusions), thus allowing you to clear your mind of thoughts and providing an invaluable resource when briefing and reviewing.

You might be wondering why annotating is important if you make an adequate, well-constructed brief. By their very nature briefs cannot cover everything in a case. Even with a thorough, well-constructed brief you may want to reference the original case in order to reread dicta that might not have seemed important at the time, to review the complete procedural history or set of facts, or to scour the rationale for a better understanding of the case; annotating makes these tasks easier. Whether you return to a case after a few hours or a few months, annotations will swiftly guide you to the pertinent parts of the case by providing a roadmap of the important sections. Your textual markings and margin notes will refresh your memory and restore specific thoughts you might have had about either the case in general or an individual passage.

Annotations will also remind you of forgotten thoughts and random ideas by providing a medium for personal comments.

In addition to making it easier to review an original case, annotating cases during the first review of a case makes the briefing process easier. With adequate annotations, the important details needed for your brief will be much easier to retrieve. Without annotations, you will likely have difficulty locating the information you seek even in the short cases. It might seem strange that it would be hard to reference a short case, but even a short case will likely take you at least fifteen to twenty-five minutes to read, while longer cases may take as much as thirty minutes to an hour to complete. No matter how long it takes, the dense material of all cases makes it difficult to remember all your thoughts, and trying to locate specific sections of the analysis may feel like you are trying to locate a needle in a haystack. An annotation in the margin, however, will not only swiftly guide you to a pertinent section, but will also refresh the thoughts that you had while reading that section.

When you read a case for the first time, read for the story and for a basic understanding of the dispute, the issues, the rationale, and the decision. As you hit these elements (or what you think are these elements) make a mark in the margins. Your markings can be as simple as “facts” (with a bracket that indicates the relevant part of the paragraph). When you spot an issue, you may simply mark “issue” or instead provide a synopsis in your own words. When a case sparks an idea — write that idea in the margin as well — you never know when a seemingly irrelevant idea might turn into something more.

Finally, when you spot a particularly important part of the text, underline it (or highlight it as described below).

With a basic understanding of the case, and with annotations in the margin, the second read-through of the case should be much easier. You can direct your reading to the most important sections and will have an easier time identifying what is and is not important. Continue rereading the case until you have identified all the relevant information that you need to make your brief, including the issue(s), the facts, the holding, and the relevant parts of the analysis.

Pencil or pen — which is better to use when annotating? Our recommendation is a mechanical pencil. Mechanical pencils make finer markings than regular pencils, and also than ballpoint pens. Although you might think a pencil might smear more than a pen, with its sharp point a mechanical pencil uses very little excess lead and will not smear as much as you might imagine. A mechanical pencil will also give you the freedom to make mistakes without consequences. When you first start annotating, you may think that some passages are more important than they really are, and therefore you may resist the urge to make a mark in order to preserve your book and prevent false guideposts. With a pencil, however, the ability to erase and rewrite removes this problem.

Highlighting

Why highlight? Like annotating, highlighting may seem unimportant if you create thorough, well-constructed briefs, but highlighting directly helps you to brief. It makes cases, especially the more complicated ones, easy to digest, review and use to extract information.

Highlighting takes advantage of colors to provide a uniquely effective method for reviewing and referencing a case. If you prefer a visual approach to learning, you may find highlighting to be a very effective tool.

If annotating and highlighting are so effective, why brief? Because the process of summarizing a case and putting it into your own words within a brief provides an understanding of the law and of the case that you cannot gain through the process of highlighting or annotating.

The process of putting the case into your own words forces you to digest the material, while annotating and highlighting can be accomplished in a much more passive manner.

What should you highlight? Similar to annotating, the best parts of the case to highlight are those that represent the needed information for your brief such as the facts, the issue, the holding and the rationale.

Unlike annotating, highlighting provides an effective way to color code, which makes referring to the case even easier. In addition, Highlighters are particularly useful in marking off entire sections by using brackets. These brackets will allow you to color-code the case without highlighting all the text, leaving the most important phrases untouched for a more detailed highlight marking or underlining.

Highlighting is a personal tool, and therefore should be used to the extent that highlighting helps, but should be modified in a way that makes it personally time efficient and beneficial. For instance, you might combine the use of annotations in the margins with the visual benefit of highlighting the relevant text. You may prefer to underline the relevant text with a pencil, but to use a highlighter to bracket off the different sections of a case. Whatever you choose to do, make sure that it works for you, regardless of what others recommend. The techniques in the remainder of this section will describe ways to make full use of your highlighters.

First, buy yourself a set of multi-colored highlighters, with at least four, or perhaps five or six different colors. Yellow, pink, and orange are usually the brightest. Depending on the brand, purple and green can be dark, but still work well. Although blue is a beautiful color, it tends to darken and hide the text.

Therefore we recommend that you save blue for the elements that you rarely highlight.

For each different section of the case, choose a color, and use that color only when highlighting the section of the case designated for that color. Consider using yellow for the text that you tend to highlight most frequently. Because yellow is the brightest, you may be inclined to use yellow for the Conclusions in order to make them stand out the most. If you do this, however, you will exhaust your other colors much faster than yellow and this will require that you purchase an entire set of new highlighters when a single color runs out because colors such as green are not sold separately. If instead you choose to use yellow on a more frequently highlighted section such as the Analysis, when it comes time to replace your yellow marker, you will need only to replace your yellow highlighter individually. In the personal experience on one of the authors, the sections of cases that seemed to demand the most highlighter attention were the

Facts and the Analysis, while the Issues and Holdings demanded the least. Other Considerations and

Procedural History required lots of highlighting in particular cases although not in every case.

Experiment if you must, but try to choose a color scheme early on in the semester and stick with it. That way, when you come back to the first cases of the semester, you will not be confused with multiple color schemes. The basic sections of a case for which you should consider giving a different color are:

(b) Procedural History

(c) Issue (and questions presented)

(d) Holding (and conclusions)

(e) Analysis (rationale)

(f) Other Considerations (such as dicta)

Not all of these sections demand a separate color. You may find that combining Facts and Procedural History or Issues and Holdings works best. Furthermore, as mentioned above, some sections may not warrant highlighting in every case (e.g., dicta probably do not need to be highlighted unless they are particularly important). If you decide that a single color is all that you need, then stick to one, but if you find yourself highlighting lots of text from many different sections, reconsider the use of at least a few different colors. Highlighters make text stand out, but only when used appropriately. The use of many colors enables you to highlight more text without reducing the highlighter’s effectiveness. Three to four colors provides decent color variation without the cumbersomeness of handling too many markers.

Once you are comfortable with your color scheme, determining exactly what to highlight still may be difficult. Similar to knowing what to annotate, experience will perfect your highlighting skills. Be careful not to highlight everything, thus ruining your highlighters’ effectiveness; at the same time, do not be afraid to make mistakes.

Now that we have covered the basics of reading, annotating, highlighting, and briefing a case, you are ready to start practicing. Keep the tips and techniques mentioned in this chapter in mind when you tackle the four topics in the remainder of this book. If you have difficultly, refer back to this chapter to help guide you as you master the case method of study and the art of using the common law.

More Helpful Links

The american legal system, how to brief a case, how to read a casebook 101, top 20 things you need to know about law school, learn to spot issues like a lawyer, why an internet search is not legal research, why go to law school, what’s the most challenging part of law school, what advice would you give yourself about law school.

Writing a law school research paper or law review note

• Books and articles

Basics of Format & Content

Research papers are not as strictly structured as legal memos, briefs, and other documents that you've learned about in legal writing and drafting courses. For example, there is no prescribed content/format similar to to the Questions Presented, Brief Answers, etc. that you learned for a legal memo.

A general approach to thinking about the content of a research paper is:

• Introduction in which you give some background and a clear statement of your thesis
• Status quo -- what is the existing law and why is it a problem
• Proposals for change

See this blog post by Jonathan Burns , an IU McKinney alum, for more on basic content.

If you're writing for a law review or seminar, you should get formatting instructions regarding things like margins, font size, line spacing. If you don't, or if you're doing an independent study, here are some basic guidelines to follow:

• Times New Roman or similar, 12 pt font.
• Double spaced lines.
• One inch margins all around.
• Footnotes in academic Bluebook style (use the rules on the main white pages instead of the light blue pages at the front of the Bluebook).
• Footnotes in same font as text, 10 pt font.
• Use Roman numerals and/or letters on headings and subheadings or style the fonts so that the difference between headings and subheadings is clear.   
• Page numbers in the footer, preferably centered, especially on first page. You could do bottom center on first page and then upper right in the header thereafter. Use the header and footer functions for this. If you don't know how to use headers and footers in Word, here is help:  https://edu.gcfglobal.org/en/word2016/headers-and-footers/1/ . 

Headings and subheadings

Research papers should have headings and subheadings. These help your reader follow your logic--and a logical structure is very important. Headings and subheadings can also help you keep your thoughts organized. Just don't overuse them--you don't want every paragaph to have a subheading. 

Road map paragraph

Often, research papers will also include a paragraph at the end of the introduction that narrates the road map the paper will follow.   Here is an example of this kind of paragraph:

"The section that follows [this introduction] sets the stage by recounting two scenarios from the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law, with discussion of the knowledge and implementation of accessibility features in online instructional materials. The next section provides an overview of various impairments and their effects on a user's experience of the online environment. Next is a review of the laws relevant to accessibility with attention to their potential application to online instruction, along with standards used to guide accessibility compliance. The article then explores the concept of universal design and its guiding principles, followed by a discussion of how to use the universal design principles to organize and better understand accessibility standards and practices. The final section briefly summarizes the discussion and encourages law librarians and professors to become knowledgeable and skilled in universal design for online materials to benefit all their students."

Table of Contents

A table of contents can also be helpful, though it's not necessary. If you add a table of contents to your papers, put it right at the beginning, before the introduction. Here's part of the table of contents for the same paper the paragraph above was taken from--it really just lays out the heading and subheadings with page numbers: 

• << Previous: Home
• Next: Books and articles >>
• Last Updated: Jul 29, 2022 11:08 AM
• URL: https://law.indiana.libguides.com/c.php?g=1071346

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A case study research paper examines a person, place, event, condition, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis in order to extrapolate  key themes and results that help predict future trends, illuminate previously hidden issues that can be applied to practice, and/or provide a means for understanding an important research problem with greater clarity. A case study research paper usually examines a single subject of analysis, but case study papers can also be designed as a comparative investigation that shows relationships between two or more subjects. The methods used to study a case can rest within a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method investigative paradigm.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010 ; “What is a Case Study?” In Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London: SAGE, 2010.

How to Approach Writing a Case Study Research Paper

General information about how to choose a topic to investigate can be found under the " Choosing a Research Problem " tab in the Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper writing guide. Review this page because it may help you identify a subject of analysis that can be investigated using a case study design.

However, identifying a case to investigate involves more than choosing the research problem . A case study encompasses a problem contextualized around the application of in-depth analysis, interpretation, and discussion, often resulting in specific recommendations for action or for improving existing conditions. As Seawright and Gerring note, practical considerations such as time and access to information can influence case selection, but these issues should not be the sole factors used in describing the methodological justification for identifying a particular case to study. Given this, selecting a case includes considering the following:

• The case represents an unusual or atypical example of a research problem that requires more in-depth analysis? Cases often represent a topic that rests on the fringes of prior investigations because the case may provide new ways of understanding the research problem. For example, if the research problem is to identify strategies to improve policies that support girl's access to secondary education in predominantly Muslim nations, you could consider using Azerbaijan as a case study rather than selecting a more obvious nation in the Middle East. Doing so may reveal important new insights into recommending how governments in other predominantly Muslim nations can formulate policies that support improved access to education for girls.
• The case provides important insight or illuminate a previously hidden problem? In-depth analysis of a case can be based on the hypothesis that the case study will reveal trends or issues that have not been exposed in prior research or will reveal new and important implications for practice. For example, anecdotal evidence may suggest drug use among homeless veterans is related to their patterns of travel throughout the day. Assuming prior studies have not looked at individual travel choices as a way to study access to illicit drug use, a case study that observes a homeless veteran could reveal how issues of personal mobility choices facilitate regular access to illicit drugs. Note that it is important to conduct a thorough literature review to ensure that your assumption about the need to reveal new insights or previously hidden problems is valid and evidence-based.
• The case challenges and offers a counter-point to prevailing assumptions? Over time, research on any given topic can fall into a trap of developing assumptions based on outdated studies that are still applied to new or changing conditions or the idea that something should simply be accepted as "common sense," even though the issue has not been thoroughly tested in current practice. A case study analysis may offer an opportunity to gather evidence that challenges prevailing assumptions about a research problem and provide a new set of recommendations applied to practice that have not been tested previously. For example, perhaps there has been a long practice among scholars to apply a particular theory in explaining the relationship between two subjects of analysis. Your case could challenge this assumption by applying an innovative theoretical framework [perhaps borrowed from another discipline] to explore whether this approach offers new ways of understanding the research problem. Taking a contrarian stance is one of the most important ways that new knowledge and understanding develops from existing literature.
• The case provides an opportunity to pursue action leading to the resolution of a problem? Another way to think about choosing a case to study is to consider how the results from investigating a particular case may result in findings that reveal ways in which to resolve an existing or emerging problem. For example, studying the case of an unforeseen incident, such as a fatal accident at a railroad crossing, can reveal hidden issues that could be applied to preventative measures that contribute to reducing the chance of accidents in the future. In this example, a case study investigating the accident could lead to a better understanding of where to strategically locate additional signals at other railroad crossings so as to better warn drivers of an approaching train, particularly when visibility is hindered by heavy rain, fog, or at night.
• The case offers a new direction in future research? A case study can be used as a tool for an exploratory investigation that highlights the need for further research about the problem. A case can be used when there are few studies that help predict an outcome or that establish a clear understanding about how best to proceed in addressing a problem. For example, after conducting a thorough literature review [very important!], you discover that little research exists showing the ways in which women contribute to promoting water conservation in rural communities of east central Africa. A case study of how women contribute to saving water in a rural village of Uganda can lay the foundation for understanding the need for more thorough research that documents how women in their roles as cooks and family caregivers think about water as a valuable resource within their community. This example of a case study could also point to the need for scholars to build new theoretical frameworks around the topic [e.g., applying feminist theories of work and family to the issue of water conservation].

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review 14 (October 1989): 532-550; Emmel, Nick. Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2013; Gerring, John. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98 (May 2004): 341-354; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Seawright, Jason and John Gerring. "Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research." Political Research Quarterly 61 (June 2008): 294-308.

Structure and Writing Style

The purpose of a paper in the social sciences designed around a case study is to thoroughly investigate a subject of analysis in order to reveal a new understanding about the research problem and, in so doing, contributing new knowledge to what is already known from previous studies. In applied social sciences disciplines [e.g., education, social work, public administration, etc.], case studies may also be used to reveal best practices, highlight key programs, or investigate interesting aspects of professional work.

In general, the structure of a case study research paper is not all that different from a standard college-level research paper. However, there are subtle differences you should be aware of. Here are the key elements to organizing and writing a case study research paper.

I.  Introduction

As with any research paper, your introduction should serve as a roadmap for your readers to ascertain the scope and purpose of your study . The introduction to a case study research paper, however, should not only describe the research problem and its significance, but you should also succinctly describe why the case is being used and how it relates to addressing the problem. The two elements should be linked. With this in mind, a good introduction answers these four questions:

• What is being studied? Describe the research problem and describe the subject of analysis [the case] you have chosen to address the problem. Explain how they are linked and what elements of the case will help to expand knowledge and understanding about the problem.
• Why is this topic important to investigate? Describe the significance of the research problem and state why a case study design and the subject of analysis that the paper is designed around is appropriate in addressing the problem.
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study? Provide background that helps lead the reader into the more in-depth literature review to follow. If applicable, summarize prior case study research applied to the research problem and why it fails to adequately address the problem. Describe why your case will be useful. If no prior case studies have been used to address the research problem, explain why you have selected this subject of analysis.
• How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding? Explain why your case study will be suitable in helping to expand knowledge and understanding about the research problem.

Each of these questions should be addressed in no more than a few paragraphs. Exceptions to this can be when you are addressing a complex research problem or subject of analysis that requires more in-depth background information.

II.  Literature Review

The literature review for a case study research paper is generally structured the same as it is for any college-level research paper. The difference, however, is that the literature review is focused on providing background information and  enabling historical interpretation of the subject of analysis in relation to the research problem the case is intended to address . This includes synthesizing studies that help to:

• Place relevant works in the context of their contribution to understanding the case study being investigated . This would involve summarizing studies that have used a similar subject of analysis to investigate the research problem. If there is literature using the same or a very similar case to study, you need to explain why duplicating past research is important [e.g., conditions have changed; prior studies were conducted long ago, etc.].
• Describe the relationship each work has to the others under consideration that informs the reader why this case is applicable . Your literature review should include a description of any works that support using the case to investigate the research problem and the underlying research questions.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research using the case study . If applicable, review any research that has examined the research problem using a different research design. Explain how your use of a case study design may reveal new knowledge or a new perspective or that can redirect research in an important new direction.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies . This refers to synthesizing any literature that points to unresolved issues of concern about the research problem and describing how the subject of analysis that forms the case study can help resolve these existing contradictions.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research . Your review should examine any literature that lays a foundation for understanding why your case study design and the subject of analysis around which you have designed your study may reveal a new way of approaching the research problem or offer a perspective that points to the need for additional research.
• Expose any gaps that exist in the literature that the case study could help to fill . Summarize any literature that not only shows how your subject of analysis contributes to understanding the research problem, but how your case contributes to a new way of understanding the problem that prior research has failed to do.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important!] . Collectively, your literature review should always place your case study within the larger domain of prior research about the problem. The overarching purpose of reviewing pertinent literature in a case study paper is to demonstrate that you have thoroughly identified and synthesized prior studies in relation to explaining the relevance of the case in addressing the research problem.

III.  Method

In this section, you explain why you selected a particular case [i.e., subject of analysis] and the strategy you used to identify and ultimately decide that your case was appropriate in addressing the research problem. The way you describe the methods used varies depending on the type of subject of analysis that constitutes your case study.

If your subject of analysis is an incident or event . In the social and behavioral sciences, the event or incident that represents the case to be studied is usually bounded by time and place, with a clear beginning and end and with an identifiable location or position relative to its surroundings. The subject of analysis can be a rare or critical event or it can focus on a typical or regular event. The purpose of studying a rare event is to illuminate new ways of thinking about the broader research problem or to test a hypothesis. Critical incident case studies must describe the method by which you identified the event and explain the process by which you determined the validity of this case to inform broader perspectives about the research problem or to reveal new findings. However, the event does not have to be a rare or uniquely significant to support new thinking about the research problem or to challenge an existing hypothesis. For example, Walo, Bull, and Breen conducted a case study to identify and evaluate the direct and indirect economic benefits and costs of a local sports event in the City of Lismore, New South Wales, Australia. The purpose of their study was to provide new insights from measuring the impact of a typical local sports event that prior studies could not measure well because they focused on large "mega-events." Whether the event is rare or not, the methods section should include an explanation of the following characteristics of the event: a) when did it take place; b) what were the underlying circumstances leading to the event; and, c) what were the consequences of the event in relation to the research problem.

If your subject of analysis is a person. Explain why you selected this particular individual to be studied and describe what experiences they have had that provide an opportunity to advance new understandings about the research problem. Mention any background about this person which might help the reader understand the significance of their experiences that make them worthy of study. This includes describing the relationships this person has had with other people, institutions, and/or events that support using them as the subject for a case study research paper. It is particularly important to differentiate the person as the subject of analysis from others and to succinctly explain how the person relates to examining the research problem [e.g., why is one politician in a particular local election used to show an increase in voter turnout from any other candidate running in the election]. Note that these issues apply to a specific group of people used as a case study unit of analysis [e.g., a classroom of students].

If your subject of analysis is a place. In general, a case study that investigates a place suggests a subject of analysis that is unique or special in some way and that this uniqueness can be used to build new understanding or knowledge about the research problem. A case study of a place must not only describe its various attributes relevant to the research problem [e.g., physical, social, historical, cultural, economic, political], but you must state the method by which you determined that this place will illuminate new understandings about the research problem. It is also important to articulate why a particular place as the case for study is being used if similar places also exist [i.e., if you are studying patterns of homeless encampments of veterans in open spaces, explain why you are studying Echo Park in Los Angeles rather than Griffith Park?]. If applicable, describe what type of human activity involving this place makes it a good choice to study [e.g., prior research suggests Echo Park has more homeless veterans].

If your subject of analysis is a phenomenon. A phenomenon refers to a fact, occurrence, or circumstance that can be studied or observed but with the cause or explanation to be in question. In this sense, a phenomenon that forms your subject of analysis can encompass anything that can be observed or presumed to exist but is not fully understood. In the social and behavioral sciences, the case usually focuses on human interaction within a complex physical, social, economic, cultural, or political system. For example, the phenomenon could be the observation that many vehicles used by ISIS fighters are small trucks with English language advertisements on them. The research problem could be that ISIS fighters are difficult to combat because they are highly mobile. The research questions could be how and by what means are these vehicles used by ISIS being supplied to the militants and how might supply lines to these vehicles be cut off? How might knowing the suppliers of these trucks reveal larger networks of collaborators and financial support? A case study of a phenomenon most often encompasses an in-depth analysis of a cause and effect that is grounded in an interactive relationship between people and their environment in some way.

NOTE:   The choice of the case or set of cases to study cannot appear random. Evidence that supports the method by which you identified and chose your subject of analysis should clearly support investigation of the research problem and linked to key findings from your literature review. Be sure to cite any studies that helped you determine that the case you chose was appropriate for examining the problem.

IV.  Discussion

The main elements of your discussion section are generally the same as any research paper, but centered around interpreting and drawing conclusions about the key findings from your analysis of the case study. Note that a general social sciences research paper may contain a separate section to report findings. However, in a paper designed around a case study, it is common to combine a description of the results with the discussion about their implications. The objectives of your discussion section should include the following:

Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings Briefly reiterate the research problem you are investigating and explain why the subject of analysis around which you designed the case study were used. You should then describe the findings revealed from your study of the case using direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results. Highlight any findings that were unexpected or especially profound.

Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Systematically explain the meaning of your case study findings and why you believe they are important. Begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most important or surprising finding first, then systematically review each finding. Be sure to thoroughly extrapolate what your analysis of the case can tell the reader about situations or conditions beyond the actual case that was studied while, at the same time, being careful not to misconstrue or conflate a finding that undermines the external validity of your conclusions.

Relate the Findings to Similar Studies No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your case study results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for choosing your subject of analysis. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your case study design and the subject of analysis differs from prior research about the topic.

Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings Remember that the purpose of social science research is to discover and not to prove. When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations revealed by the case study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. Be alert to what the in-depth analysis of the case may reveal about the research problem, including offering a contrarian perspective to what scholars have stated in prior research if that is how the findings can be interpreted from your case.

Acknowledge the Study's Limitations You can state the study's limitations in the conclusion section of your paper but describing the limitations of your subject of analysis in the discussion section provides an opportunity to identify the limitations and explain why they are not significant. This part of the discussion section should also note any unanswered questions or issues your case study could not address. More detailed information about how to document any limitations to your research can be found here .

Suggest Areas for Further Research Although your case study may offer important insights about the research problem, there are likely additional questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or findings that unexpectedly revealed themselves as a result of your in-depth analysis of the case. Be sure that the recommendations for further research are linked to the research problem and that you explain why your recommendations are valid in other contexts and based on the original assumptions of your study.

V.  Conclusion

As with any research paper, you should summarize your conclusion in clear, simple language; emphasize how the findings from your case study differs from or supports prior research and why. Do not simply reiterate the discussion section. Provide a synthesis of key findings presented in the paper to show how these converge to address the research problem. If you haven't already done so in the discussion section, be sure to document the limitations of your case study and any need for further research.

The function of your paper's conclusion is to: 1) reiterate the main argument supported by the findings from your case study; 2) state clearly the context, background, and necessity of pursuing the research problem using a case study design in relation to an issue, controversy, or a gap found from reviewing the literature; and, 3) provide a place to persuasively and succinctly restate the significance of your research problem, given that the reader has now been presented with in-depth information about the topic.

Consider the following points to help ensure your conclusion is appropriate:

• If the argument or purpose of your paper is complex, you may need to summarize these points for your reader.
• If prior to your conclusion, you have not yet explained the significance of your findings or if you are proceeding inductively, use the conclusion of your paper to describe your main points and explain their significance.
• Move from a detailed to a general level of consideration of the case study's findings that returns the topic to the context provided by the introduction or within a new context that emerges from your case study findings.

Note that, depending on the discipline you are writing in or the preferences of your professor, the concluding paragraph may contain your final reflections on the evidence presented as it applies to practice or on the essay's central research problem. However, the nature of being introspective about the subject of analysis you have investigated will depend on whether you are explicitly asked to express your observations in this way.

Problems to Avoid

Overgeneralization One of the goals of a case study is to lay a foundation for understanding broader trends and issues applied to similar circumstances. However, be careful when drawing conclusions from your case study. They must be evidence-based and grounded in the results of the study; otherwise, it is merely speculation. Looking at a prior example, it would be incorrect to state that a factor in improving girls access to education in Azerbaijan and the policy implications this may have for improving access in other Muslim nations is due to girls access to social media if there is no documentary evidence from your case study to indicate this. There may be anecdotal evidence that retention rates were better for girls who were engaged with social media, but this observation would only point to the need for further research and would not be a definitive finding if this was not a part of your original research agenda.

Failure to Document Limitations No case is going to reveal all that needs to be understood about a research problem. Therefore, just as you have to clearly state the limitations of a general research study , you must describe the specific limitations inherent in the subject of analysis. For example, the case of studying how women conceptualize the need for water conservation in a village in Uganda could have limited application in other cultural contexts or in areas where fresh water from rivers or lakes is plentiful and, therefore, conservation is understood more in terms of managing access rather than preserving access to a scarce resource.

Failure to Extrapolate All Possible Implications Just as you don't want to over-generalize from your case study findings, you also have to be thorough in the consideration of all possible outcomes or recommendations derived from your findings. If you do not, your reader may question the validity of your analysis, particularly if you failed to document an obvious outcome from your case study research. For example, in the case of studying the accident at the railroad crossing to evaluate where and what types of warning signals should be located, you failed to take into consideration speed limit signage as well as warning signals. When designing your case study, be sure you have thoroughly addressed all aspects of the problem and do not leave gaps in your analysis that leave the reader questioning the results.

Case Studies. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education . Rev. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998; Miller, Lisa L. “The Use of Case Studies in Law and Social Science Research.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (2018): TBD; Mills, Albert J., Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Putney, LeAnn Grogan. "Case Study." In Encyclopedia of Research Design , Neil J. Salkind, editor. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010), pp. 116-120; Simons, Helen. Case Study Research in Practice . London: SAGE Publications, 2009;  Kratochwill,  Thomas R. and Joel R. Levin, editors. Single-Case Research Design and Analysis: New Development for Psychology and Education .  Hilldsale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992; Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London : SAGE, 2010; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 6th edition. Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications, 2014; Walo, Maree, Adrian Bull, and Helen Breen. “Achieving Economic Benefits at Local Events: A Case Study of a Local Sports Event.” Festival Management and Event Tourism 4 (1996): 95-106.

Writing Tip

At Least Five Misconceptions about Case Study Research

Social science case studies are often perceived as limited in their ability to create new knowledge because they are not randomly selected and findings cannot be generalized to larger populations. Flyvbjerg examines five misunderstandings about case study research and systematically "corrects" each one. To quote, these are:

Misunderstanding 1 :  General, theoretical [context-independent] knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical [context-dependent] knowledge. Misunderstanding 2 :  One cannot generalize on the basis of an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development. Misunderstanding 3 :  The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses; that is, in the first stage of a total research process, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building. Misunderstanding 4 :  The case study contains a bias toward verification, that is, a tendency to confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions. Misunderstanding 5 :  It is often difficult to summarize and develop general propositions and theories on the basis of specific case studies [p. 221].

While writing your paper, think introspectively about how you addressed these misconceptions because to do so can help you strengthen the validity and reliability of your research by clarifying issues of case selection, the testing and challenging of existing assumptions, the interpretation of key findings, and the summation of case outcomes. Think of a case study research paper as a complete, in-depth narrative about the specific properties and key characteristics of your subject of analysis applied to the research problem.

Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (April 2006): 219-245.

• << Previous: Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Next: Writing a Field Report >>
• Last Updated: Jun 3, 2024 9:44 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

• Privacy Policy

Home » Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Case Study – Methods, Examples and Guide

Table of Contents

A case study is a research method that involves an in-depth examination and analysis of a particular phenomenon or case, such as an individual, organization, community, event, or situation.

It is a qualitative research approach that aims to provide a detailed and comprehensive understanding of the case being studied. Case studies typically involve multiple sources of data, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts, which are analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, and grounded theory. The findings of a case study are often used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Types of Case Study

Types and Methods of Case Study are as follows:

Single-Case Study

A single-case study is an in-depth analysis of a single case. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand a specific phenomenon in detail.

For Example , A researcher might conduct a single-case study on a particular individual to understand their experiences with a particular health condition or a specific organization to explore their management practices. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a single-case study are often used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Multiple-Case Study

A multiple-case study involves the analysis of several cases that are similar in nature. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to identify similarities and differences between the cases.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a multiple-case study on several companies to explore the factors that contribute to their success or failure. The researcher collects data from each case, compares and contrasts the findings, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as comparative analysis or pattern-matching. The findings of a multiple-case study can be used to develop theories, inform policy or practice, or generate new research questions.

Exploratory Case Study

An exploratory case study is used to explore a new or understudied phenomenon. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to generate hypotheses or theories about the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an exploratory case study on a new technology to understand its potential impact on society. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as grounded theory or content analysis. The findings of an exploratory case study can be used to generate new research questions, develop theories, or inform policy or practice.

Descriptive Case Study

A descriptive case study is used to describe a particular phenomenon in detail. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to provide a comprehensive account of the phenomenon.

For Example, a researcher might conduct a descriptive case study on a particular community to understand its social and economic characteristics. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of a descriptive case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Instrumental Case Study

An instrumental case study is used to understand a particular phenomenon that is instrumental in achieving a particular goal. This type of case study is useful when the researcher wants to understand the role of the phenomenon in achieving the goal.

For Example, a researcher might conduct an instrumental case study on a particular policy to understand its impact on achieving a particular goal, such as reducing poverty. The researcher collects data from multiple sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, and uses various techniques to analyze the data, such as content analysis or thematic analysis. The findings of an instrumental case study can be used to inform policy or practice or generate new research questions.

Case Study Data Collection Methods

Here are some common data collection methods for case studies:

Interviews involve asking questions to individuals who have knowledge or experience relevant to the case study. Interviews can be structured (where the same questions are asked to all participants) or unstructured (where the interviewer follows up on the responses with further questions). Interviews can be conducted in person, over the phone, or through video conferencing.

Observations

Observations involve watching and recording the behavior and activities of individuals or groups relevant to the case study. Observations can be participant (where the researcher actively participates in the activities) or non-participant (where the researcher observes from a distance). Observations can be recorded using notes, audio or video recordings, or photographs.

Documents can be used as a source of information for case studies. Documents can include reports, memos, emails, letters, and other written materials related to the case study. Documents can be collected from the case study participants or from public sources.

Surveys involve asking a set of questions to a sample of individuals relevant to the case study. Surveys can be administered in person, over the phone, through mail or email, or online. Surveys can be used to gather information on attitudes, opinions, or behaviors related to the case study.

Artifacts are physical objects relevant to the case study. Artifacts can include tools, equipment, products, or other objects that provide insights into the case study phenomenon.

How to conduct Case Study Research

Conducting a case study research involves several steps that need to be followed to ensure the quality and rigor of the study. Here are the steps to conduct case study research:

• Define the research questions: The first step in conducting a case study research is to define the research questions. The research questions should be specific, measurable, and relevant to the case study phenomenon under investigation.
• Select the case: The next step is to select the case or cases to be studied. The case should be relevant to the research questions and should provide rich and diverse data that can be used to answer the research questions.
• Collect data: Data can be collected using various methods, such as interviews, observations, documents, surveys, and artifacts. The data collection method should be selected based on the research questions and the nature of the case study phenomenon.
• Analyze the data: The data collected from the case study should be analyzed using various techniques, such as content analysis, thematic analysis, or grounded theory. The analysis should be guided by the research questions and should aim to provide insights and conclusions relevant to the research questions.
• Draw conclusions: The conclusions drawn from the case study should be based on the data analysis and should be relevant to the research questions. The conclusions should be supported by evidence and should be clearly stated.
• Validate the findings: The findings of the case study should be validated by reviewing the data and the analysis with participants or other experts in the field. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Write the report: The final step is to write the report of the case study research. The report should provide a clear description of the case study phenomenon, the research questions, the data collection methods, the data analysis, the findings, and the conclusions. The report should be written in a clear and concise manner and should follow the guidelines for academic writing.

Examples of Case Study

Here are some examples of case study research:

• The Hawthorne Studies : Conducted between 1924 and 1932, the Hawthorne Studies were a series of case studies conducted by Elton Mayo and his colleagues to examine the impact of work environment on employee productivity. The studies were conducted at the Hawthorne Works plant of the Western Electric Company in Chicago and included interviews, observations, and experiments.
• The Stanford Prison Experiment: Conducted in 1971, the Stanford Prison Experiment was a case study conducted by Philip Zimbardo to examine the psychological effects of power and authority. The study involved simulating a prison environment and assigning participants to the role of guards or prisoners. The study was controversial due to the ethical issues it raised.
• The Challenger Disaster: The Challenger Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion in 1986. The study included interviews, observations, and analysis of data to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.
• The Enron Scandal: The Enron Scandal was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the Enron Corporation’s bankruptcy in 2001. The study included interviews, analysis of financial data, and review of documents to identify the accounting practices, corporate culture, and ethical issues that led to the company’s downfall.
• The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster : The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster was a case study conducted to examine the causes of the nuclear accident that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Japan in 2011. The study included interviews, analysis of data, and review of documents to identify the technical, organizational, and cultural factors that contributed to the disaster.

Application of Case Study

Case studies have a wide range of applications across various fields and industries. Here are some examples:

Business and Management

Case studies are widely used in business and management to examine real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills. Case studies can help students and professionals to develop a deep understanding of business concepts, theories, and best practices.

Case studies are used in healthcare to examine patient care, treatment options, and outcomes. Case studies can help healthcare professionals to develop critical thinking skills, diagnose complex medical conditions, and develop effective treatment plans.

Case studies are used in education to examine teaching and learning practices. Case studies can help educators to develop effective teaching strategies, evaluate student progress, and identify areas for improvement.

Social Sciences

Case studies are widely used in social sciences to examine human behavior, social phenomena, and cultural practices. Case studies can help researchers to develop theories, test hypotheses, and gain insights into complex social issues.

Law and Ethics

Case studies are used in law and ethics to examine legal and ethical dilemmas. Case studies can help lawyers, policymakers, and ethical professionals to develop critical thinking skills, analyze complex cases, and make informed decisions.

Purpose of Case Study

The purpose of a case study is to provide a detailed analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. A case study is a qualitative research method that involves the in-depth exploration and analysis of a particular case, which can be an individual, group, organization, event, or community.

The primary purpose of a case study is to generate a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the case, including its history, context, and dynamics. Case studies can help researchers to identify and examine the underlying factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and detailed understanding of the case, which can inform future research, practice, or policy.

Case studies can also serve other purposes, including:

• Illustrating a theory or concept: Case studies can be used to illustrate and explain theoretical concepts and frameworks, providing concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Developing hypotheses: Case studies can help to generate hypotheses about the causal relationships between different factors and outcomes, which can be tested through further research.
• Providing insight into complex issues: Case studies can provide insights into complex and multifaceted issues, which may be difficult to understand through other research methods.
• Informing practice or policy: Case studies can be used to inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.

Advantages of Case Study Research

There are several advantages of case study research, including:

• In-depth exploration: Case study research allows for a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific phenomenon, issue, or problem in its real-life context. This can provide a comprehensive understanding of the case and its dynamics, which may not be possible through other research methods.
• Rich data: Case study research can generate rich and detailed data, including qualitative data such as interviews, observations, and documents. This can provide a nuanced understanding of the case and its complexity.
• Holistic perspective: Case study research allows for a holistic perspective of the case, taking into account the various factors, processes, and mechanisms that contribute to the case and its outcomes. This can help to develop a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the case.
• Theory development: Case study research can help to develop and refine theories and concepts by providing empirical evidence and concrete examples of how they can be applied in real-life situations.
• Practical application: Case study research can inform practice or policy by identifying best practices, lessons learned, or areas for improvement.
• Contextualization: Case study research takes into account the specific context in which the case is situated, which can help to understand how the case is influenced by the social, cultural, and historical factors of its environment.

Limitations of Case Study Research

There are several limitations of case study research, including:

• Limited generalizability : Case studies are typically focused on a single case or a small number of cases, which limits the generalizability of the findings. The unique characteristics of the case may not be applicable to other contexts or populations, which may limit the external validity of the research.
• Biased sampling: Case studies may rely on purposive or convenience sampling, which can introduce bias into the sample selection process. This may limit the representativeness of the sample and the generalizability of the findings.
• Subjectivity: Case studies rely on the interpretation of the researcher, which can introduce subjectivity into the analysis. The researcher’s own biases, assumptions, and perspectives may influence the findings, which may limit the objectivity of the research.
• Limited control: Case studies are typically conducted in naturalistic settings, which limits the control that the researcher has over the environment and the variables being studied. This may limit the ability to establish causal relationships between variables.
• Time-consuming: Case studies can be time-consuming to conduct, as they typically involve a detailed exploration and analysis of a specific case. This may limit the feasibility of conducting multiple case studies or conducting case studies in a timely manner.
• Resource-intensive: Case studies may require significant resources, including time, funding, and expertise. This may limit the ability of researchers to conduct case studies in resource-constrained settings.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Phenomenology – Methods, Examples and Guide

Explanatory Research – Types, Methods, Guide

Observational Research – Methods and Guide

Focus Groups – Steps, Examples and Guide

Descriptive Research Design – Types, Methods and...

Triangulation in Research – Types, Methods and...

Sustainable e-waste management in higher education institutions: case study of Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology

• Original Paper
• Published: 14 September 2024

Cite this article

• T. Q. Thao 1 , 2 ,
• T. H. Hanh 1 , 2 &
• N. N. Huy   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2918-7935 1 , 2  

The global concern for e-waste necessitates comprehensive research, especially in educational institutions. This paper examines the case study of Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT), examining the generation, flow, and potential environmental impact of e-waste from 2024 to 2034. The research incorporates life cycle inventory (LCI) and material flow analysis (MFA) to estimate the volume and composition of obsolete electronic and electrical equipment (EEE). The study reveals a substantial increase in discarded devices at HCMUT, aligning with campus expansions. E-waste is estimated to generated 1.5 times from 16,792 kg in 2024 to 25,230 kg in 2034, emphasizing the urgency for effective waste management. MFA models delineate the flow of e-waste materials, emphasizing the need for targeted recycling measures. The examination of specific EEE types (projectors, computers, air conditioners, and lamps) reveals varying recyclability proportions, necessitating tailored management strategies. The absence of a specific e-waste management law in Vietnam, coupled with manual and unsafe processing practices, contributes to environmental and health hazards. The paper emphasizes the imperative for sustainable practices in higher education institutions (HEIs) and presents HCMUT's case as pivotal. The university's commitment to sustainable development is highlighted, underscoring the importance of integrating e-waste management into broader environmental strategies. As HEIs globally struggle with e-waste challenges, the study proposes a framework for effective management, incorporating LCI and MFA for informed decision-making. The results provide valuable insights for developing practical and sustainable e-waste management measures, guiding HEIs toward minimizing environmental impact while fostering a culture of responsible e-waste practices.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Source: compiled from Huisman ( 2008 ); Cheung et al. ( 2017 ); (Nguyen 2018 )

Source: HCMUT Department of Equipment Management

Similar content being viewed by others

Designing Sustainable Consumption and Production Systems in Higher Education Institutions: The Case of Solid Waste Management

How well are we managing e-waste in india: evidences from the city of bangalore, e-waste management and sustainability: a case study in brazil, explore related subjects.

• Environmental Chemistry

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article. The other datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Ahirwar R, Tripathi AK (2021) E-waste management: a review of recycling process, environmental and occupational health hazards, and potential solutions. Environ Nanotechnol Monitor Manag 15:100409

CAS   Google Scholar  

Arushanyan Y, Björklund A, Eriksson O, Finnveden G, Ljunggren Söderman M, Sundqvist J-O, Stenmarck Å (2017) Environmental assessment of possible future waste management scenarios. Energies 10(2):247. https://doi.org/10.3390/en10020247

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Berchin II, de Aguiar Dutra AR (2021) How do higher education institutions promote sustainable development? A Literature Review. Sustain Develop 29(6):1204–1222. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2219

Article   Google Scholar  

Cheung CW, Berger M, Finkbeiner M (2017) Comparative life cycle assessment of re-use and replacement for video projectors. Int J Life Cycle Assess 23(1):82–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-017-1301-3

Chibunna JB, Siwar C, Begum RA, Mohamed AF (2012) The challenges of e-waste management among institutions: a case study of ukm. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 59:644–649

Cravioto J, Yasunaga R, Yamasue E (2017) Comparative analysis of average time of use of home appliances. Procedia CIRP 61:657–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.248

Cuong N (2013) E-waste: disposal increasing—recycling is not enough. In: E-waste. DONRE, Ho Chi Minh City

Davis G, Wolski M (2009) E-waste and the sustainable organisation: Griffith university’s approach to e-waste. Int J Sustain High Educ 10(1):21–32

Dominguez C, Orehounig K, Carmeliet J (2021) Understanding the path towards a clean energy transition and post-electrification patterns of rural households. Energy Sustain Dev 61:46–64

Findler F, Schönherr N, Lozano R, Reider D, Martinuzzi A (2019) The impacts of higher education institutions on sustainable development: a review and conceptualization. Int J Sustain High Educ 20(1):23–38

Forti V, Balde CP, Kuehr R, Bel G (2020) The global e-waste monitor 2020: Quantities, flows and the circular economy potential

GSO (2024) Vietnam General Statistics Office-GSO: University and college education. https://www.gso.gov.vn/en/education/

HCMUT (2020–2023) Student enrollment plan. Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology—National University (HCMUT)

HCMUT (2024) Official portal of Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology - Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City. https://hcmut.edu.vn/en

He H, Reynolds CJ, Hadjikakou M, Holyoak N, Boland J (2020) Quantification of indirect waste generation and treatment arising from australian household consumption: a waste input-output analysis. J Clean Prod 258:120935

Huisman J (2008) 2008 review of directive 2002/96 on waste electrical and electronic equipment (weee), final report

Ismail H, Hanafiah MM (2021) Evaluation of e-waste management systems in malaysia using life cycle assessment and material flow analysis. J Clean Prod 308:127358

Karkour S, Ihara T, Kuwayama T, Yamaguchi K, Itsubo N (2021) Life cycle assessment of residential air conditioners considering the benefits of their use: a case study in indonesia. Energies 14(2):447

Kullmann F, Markewitz P, Stolten D, Robinius M (2021) Combining the worlds of energy systems and material flow analysis: a review. Energy, Sustainability and Society 11(1):1–22

Kumar P, Shrihari S (2007) Estimation and material flow analysis of waste electrical and electronic equipment (weee)–a case study of mangalore city, karnataka, india. In: Proceedings of the international conference on sustainable solid waste management, Chennai, India. pp 5–7

Li J, Just RE (2018) Modeling household energy consumption and adoption of energy efficient technology. Energy Econ 72:404–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.04.019

Li Y, Fei Y, Zhang X-B, Qin P (2019) Household appliance ownership and income inequality: evidence from micro data in china. China Econ Rev 56:101309

Lin S, Ali MU, Zheng C, Cai Z, Wong MH (2022) Toxic chemicals from uncontrolled e-waste recycling: exposure, body burden, health impact. J Hazard Mater 426:127792

Liu K, Tan Q, Yu J, Wang M (2023) A global perspective on e-waste recycling. Circ Econ 2(1):100028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cec.2023.100028

MET (2022) Higher education statistics for the 2021—2022 school year. Ministry of education and training

MONRE (2011) Vietnam's 2011 national environment report. Ministry of natural resource and environment

Network GE (2022) The growing environmental risks of e-waste. Un environment programme

Nguyen D-Q, Ha VH, Eiji Y, Huynh TH (2017) Material flows from electronic waste: understanding the shortages for extended producer responsibility implementation in vietnam. Procedia CIRP 61:651–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.11.184

Nguyen DQ (2018) Impact assessment of the extended production responsibility implementation in vietnam: a study on electronic waste management. Vietnam J Sci Technol. https://doi.org/10.15625/2525-2518/54/2a/11908 .

OECD (2008) Measuring material flows and resource productivity: Full guide. I. Available from http://www.oecd.org/environment/indicators-modelling-outlooks/MFA-Guide.pdf

OQA (2016) Aun-qa self-assessment report. In: Office QA (Ed.). Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology—National University (HCMUT)

Rautela R, Arya S, Vishwakarma S, Lee J, Kim K-H, Kumar S (2021) E-waste management and its effects on the environment and human health. Sci Total Environ 773:145623

Rotter VS, Chancerel P, Schill WP (2009) Implementing individual producer responsibility (ipr) under the european weee directive-experiences in germany. In: Sustainable systems and technology, 2009. ISSST'09. IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE: pp 1–6

Thang NT (2017) Country chapter—state of the 3rs in asia and the pacific: The socialist republic of vietnam

Thomas L (2000) Extended producer responsibility in cleaner production. Lund University

Tran CD, Salhofer SP (2018) Analysis of recycling structures for e-waste in vietnam. J Mater Cycles Waste Manage 20(1):110–126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-016-0549-1

UNEP (2007) E-waste volume i: Inventory assessment manual. Osaka: division of technology, industry and economics. Int Environ Technol Centre United Nations Environ Programme

Verma AK (2020) E-wastes and their impact on environment and public health. Int J Appl Res

Viruega Sevilla D, Francisco López A, Bello Bugallo P (2022) The role of a hazardous waste intermediate management plant in the circularity of products. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031241

Yaashikaa P, Priyanka B, Kumar PS, Karishma S, Jeevanantham S, Indraganti S (2022) A review on recent advancements in recovery of valuable and toxic metals from e-waste using bioleaching approach. Chemosphere 287:132230

Ylä-Mella J, Keiski RL, Pongrácz E (2022) End-of-use vs. end-of-life: When do consumer electronics become waste? Resources, 11(2): 18

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT), VNU-HCM for this study.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT), 268 Ly Thuong Kiet St., District 10, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

T. Q. Thao, T. H. Hanh & N. N. Huy

Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City, Linh Trung Ward, Thu Duc District, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

TQT conceived, designed, and supervised the study and prepared the first draft manuscript. THH collected and processed data. NNH prepared and revised the whole manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. N. Huy .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Editorial responsibility: Samareh Mirkia.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Thao, T.Q., Hanh, T.H. & Huy, N.N. Sustainable e-waste management in higher education institutions: case study of Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-024-06012-w

Download citation

Received : 02 April 2024

Revised : 09 August 2024

Accepted : 19 August 2024

Published : 14 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-024-06012-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Sustainable campus
• Sustainability
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Writing a Case Study

• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Reading Research Effectively
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• What Is Scholarly vs. Popular?
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Annotated Bibliography
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Essays
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Bibliography

The term case study refers to both a method of analysis and a specific research design for examining a problem, both of which are used in most circumstances to generalize across populations. This tab focuses on the latter--how to design and organize a research paper in the social sciences that analyzes a specific case.

A case study research paper examines a person, place, event, phenomenon, or other type of subject of analysis in order to extrapolate  key themes and results that help predict future trends, illuminate previously hidden issues that can be applied to practice, and/or provide a means for understanding an important research problem with greater clarity. A case study paper usually examines a single subject of analysis, but case study papers can also be designed as a comparative investigation that shows relationships between two or among more than two subjects. The methods used to study a case can rest within a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method investigative paradigm.

Case Studies . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010 ; “What is a Case Study?” In Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London: SAGE, 2010.

How to Approach Writing a Case Study Research Paper

General information about how to choose a topic to investigate can be found under the " Choosing a Research Problem " tab in this writing guide. Review this page because it may help you identify a subject of analysis that can be investigated using a single case study design.

However, identifying a case to investigate involves more than choosing the research problem . A case study encompasses a problem contextualized around the application of in-depth analysis, interpretation, and discussion, often resulting in specific recommendations for action or for improving existing conditions. As Seawright and Gerring note, practical considerations such as time and access to information can influence case selection, but these issues should not be the sole factors used in describing the methodological justification for identifying a particular case to study. Given this, selecting a case includes considering the following:

• Does the case represent an unusual or atypical example of a research problem that requires more in-depth analysis? Cases often represent a topic that rests on the fringes of prior investigations because the case may provide new ways of understanding the research problem. For example, if the research problem is to identify strategies to improve policies that support girl's access to secondary education in predominantly Muslim nations, you could consider using Azerbaijan as a case study rather than selecting a more obvious nation in the Middle East. Doing so may reveal important new insights into recommending how governments in other predominantly Muslim nations can formulate policies that support improved access to education for girls.
• Does the case provide important insight or illuminate a previously hidden problem? In-depth analysis of a case can be based on the hypothesis that the case study will reveal trends or issues that have not been exposed in prior research or will reveal new and important implications for practice. For example, anecdotal evidence may suggest drug use among homeless veterans is related to their patterns of travel throughout the day. Assuming prior studies have not looked at individual travel choices as a way to study access to illicit drug use, a case study that observes a homeless veteran could reveal how issues of personal mobility choices facilitate regular access to illicit drugs. Note that it is important to conduct a thorough literature review to ensure that your assumption about the need to reveal new insights or previously hidden problems is valid and evidence-based.
• Does the case challenge and offer a counter-point to prevailing assumptions? Over time, research on any given topic can fall into a trap of developing assumptions based on outdated studies that are still applied to new or changing conditions or the idea that something should simply be accepted as "common sense," even though the issue has not been thoroughly tested in practice. A case may offer you an opportunity to gather evidence that challenges prevailing assumptions about a research problem and provide a new set of recommendations applied to practice that have not been tested previously. For example, perhaps there has been a long practice among scholars to apply a particular theory in explaining the relationship between two subjects of analysis. Your case could challenge this assumption by applying an innovative theoretical framework [perhaps borrowed from another discipline] to the study a case in order to explore whether this approach offers new ways of understanding the research problem. Taking a contrarian stance is one of the most important ways that new knowledge and understanding develops from existing literature.
• Does the case provide an opportunity to pursue action leading to the resolution of a problem? Another way to think about choosing a case to study is to consider how the results from investigating a particular case may result in findings that reveal ways in which to resolve an existing or emerging problem. For example, studying the case of an unforeseen incident, such as a fatal accident at a railroad crossing, can reveal hidden issues that could be applied to preventative measures that contribute to reducing the chance of accidents in the future. In this example, a case study investigating the accident could lead to a better understanding of where to strategically locate additional signals at other railroad crossings in order to better warn drivers of an approaching train, particularly when visibility is hindered by heavy rain, fog, or at night.
• Does the case offer a new direction in future research? A case study can be used as a tool for exploratory research that points to a need for further examination of the research problem. A case can be used when there are few studies that help predict an outcome or that establish a clear understanding about how best to proceed in addressing a problem. For example, after conducting a thorough literature review [very important!], you discover that little research exists showing the ways in which women contribute to promoting water conservation in rural communities of Uganda. A case study of how women contribute to saving water in a particular village can lay the foundation for understanding the need for more thorough research that documents how women in their roles as cooks and family caregivers think about water as a valuable resource within their community throughout rural regions of east Africa. The case could also point to the need for scholars to apply feminist theories of work and family to the issue of water conservation.

Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. “Building Theories from Case Study Research.” Academy of Management Review 14 (October 1989): 532-550; Emmel, Nick. Sampling and Choosing Cases in Qualitative Research: A Realist Approach . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2013; Gerring, John. “What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?” American Political Science Review 98 (May 2004): 341-354; Mills, Albert J. , Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Seawright, Jason and John Gerring. "Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research." Political Research Quarterly 61 (June 2008): 294-308.

Structure and Writing Style

The purpose of a paper in the social sciences designed around a case study is to thoroughly investigate a subject of analysis in order to reveal a new understanding about the research problem and, in so doing, contributing new knowledge to what is already known from previous studies. In applied social sciences disciplines [e.g., education, social work, public administration, etc.], case studies may also be used to reveal best practices, highlight key programs, or investigate interesting aspects of professional work. In general, the structure of a case study research paper is not all that different from a standard college-level research paper. However, there are subtle differences you should be aware of. Here are the key elements to organizing and writing a case study research paper.

I.  Introduction

As with any research paper, your introduction should serve as a roadmap for your readers to ascertain the scope and purpose of your study . The introduction to a case study research paper, however, should not only describe the research problem and its significance, but you should also succinctly describe why the case is being used and how it relates to addressing the problem. The two elements should be linked. With this in mind, a good introduction answers these four questions:

• What was I studying? Describe the research problem and describe the subject of analysis you have chosen to address the problem. Explain how they are linked and what elements of the case will help to expand knowledge and understanding about the problem.
• Why was this topic important to investigate? Describe the significance of the research problem and state why a case study design and the subject of analysis that the paper is designed around is appropriate in addressing the problem.
• What did we know about this topic before I did this study? Provide background that helps lead the reader into the more in-depth literature review to follow. If applicable, summarize prior case study research applied to the research problem and why it fails to adequately address the research problem. Describe why your case will be useful. If no prior case studies have been used to address the research problem, explain why you have selected this subject of analysis.
• How will this study advance new knowledge or new ways of understanding? Explain why your case study will be suitable in helping to expand knowledge and understanding about the research problem.

Each of these questions should be addressed in no more than a few paragraphs. Exceptions to this can be when you are addressing a complex research problem or subject of analysis that requires more in-depth background information.

II.  Literature Review

The literature review for a case study research paper is generally structured the same as it is for any college-level research paper. The difference, however, is that the literature review is focused on providing background information and  enabling historical interpretation of the subject of analysis in relation to the research problem the case is intended to address . This includes synthesizing studies that help to:

• Place relevant works in the context of their contribution to understanding the case study being investigated . This would include summarizing studies that have used a similar subject of analysis to investigate the research problem. If there is literature using the same or a very similar case to study, you need to explain why duplicating past research is important [e.g., conditions have changed; prior studies were conducted long ago, etc.].
• Describe the relationship each work has to the others under consideration that informs the reader why this case is applicable . Your literature review should include a description of any works that support using the case to study the research problem and the underlying research questions.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research using the case study . If applicable, review any research that has examined the research problem using a different research design. Explain how your case study design may reveal new knowledge or a new perspective or that can redirect research in an important new direction.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies . This refers to synthesizing any literature that points to unresolved issues of concern about the research problem and describing how the subject of analysis that forms the case study can help resolve these existing contradictions.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research . Your review should examine any literature that lays a foundation for understanding why your case study design and the subject of analysis around which you have designed your study may reveal a new way of approaching the research problem or offer a perspective that points to the need for additional research.
• Expose any gaps that exist in the literature that the case study could help to fill . Summarize any literature that not only shows how your subject of analysis contributes to understanding the research problem, but how your case contributes to a new way of understanding the problem that prior research has failed to do.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important!] . Collectively, your literature review should always place your case study within the larger domain of prior research about the problem. The overarching purpose of reviewing pertinent literature in a case study paper is to demonstrate that you have thoroughly identified and synthesized prior studies in the context of explaining the relevance of the case in addressing the research problem.

III.  Method

In this section, you explain why you selected a particular subject of analysis to study and the strategy you used to identify and ultimately decide that your case was appropriate in addressing the research problem. The way you describe the methods used varies depending on the type of subject of analysis that frames your case study.

If your subject of analysis is an incident or event . In the social and behavioral sciences, the event or incident that represents the case to be studied is usually bounded by time and place, with a clear beginning and end and with an identifiable location or position relative to its surroundings. The subject of analysis can be a rare or critical event or it can focus on a typical or regular event. The purpose of studying a rare event is to illuminate new ways of thinking about the broader research problem or to test a hypothesis. Critical incident case studies must describe the method by which you identified the event and explain the process by which you determined the validity of this case to inform broader perspectives about the research problem or to reveal new findings. However, the event does not have to be a rare or uniquely significant to support new thinking about the research problem or to challenge an existing hypothesis. For example, Walo, Bull, and Breen conducted a case study to identify and evaluate the direct and indirect economic benefits and costs of a local sports event in the City of Lismore, New South Wales, Australia. The purpose of their study was to provide new insights from measuring the impact of a typical local sports event that prior studies could not measure well because they focused on large "mega-events." Whether the event is rare or not, the methods section should include an explanation of the following characteristics of the event: a) when did it take place; b) what were the underlying circumstances leading to the event; c) what were the consequences of the event.

If your subject of analysis is a person. Explain why you selected this particular individual to be studied and describe what experience he or she has had that provides an opportunity to advance new understandings about the research problem. Mention any background about this person which might help the reader understand the significance of his/her experiences that make them worthy of study. This includes describing the relationships this person has had with other people, institutions, and/or events that support using him or her as the subject for a case study research paper. It is particularly important to differentiate the person as the subject of analysis from others and to succinctly explain how the person relates to examining the research problem.

If your subject of analysis is a place. In general, a case study that investigates a place suggests a subject of analysis that is unique or special in some way and that this uniqueness can be used to build new understanding or knowledge about the research problem. A case study of a place must not only describe its various attributes relevant to the research problem [e.g., physical, social, cultural, economic, political, etc.], but you must state the method by which you determined that this place will illuminate new understandings about the research problem. It is also important to articulate why a particular place as the case for study is being used if similar places also exist [i.e., if you are studying patterns of homeless encampments of veterans in open spaces, why study Echo Park in Los Angeles rather than Griffith Park?]. If applicable, describe what type of human activity involving this place makes it a good choice to study [e.g., prior research reveals Echo Park has more homeless veterans].

If your subject of analysis is a phenomenon. A phenomenon refers to a fact, occurrence, or circumstance that can be studied or observed but with the cause or explanation to be in question. In this sense, a phenomenon that forms your subject of analysis can encompass anything that can be observed or presumed to exist but is not fully understood. In the social and behavioral sciences, the case usually focuses on human interaction within a complex physical, social, economic, cultural, or political system. For example, the phenomenon could be the observation that many vehicles used by ISIS fighters are small trucks with English language advertisements on them. The research problem could be that ISIS fighters are difficult to combat because they are highly mobile. The research questions could be how and by what means are these vehicles used by ISIS being supplied to the militants and how might supply lines to these vehicles be cut? How might knowing the suppliers of these trucks from overseas reveal larger networks of collaborators and financial support? A case study of a phenomenon most often encompasses an in-depth analysis of a cause and effect that is grounded in an interactive relationship between people and their environment in some way.

NOTE:   The choice of the case or set of cases to study cannot appear random. Evidence that supports the method by which you identified and chose your subject of analysis should be linked to the findings from the literature review. Be sure to cite any prior studies that helped you determine that the case you chose was appropriate for investigating the research problem.

IV.  Discussion

The main elements of your discussion section are generally the same as any research paper, but centered around interpreting and drawing conclusions about the key findings from your case study. Note that a general social sciences research paper may contain a separate section to report findings. However, in a paper designed around a case study, it is more common to combine a description of the findings with the discussion about their implications. The objectives of your discussion section should include the following:

Reiterate the Research Problem/State the Major Findings Briefly reiterate the research problem you are investigating and explain why the subject of analysis around which you designed the case study were used. You should then describe the findings revealed from your study of the case using direct, declarative, and succinct proclamation of the study results. Highlight any findings that were unexpected or especially profound.

Explain the Meaning of the Findings and Why They are Important Systematically explain the meaning of your case study findings and why you believe they are important. Begin this part of the section by repeating what you consider to be your most important or surprising finding first, then systematically review each finding. Be sure to thoroughly extrapolate what your analysis of the case can tell the reader about situations or conditions beyond the actual case that was studied while, at the same time, being careful not to misconstrue or conflate a finding that undermines the external validity of your conclusions.

Relate the Findings to Similar Studies No study in the social sciences is so novel or possesses such a restricted focus that it has absolutely no relation to previously published research. The discussion section should relate your case study results to those found in other studies, particularly if questions raised from prior studies served as the motivation for choosing your subject of analysis. This is important because comparing and contrasting the findings of other studies helps to support the overall importance of your results and it highlights how and in what ways your case study design and the subject of analysis differs from prior research about the topic.

Consider Alternative Explanations of the Findings It is important to remember that the purpose of social science research is to discover and not to prove. When writing the discussion section, you should carefully consider all possible explanations for the case study results, rather than just those that fit your hypothesis or prior assumptions and biases. Be alert to what the in-depth analysis of the case may reveal about the research problem, including offering a contrarian perspective to what scholars have stated in prior research.

Acknowledge the Study's Limitations You can state the study's limitations in the conclusion section of your paper but describing the limitations of your subject of analysis in the discussion section provides an opportunity to identify the limitations and explain why they are not significant. This part of the discussion section should also note any unanswered questions or issues your case study could not address. More detailed information about how to document any limitations to your research can be found here .

Suggest Areas for Further Research Although your case study may offer important insights about the research problem, there are likely additional questions related to the problem that remain unanswered or findings that unexpectedly revealed themselves as a result of your in-depth analysis of the case. Be sure that the recommendations for further research are linked to the research problem and that you explain why your recommendations are valid in other contexts and based on the original assumptions of your study.

V.  Conclusion

As with any research paper, you should summarize your conclusion in clear, simple language; emphasize how the findings from your case study differs from or supports prior research and why. Do not simply reiterate the discussion section. Provide a synthesis of key findings presented in the paper to show how these converge to address the research problem. If you haven't already done so in the discussion section, be sure to document the limitations of your case study and needs for further research.

The function of your paper's conclusion is to: 1)  restate the main argument supported by the findings from the analysis of your case; 2) clearly state the context, background, and necessity of pursuing the research problem using a case study design in relation to an issue, controversy, or a gap found from reviewing the literature; and, 3) provide a place for you to persuasively and succinctly restate the significance of your research problem, given that the reader has now been presented with in-depth information about the topic.

Consider the following points to help ensure your conclusion is appropriate:

• If the argument or purpose of your paper is complex, you may need to summarize these points for your reader.
• If prior to your conclusion, you have not yet explained the significance of your findings or if you are proceeding inductively, use the conclusion of your paper to describe your main points and explain their significance.
• Move from a detailed to a general level of consideration of the case study's findings that returns the topic to the context provided by the introduction or within a new context that emerges from your case study findings.

Note that, depending on the discipline you are writing in and your professor's preferences, the concluding paragraph may contain your final reflections on the evidence presented applied to practice or on the essay's central research problem. However, the nature of being introspective about the subject of analysis you have investigated will depend on whether you are explicitly asked to express your observations in this way.

Problems to Avoid

Overgeneralization One of the goals of a case study is to lay a foundation for understanding broader trends and issues applied to similar circumstances. However, be careful when drawing conclusions from your case study. They must be evidence-based and grounded in the results of the study; otherwise, it is merely speculation. Looking at a prior example, it would be incorrect to state that a factor in improving girls access to education in Azerbaijan and the policy implications this may have for improving access in other Muslim nations is due to girls access to social media if there is no documentary evidence from your case study to indicate this. There may be anecdotal evidence that retention rates were better for girls who were on social media, but this observation would only point to the need for further research and would not be a definitive finding if this was not a part of your original research agenda.

Failure to Document Limitations No case is going to reveal all that needs to be understood about a research problem. Therefore, just as you have to clearly state the limitations of a general research study , you must describe the specific limitations inherent in the subject of analysis. For example, the case of studying how women conceptualize the need for water conservation in a village in Uganda could have limited application in other cultural contexts or in areas where fresh water from rivers or lakes is plentiful and, therefore, conservation is understood differently than preserving access to a scarce resource.

Failure to Extrapolate All Possible Implications Just as you don't want to over-generalize from your case study findings, you also have to be thorough in the consideration of all possible outcomes or recommendations derived from your findings. If you do not, your reader may question the validity of your analysis, particularly if you failed to document an obvious outcome from your case study research. For example, in the case of studying the accident at the railroad crossing to evaluate where and what types of warning signals should be located, you failed to take into consideration speed limit signage as well as warning signals. When designing your case study, be sure you have thoroughly addressed all aspects of the problem and do not leave gaps in your analysis.

Case Studies . Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Gerring, John. Case Study Research: Principles and Practices . New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007; Merriam, Sharan B. Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education . Rev. ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1998; Miller, Lisa L. “The Use of Case Studies in Law and Social Science Research.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science 14 (2018): TBD; Mills, Albert J., Gabrielle Durepos, and Eiden Wiebe, editors. Encyclopedia of Case Study Research . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010; Putney, LeAnn Grogan. "Case Study." In Encyclopedia of Research Design , Neil J. Salkind, editor. (Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2010), pp. 116-120; Simons, Helen. Case Study Research in Practice . London: SAGE Publications, 2009;  Kratochwill,  Thomas R. and Joel R. Levin, editors. Single-Case Research Design and Analysis: New Development for Psychology and Education .  Hilldsale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992; Swanborn, Peter G. Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London : SAGE, 2010; Yin, Robert K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods . 6th edition. Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications, 2014; Walo, Maree, Adrian Bull, and Helen Breen. “Achieving Economic Benefits at Local Events: A Case Study of a Local Sports Event.” Festival Management and Event Tourism 4 (1996): 95-106.

Writing Tip

At Least Five Misconceptions about Case Study Research

Social science case studies are often perceived as limited in their ability to create new knowledge because they are not randomly selected and findings cannot be generalized to larger populations. Flyvbjerg examines five misunderstandings about case study research and systematically "corrects" each one. To quote, these are:

Misunderstanding 1 :  General, theoretical [context-independent knowledge is more valuable than concrete, practical (context-dependent) knowledge. Misunderstanding 2 :  One cannot generalize on the basis of an individual case; therefore, the case study cannot contribute to scientific development. Misunderstanding 3 :  The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses; that is, in the first stage of a total research process, whereas other methods are more suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building. Misunderstanding 4 :  The case study contains a bias toward verification, that is, a tendency to confirm the researcher’s preconceived notions. Misunderstanding 5 :  It is often difficult to summarize and develop general propositions and theories on the basis of specific case studies [p. 221].

While writing your paper, think introspectively about how you addressed these misconceptions because to do so can help you strengthen the validity and reliability of your research by clarifying issues of case selection, the testing and challenging of existing assumptions, the interpretation of key findings, and the summation of case outcomes. Think of a case study research paper as a complete, in-depth narrative about the specific properties and key characteristics of your subject of analysis applied to the research problem.

Flyvbjerg, Bent. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (April 2006): 219-245.

• << Previous: Reviewing Collected Essays
• Next: Writing a Field Report >>
• Last Updated: Jan 17, 2023 10:50 AM
• URL: https://libguides.pointloma.edu/ResearchPaper