Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:22:59.247Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Index

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2022

Edited by
Jennifer Widner ,
Michael Woolcock  and
Daniel Ortega Nieto
Jennifer Widner
Affiliation:
Princeton University, New Jersey
Michael Woolcock
Affiliation:
Development Research Group, The World Bank
Daniel Ortega Nieto
Affiliation:
Global Delivery Initiative, The World Bank

Summary

A summary is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Chapter
Information
The Case for Case Studies
Methods and Applications in International Development
 , pp. 304 - 312
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY 3.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

Index

AC. See Active Citation
accuracy, in interview-based case studies, 120
rewards for, 132–133
Achen, Christopher, 17–18
Active Citation (AC), 185
elements of, 187
adaptive management, in development policy, 282–286, 290–291, 297–301
Allende, Salvadore, 249–250
American Political Science Association’s initiative on Data Access and Research Transparency (APSA/DA-RT), 180–189
analytic case studies, 108–110
analytic narratives, 108
qualitative comparative analysis, 108–109
analytic narratives
in analytic case studies, 108
case selection criteria, 241–242
game theory in, 243, 245–246
definition of, 239
for development policy and practice, 247–253
for contract law, 248
credible commitment hypothesis, 248–249
debt-credibility hypothesis, 249
for justice provisions, 248
for political stability, 249–250
for power sharing dynamics, 251–252
limitations of, 244–247
conjunction, 245–247
contingency elements, 245–247
generalization as, 244–245
surprise elements, 245–247
mechanisms of, 242–244
causal, 245
comparative statics, 243
deterrence game, 243–244
modeling in, 241
from rational choice, 242, 244–245
overview of, 253–254
process tracing and, 241
public goods provision, 240
sequence identification in, 242–244
theoretical approach to, 239–241
analytic transparency, 178–179
Andrews, Matt, 284
Annotation for Transparency Initiative (ATI), 186–189
antecedent condition limits, for decision-makers, 10–12
Global Delivery Initiative studies, 12
Innovations for Successful Societies studies, 11–12
APSA/DA-RT. See American Political Science Association’s initiative on Data Access and Research Transparency
Argentina, case study research in, 12
ATI. See Annotation for Transparency Initiative
Bangladesh, case study research in, 6
Barber, Sir Michael, 280
Battilana, Julie, 77–78
Bayes nets methods, for causal inference, 34–35
Bayes Theorem
in Gerber–Kaplan Model, 55–56
in program process tracing, 211–216
Ben Romdhane, Habiba, 233–234
Bennett, Andrew, 136
best fit concept, 92
best practice standards
in process tracing, 202
for transparency, 186–189
bias
confirmation, 124
in Illusion of Observational Learning Theorem, 58–59
in process tracing
selection bias, 137
stakeholder biases, 204–205
in randomized control trials, 88, 91–92
selection, in interview-based case studies, 137–139
among favorable respondents, 139
avoidance of, strategies for, 137–138
in process tracing case studies, 137
through self-censorship, 138–139
biomedicine, external validity problem and, 91–92
Bird, Alexander, 37–38
Blair, Tony, 280
Bradburn, Norma, 129
Carpenter, Daniel, 3–4, 245
CAR-T therapy. See chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy
Cartwright, Nancy, 16–17, 60, 87
case study research
antecedent condition limits, for decision-makers, 10–12
Global Delivery Initiative studies, 12
Innovations for Successful Societies studies, 11–12
in Argentina, 12
in Bangladesh, 6
causal mechanisms in, identification of, 5–7
inductive generalization and, 7
qualitative methods, 5
quantitative methods, 5
deviant cases, 14–15
Global Delivery Initiative, 6
antecedent condition limits and, 12
strategic structure tactics, 10
in India, 3–4
in Indonesia, 6
Innovations for Successful Societies, 6–7
antecedent condition limits and, 11–12
outlier cases, 15
“rapid results” management practices and, 7
strategic structure tactics, 9–10
theory testing and, 13–14
in Liberia, 9–10
outliers in, 14–15
in Innovations for Successful Societies studies, 15
qualitative methods in, 4–5
causal mechanisms in, 5
standards for, 16
quantitative methods in, 4–5
causal mechanisms in, 5
rigor in, 16–23
in social sciences, 4–5
in South Africa, 11–12
strategic structure in, elicitation of, 7–10
in Global Delivery Initiative studies, 10
Governance and Economic Management Assistance Program, 9–10
identification of actors in, 8
Innovations for Successful Societies studies, 9–10
outcomes from, 8
World Bank and, 10
theoretical approach to, 3–5, 23–24
theory testing in, 12–14
in collaborative projects, 13
in Innovations for Successful Societies studies, 13–14
in small-scale observational studies, 14
Case Study Research (Yin), 1–2
causal claims
counterfactuals in, 29
definition of, 29–30
diagrammatic examples, 40
evidence in, 36–38
categories of, 39
direct, 37–38
indirect, 37–38
individualized, 31
in randomized control trials, 31–36
randomized control trials, 46–47
effect sizes in, 31–32, 33–34
individualized evidence and, 31–36
interactive/support variables in, 32–33
methodology of, 34–35
premises for, 35–36
Rubin/Holland analysis, 48–49
situation-specific causal equations model, 40–46, 49–50
characteristics of, 43
construction of, 41–42
INUS conditions, 42–43
potential outcomes equation, 41, 43–44
qualitative principles in, 44–46
theoretical approach to, 29–31
uncertainty in, 47
causal density, 95–101
classification of activities, 100
complexity theory, 96–97, 98
in integrated framework, for external validity, 106–107
operationalization of, 98–99
causal inference. See also process tracing
in comparative case study research, 149–158
causal mechanisms
of analytic narratives, 245
identification of, 5–7
inductive generalization and, 7
qualitative methods for, 5
quantitative methods for, 5
philosophy of science and, 196–199
causal realism, 197–198
critical realism, 197–198
scientific realism, 197–198
causal realism, 197–198
causality
for complex development programs, 110–111
contextual, 94
counterfactuals and, 29–30
causes of effects, effects of causes as distinct from, 147
CCTs programs. See conditional cash transfer programs
censorship. See self-censorship
change. See theory of change
Checkel, Jeffrey, 201–202
chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T therapy), 76–77
Chung, Park, 249
Collingwood, R. J., 179
Community-driven development programs, 89
community scorecards, in positive deviance cases, 234
comparative case study research. See also process tracing
case selection methods, 143–149
Method of Agreement, 143, 145–146
Method of Difference, 143, 145–146, 147
before process tracing, 144–147
with process tracing, 147–149
regression framework in, 146–147
econometric methods, 142–143
equifinality
in inductive case selection, 165–170
in process tracing, risks with, 156–158
inductive case selection, 158–171
case selection factors, 159–161
deviant cases in, 161
equifinality in, 165–170
generalizability in, 162–165, 169
scope conditions in, 165–170
temporal dynamics in, 158–159
overview of, 170–171
selection bias, 142
shadow cases in, 158
theoretical approach to, 142–144
in process tracing, 149–158
Comparative Politics (Lasswell), 142
comparative sequential analysis. See comparative case study research
comparative statics, 243
complex development programs. See also external validity problem
analytic case studies, 108–110
analytic narratives, 108
qualitative comparative analysis, 108–109
best fit concept, 92
causal density, 95–101
classification of activities, 100
complexity theory, 96–97, 98
in integrated framework, for external validity, 106–107
operationalization of, 98–99
causality for, 110–111
conditional cash transfer programs, 101
construct validity problem, 88
identification strategies, 88
implementation capability, 95–96, 101–102
in integrated framework, for external validity, 106–107
internal validity problem, 88, 106, 110–111
‘key facts’ about, 87–90, 95–107
implementation capability, 95–96, 101–102, 106–107
reasoned expectations for, 95–96, 102–107
in public sector, 110–111
quality improvement collaboratives, 92
quasi-experimental designs and, 88
external validity of, 89
randomized control trials and, 88–89
bias in, 88, 91–92
external validity of, 89
reasoned expectations for, 95–96, 102–106
impact trajectories, 103–105
in integrated framework, for external validity, 106–107
complexity theory, 96–97, 98
Concours Qualité (CQ) program, 231–232
conditional cash transfer (CCTs) programs, 101
confirmation bias, in interview-based case studies, 124
conjunctions, in analytic narratives, 245–247
constant conjunction, 197
construct validity problem, 88
contextual causality, 94
contingency elements, in analytic narratives, 245–247
contingent generalizations, 66–67
contract law, 248
contribution analysis, 196. See also program evaluation
conventional footnotes, 181–183
counterfactuals
in causal claims, 29
causality and, 29–30
CQ program. See Concours Qualité program
credible commitment hypothesis, 248–249
critical realism, 197–198
cross-case comparisons, process tracing in, 206–207
in least-similar cases, 207
in most-similar cases, 206–207
Darwin, Charles, 73
data archiving, 181, 184–185
data transparency, 178
DDD program. See “Doing Development Differently” program
Deaton, Angus, 33–34
debt-credibility hypothesis, 249
decision-making. See antecedent condition limits
deductive reasoning, in program evaluation, 208–209
Deductive-Nomological (D-N) Model, 197
delivery challenges, in organizational learning, 263–264
deterrence game, 243–244
Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), 265–268, 269–277
development policy and practices, cases studies and. See also government policy initiatives
analytic narratives for, 247–253
for contract law, 248
credible commitment hypothesis, 248–249
debt-credibility hypothesis, 249
for justice provisions, 248
for political stability, 249–250
for power sharing dynamics, 251–252
application of
in case discussions, 294–297
useful qualities for, 286–294
citizen outcomes from, 290–291
collaboration in, 290–291
evidence for, 290–291
Global Delivery Initiative, 1, 286–294
implementation of, 280–281
adaptive management in, 282–286, 290–291, 297–301
“Doing Development Differently” program, 284–285
problem-driven iterative adaptation, 284, 298–299
science of delivery and, 282–286
Innovations for Successful Societies, 12–13, 286–294
leadership for change in, 290–291
in legal research methods, 1–2
mechanism-based generalization for, 74
overview of, 301–302
as pedagogical tool, 1–2
policy-relevant process tracing, 206
political will and, 292
positive deviance cases, 220–227, 234–235
“rapid results” management practices, 7
scope conditions and, 292–293
theoretical approach to, 1–3
transparency in, 176–177, 180
World Bank Development Research Group, 2–3
development programs. See community driven development programs; complex development programs; specific programs
deviant case studies, 14–15. See also positive deviance cases
in inductive case selection, 161
diffusion, in positive deviance cases, 224
direct evidence, in causal claims, 37–38
D-N Model. See Deductive-Nomological Model
“Doing Development Differently” (DDD) program, 284–285
Dorado, Silvia, 77–78
Ebola Outbreak case study, generalization in, 70–72, 73–74
eclectic theories, for transparency, 180
ecological inference problem, 64–65, 66
frequentist statistical analysis and, 199–200
econometrics, 94–95
in comparative case study research, 142–143
educational programs, process tracing for, 208–209
effect sizes, in randomized control trials, 31–32, 33–34
effects of causes, causes of effects as distinct from, 147
Ellickson, Robert, 3–4
equifinality, in comparative case study research
in inductive case selection, 165–170
in process tracing, risks with, 156–158
ethical constraints, on transparency, 188
evidence
in causal claims, 36–38
categories of, 39
direct evidence, 37–38
indirect evidence, 37–38
individualized evidence, 31
in randomized control trials, 31–36
for development policy and practices, 290–291
in interview-based case studies, integrating differences in, 133–137
in process tracing, 206
explicit knowledge, in organizational learning, 263
external validity problem, for complex development programs, 88, 89–95, 106
in biomedicine, 91–92
causal density and, 106–107
econometrics and, 94–95
in health research, 92–93
implementation capability, 106–107
implementation strategies, 93–94
in psychology, 90–91
in quasi-experimental designs, 89
in randomized control trials, 89
reasoned expectations, 106–107
feedback. See nondirective feedback
Ferguson, Niall, 243
Feynman, Richard, 178
Fishbone Diagram, 300
Flyvbjerg, Bent, 62–63
The Forest Ranger (Kaufman), 3–4
The Forging of Bureaucratic Autonomy (Carpenter), 3–4
frequentist framework, 75–76
for statistical analysis, 67–68
frequentist statistical analysis
ecological inference problem and, 199–200
framework for, 67–68
process tracing compared to, 199–200
Frieden, Tom, 134
fsQCA. See fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis
fundamental problem of causal inference, 65
fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), 68
game theory, 243, 245–246
GDI. See Global Delivery Initiative
Gelsinger, Jesse, 77–78
GEMAP. See Governance and Economic Management Assistance Program
generalization, in case studies
in analytic narratives, 244–245
case selection and, 75
in Ebola Outbreak case, 70–72, 73–74
error terms and, 75
frequentist framework, 75–76
for statistical analysis, 67–68
fundamental problem of causal inference, 65
fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis, 68
in inductive case selection, 162–165, 169
in least-likely case studies, 69–72
mechanism-based, 72–78
for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, 76–77
immediate kinship relations, 73
for individual cases, 74–75
for policy decisions, 74
in most-likely case studies, 69–72
overview of, 83–84
process tracing and, 75–76
Qualitative Comparative Analysis, 78–79
from statistical analysis, 63–68
contingent generalizations, 66–67
ecological inference problem and, 64–65, 66
frequentist framework, 67–68
in individual cases, 65–66
interaction effects, 64–65
learning and, 64–65
selection effects, 64–65
Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption, 64
in ‘typical’ cases, 68–69
typological theorizing, 78–83
building block approach, 83
classification of extant historical cases, 81, 82–83
construction of, 79–80
independent variable identification, 80
outcome expectations, 81–82
typological spaces in, 80–81
Gerber–Kaplan Model, for RCTs, 53–56
Bayes Theorem in, 55–56
parameters in, 55
GIZ. See Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit
Global Delivery Initiative (GDI)
case study research by, 6
antecedent condition limits and, 12
strategic structure tactics, 10
development policy and practices, 1, 286–294
organizational learning under, in development agencies, 267–268
Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit, 265–268, 269–277
Millions Learning Project, 265–268, 269–277
Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China, 265–268, 269–277
Good Government in the Tropics (Tendler), 3–4
Governance and Economic Management Assistance Program (GEMAP), 9–10
government policy initiatives, transparency for, 176–177, 180
group learning, in development agencies, 262
Hardie, Jeremy, 87
Hawthorn effects, 91–92. See also bias
Health Care Accreditation Council (HCAC), 228
health research, external validity problem, 92–93
Heckman, James, 88
Helmke, Gretchen, 245–246
Hempel, Carl, 197
Hill, Sir Austin Bradford, 76
Hirschman, Albert, 87
Hume, David, 197, 206
hyperlinks to online sources, for transparency enhancement, 183–184
Illusion of Experimental Learning Theorem, 59
Illusion of Observational Learning Theorem, 56–59
biases in, 58–59
context on, role of, 57–58
heterogeneity of treatment effects, 57–58
impact trajectories, 103–105
implementation capability, 95–96, 101–102
in integrated framework, for external validity, 106–107
In Search of Excellence, 78
India, case study research in, 3–4
indirect evidence, in causal claims, 37–38
individual learning, in development agencies, 262
individualized evidence, in causal claims, 31
Indonesia, case study research in, 6
inductive case selection, 158–171
case selection factors, 159–161
deviant cases in, 161
equifinality in, 165–170
generalizability in, 162–165, 169
scope conditions in, 165–170
temporal dynamics in, 158–159
inductive generalization, 7
inductive theories, for transparency, 180
Innovations for Successful Societies (ISS), 281
case study research by, 6–7
antecedent condition limits and, 11–12
outlier cases, 15
“rapid results” management practices and, 7
strategic structure tactics, 9–10
theory testing and, 13–14
development policy and practices and, 12–13, 286–294
interview-based case studies, 119–120
inspirational justifications, for positive deviance cases, 223–225
interaction effects, 64–65
internal validity problem, 88, 106, 110–111
interorganizational learning, in development agencies, 262
interview-based case studies
accuracy in, 120
rewards for, 132–133
evidence in, integrating differences in, 133–137
Innovations for Successful Societies, 119–120
interview setting, 121
interviewee exposure to subject matter, 121
nondirective feedback, 132–133
overview of, 139
in qualitative case studies, 139
in quantitative case studies, 139
questions, role of
order of questions, 131–132
for specificity, 128–129
recall improvement, 127–133
crisis atmosphere as factor for, 130–131
goal-setting for, 128
passage of time as influence on, 129–130
in structured interviews, 128
selection bias, 137–139
among favorable respondents, 139
avoidance of, strategies for, 137–138
in process tracing case studies, 137
through self-censorship, 138–139
as social science research, 121–127
arbitration among competing statements, theory and, 126–127
confirmation bias, 124
interview focus, theory and, 122–124
interview process, theory and, 124–126
theory of change, 123–124
specificity in, 127–133
passage of time as influence on, 129–130
questions for, 128–129
subject matter in, 120–121
INUS conditions, in SCEM, 42–43
ISS. See Innovations for Successful Societies
Johnson, Samuel, 127
Jordan, positive deviance cases in, 227–231
community scorecards in, 234
data collection in, 230–231
Health Care Accreditation Council, 228
mixed methods research design for, 233–234
social networks in, role of, 229–230
justice provisions, 248
Kaufman, Herbert, 3–4
Kruk, Margaret, 233–234
Lasswell, Harold, 142
learning, generalization and, 64–65
Learning from Strangers (Weiss), 122
least-likely case studies, generalization in, 69–72
least-similar cases, in cross-case comparisons, 207
legal constraints, on transparency, 188
legal research methods, in development policy and practices, 1–2
Liberia, case study research in, 9–10
logistical constraints, on transparency, 188
Lust, Ellen, 233–234
mechanism-based generalization, 72–78
for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, 76–77
immediate kinship relations, 73
for individual cases, 74–75
for policy decisions, 74
Medicins sans frontieres (MSF), 70
Method of Agreement, 143, 145–146
Method of Difference, 143, 145–146, 147
methodological justifications, for positive deviance cases, 221–223
microfinance programs, process tracing for, 208
Mill, John Stuart, 143–149. See also comparative case study research
causes of effects as distinct from effects of causes, 147
Millions Learning Project, 265–268, 269–277
Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China (MoF), 265–268, 269–277
mixed methods research design, for positive deviance cases, 233–234
MoF. See Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China
Morocco, positive deviance cases in, 231–234
community scorecards in, 234
Concours Qualité program, 231–232
mixed methods research design for, 233–234
most-likely case studies, generalization in, 69–72
most-similar cases, in cross-case comparisons, 206–207
MSF. See Medicins sans frontieres
National Science Foundation (NSF), 181, 184
nondirective feedback, 132–133
NSF. See National Science Foundation
Order Without Law (Ellickson), 3–4
organizational learning, in development agencies, 260–265
analysis of, 276–277
case studies for, 265–276
Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), 265–268, 269–277
Global Delivery Initiative, 265, 267–268
Millions Learning Project, 265–268, 269–277
Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China, 265–268, 269–277
World Bank, 270–273, 276–277
environmental factors for, 261–262
for group learning, 262
for individual learning, 262
for inter-organizational learning, 262
for organizational learning, 262, 269–271
motivation for, 260–261, 265–268
external factors, 261
internal factors, 261
practical use for, strategies for, 264–265
theoretical approach to, 258–260
types of knowledge, 263, 271–273
delivery challenges, 263–264
explicit knowledge, 263
technical knowledge, 263
outliers, in case study research, 14–15
in Innovations for Successful Societies studies, 15
Pavone, Tommaso, 120
Pawson, Ray, 197
PDIA. See problem-driven iterative adaptation
philosophy of science
causal mechanisms and, 196–199
causal realism, 197–198
critical realism, 197–198
scientific realism, 197–198
process tracing and, 196–199
policy-relevant process tracing, 206
Portes, Alejandro, 13
positive deviance cases
case selection, 225–227
regression line approach, 226
definition of, 220–221
development policy through, 220–227, 234–235
diffusion in, 224
in Jordan, 227–231
community scorecards in, 234
data collection in, 230–231
Health Care Accreditation Council, 228
mixed methods research design for, 233–234
social networks in, role of, 229–230
justifications for, 221–225
inspirational, 223–225
methodological, 221–223
measurement of, 226–227
in Morocco, 231–234
community scorecards in, 234
Concours Qualité program, 231–232
mixed methods research design for, 233–234
operationalization of, 220–221
process tracing techniques in, 223
theoretical approach to, 219–220
in Tunisia, 233–234
potential outcomes equation, in SCEM, 41, 43–44
power sharing dynamics, 251–252
prediction studies, 180
problem-driven iterative adaptation (PDIA), 284, 298–299
process tracing, 75–76
alternative explanations for, 202–204
goals of, 204
for program outcomes, 203–204
analytic narratives and, 241
best practices in, 202
bias in
selection bias, 137
stakeholder biases, 204–205
in comparative case study research, 147–149
causal inference and, 149–158
equifinal causal processes, risks with, 156–158
independence in, 148–149
methods prior to, 144–147
paced processes in, risks with, 153–155
role of theory in, 149–158
temporal order in, 150–152
unit heterogeneity in, 148–149
conclusiveness of, 209–210
in cross-case comparisons, 206–207
in least-similar cases, 207
in most-similar cases, 206–207
Deductive-Nomological Model, 197
definition of, 199–201
evidence gathering in, 206
frequentist statistical analysis compared to, 199–200
philosophy of science, 196–199
policy-relevant, 206
in positive deviance cases, 223
taxonomy of types, 203
theoretical approach to, 201–210
production transparency, 179
program evaluation, process tracing for
Bayesian logic in, 211–216
deductive reasoning in, 208–209
in educational programs, 208–209
in microfinance, 208
overview of, 216
replication crisis, 195
social science process tracing compared to, 210–216
program designers’ role in, 210–211
program indicators, 210
start times for, 205
psychology, external validity problem for, 90–91
public goods provision, 240
QCA. See Qualitative Comparative Analysis
QDR. See Qualitative Data Repository
QICs. See quality improvement collaboratives
Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA), 78–79
analytic case studies, 108–109
fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis, 68
Qualitative Data Repository (QDR), 181, 184
qualitative methods, 4–5
for causal mechanisms, 5
in interview-based case studies, 139
standards for, 16
quality improvement collaboratives (QICs), 92
quantitative methods, 4–5
for causal mechanisms, 5
in interview-based case studies, 139
questions, in interview-based case studies
order of questions, 131–132
for specificity, 128–129
randomized control trials (RCTs), 16–17
causal claims and, 46–47
effect sizes in, 31–32, 33–34
individualized evidence and, 31–36
interactive/support variables in, 32–33
methodology of, 34–35
premises for, 35–36
complex development programs and, 88–89
bias in, 88, 91–92
external validity of, 89
Gerber–Kaplan Model, 53–56
Bayes Theorem in, 55–56
parameters in, 55
historical development of, 52–53
Illusion of Experimental Learning Theorem, 59
Illusion of Observational Learning Theorem, 56–59
biases in, 58–59
context on, role of, 57–58
heterogeneity of treatment effects, 57–58
limitations of, 53
plausible counterarguments in, 60
“rapid results” management practices, 7
rational choice, 242, 244–245
RCTs. See randomized control trials
reasoned expectations, 95–96, 102–106
impact trajectories, 103–105
in integrated framework, for external validity, 106–107
recall improvement, in interview case studies, 127–133
crisis atmosphere as factor for, 130–131
goal-setting for, 128
passage of time as influence on, 129–130
in structured interviews, 128
replication crisis, 195
Rosen, Jay, 133–134
Rubin/Holland analysis, of causal claims, 48–49
Salhi, Carmel, 233–234
SCEM. See situation-specific causal equations model
science of delivery, 280, 282–286
scientific realism, 197–198
scope conditions
for development policy and practices, 292–293
in inductive case selection, 165–170
selection bias
in comparative case study research, 142
in interview-based case studies, 137–139
among favorable respondents, 139
avoidance of, strategies for, 137–138
in process tracing case studies, 137
through self-censorship, 138–139
in process tracing, 137
selection effects, 64–65
self-censorship, selection bias through, 138–139
shadow cases, in comparative case study research, 158
Sirleaf, Ellen, 134
situation-specific causal equations model (SCEM), 40–46, 49–50
characteristics of, 43
construction of, 41–42
INUS conditions, 42–43
potential outcomes equation, 41, 43–44
qualitative principles in, 44–46
Skocpol, Theda, 156–157
Smith, Adam, 248
social science, interview-based case studies as, 121–127
arbitration among competing statements, theory and, 126–127
confirmation bias, 124
interview focus, theory and, 122–124
interview process, theory and, 124–126
theory of change, 123–124
social science process tracing, 210–216
program designers’ role in, 210–211
program indicators, 210
South Africa, case study research in, 11–12
specificity, in interview-based case studies, 127–133
passage of time as influence on, 129–130
questions for, 128–129
Stable Unit Treatment Value Assumption, 64
stakeholder biases, in process tracing, 204–205
States and Social Revolutions (Skocpol), 156–157
technical knowledge, in organizational learning, 263
temporal order, process tracing and, 150–152
Tendler, Judith, 3–4
theory of change, 123–124
theory testing, in case study research, 12–14
in collaborative projects, 13
in Innovations for Successful Societies studies, 13–14
in small-scale observational studies, 14
Tilley, Nick, 197
Toyota ‘Five Whys’, 298–299
transparency, in qualitative social science
advantages of, 179–180
American Political Science Association’s initiative on Data Access and Research Transparency, 180–189
anonymous sources and, 188
best practice standards of, 186–189
dimensions of, 178–180
analytic transparency, 178–179
data transparency, 178
production transparency, 179
eclectic theories, 180
enhancement strategies for, practical options for, 180–189
Active Citation, 185, 187
Annotated Transparency Initiative, 186–189
casual process observations in, 185
through conventional footnotes, 181–183
through data archiving, 181, 184–185
through hyperlinks to online sources, 183–184
ethical constraints, 188
government policy and, 176–177, 180
inductive theories, 180
legal constraints, 188
logistical constraints, 188
National Science Foundation, as data repository, 181, 184
overview of, 189
in prediction studies, 180
at Qualitative Data Repository, 181, 184
theoretical approach to, 176–177
Tunisia, positive deviance cases in, 233–234
‘typical’ cases, generalization in, 68–69
typological theorizing, 78–83
building block approach, 83
classification of extant historical cases, 81, 82–83
construction of, 79–80
independent variable identification, 80
outcome expectations, 81–82
typological spaces in, 80–81
uncertainty, in causal claims, 47
unit heterogeneity, in comparative case study research, 148–149
Wade, Robert, 3–4
Weiss, Robert, 122
Whitehead, Emily, 76–77
Widner, Jennifer, 70
Woolcock, Michael, 70, 120–121
World Bank
case study research by, strategic structure for, 10
organizations learning in, 270–273, 276–277
World Bank Development Research Group, 2–3
Yin, Robert, 1–2

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×