@book{6ce5ed20003711dab4d5000ea68e967b,
title = "Five misunderstandings about Case-study Research",
abstract = "This article examines five common misunderstandings about case-study research: (1) Theoretical knowledge is more valuable than practical knowledge; (2) One cannot generalize from a single case, therefore the single case study cannot contribute to scientific development; (3) The case study is most useful for generating hypotheses, while other methods aremore suitable for hypotheses testing and theory building; (4) The case study contains a bias toward verification; and (5) It is often difficult to summarize specific case studies. The article explains and corrects these misunderstandings one by one and concludes with the Kuhnian insight that a scientific discipline without a large number of thoroughly executed case studies is a discipline without systematic production of exemplars, and that a discipline without exemplars is an ineffective one. Social science may be strengthened by the execution of more good case studies.",
keywords = "Case study, Validity, Human learning, Falsification, Hypothesis testing, Critical cases",
author = "Bent Flyvbjerg",
note = "Reprint of {"}Five Misunderstandings About Case-study Research{"}. In Clive Seale, Giampietro Gobo, Jaber F. Gubrium and David Silverman (eds.){"}Qualitative Research Practice{"}. London, Sage, 2004, pp. 420-434.",
year = "2004",
language = "English",
isbn = "879089373",
publisher = "Department og Development and Planning",
}