The DOI matches its Crossref record; 46 of the 46 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Case in Case Study Methodology
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive view of the case study process from the researcher's perspective, emphasizing methodological considerations. As opposed to other qualitative or quantitative research strategies, such as grounded theory or surveys, there are virtually no specific requirements guiding case research. This is both the strength and the weakness of this approach. It is a strength because it allows tailoring the design and data collection procedures to the research questions. On the other hand, this approach has resulted in many poor case studies, leaving it open to criticism, especially from the quantitative field of research. This article argues that there is a particular need in case studies to be explicit about the methodological choices one makes. This implies discussing the wide range of decisions concerned with design requirements, data collection procedures, data analysis, and validity and reliability. The approach here is to illustrate these decisions through a particular case study of two mergers in the financial industry in Norway.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1984) · Cited by 81,983
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,361
Case Study Research: Design and Methods
Chaiklin, H. (1991) · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · doi:10.1097/00005053-199102000-00025 · Cited by 39,535
Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques.
Ellis, C., Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074814 · Cited by 29,249
Handbook of Qualitative Research
Crozier, G., Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (1994) · British Journal of Educational Studies · doi:10.2307/3121684 · Cited by 26,666
(1998) · Cited by 18,576
Building Theories from Case Study Research
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258557 · Cited by 17,455
(2008) · Biostatistics and Microbiology: A Survival Manual · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-77282-0_6 · Cited by 17,371
The Art of Case Study Research
Johnson, K. E., & Stake, R. E. (1996) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.2307/329758 · Cited by 15,826
(1979) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 11,252
Cited by
Methodology or method? A critical review of qualitative case study reports
Hyett, N., Kenny, A., & Dickson-Swift, V. (2014) · International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being · doi:10.3402/qhw.v9.23606 · Cited by 608
Pan, S. L., & Tan, B. (2011) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2011.07.001 · Cited by 414
Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm
Diercks, G., Larsen, H., & Steward, F. (2019) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.028 · Cited by 404
Requirements engineering for artificial intelligence systems: A systematic mapping study
Ahmad, K., Abdelrazek, M., Arora, C., Bano, M., & Grundy, J. (2023) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2023.107176 · Cited by 132
The digital covenant: non-centralized platform governance on the mastodon social network
Gehl, R. W., & Zulli, D. (2023) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2022.2147400 · Cited by 51
Metadata
- Authors
- Meyer, C. B.
- Venue
- Field Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2001-11
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 329-352
- ISSN
- 1064-8631 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-822X
- 1552-3969
- OpenAlex
- W2100515823
- Cited by
- 591
- References
- 46
- FWCI
- 1.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Case in Case Study Methodology. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1525822x0101300402
- The paper
- Meyer, C. B. (2001). A Case in Case Study Methodology. Field Methods. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x0101300402
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
