CHAPTER TWO
2.2. A Case Study Methodological Approach
The use of case study methodology is becoming increasingly popular across various disciplines. J. Nisbett and J. Watt have defined case study quite simply as “a systematic investigation of a specific instance.”1
They examine this approach and pinpoint the fact that it “draws on the techniques of observational studies, and aims to give a portrayal of a specific situation in such a way as to illuminate some general principle.”2
Support for this methodology is not always forthcoming, for as Robert K. Yin, an authority in qualitative research methods, laments that as a research method, case study has been typically ranked very low on the hierarchical ladder and is usually seen as “soft” research. To counter that view, Yin offers what he considers to be a more accurate and comprehensive definition of this methodology. Yin states that “a case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are
1 J. Nisbett and J. Watt, “Case Study,” in Rediguide, ed. M. B. Youngman, (Nottingham: Nottingham
University School of Education, ND), 4.
44
not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used.”1
Yin’s position towards case study elevates the methodology and counters naysayers who argue that this particular methodology is not a legitimate option.
The use of the case study strategy would indeed be the most appropriate option for me in that I sought to engage with specific instances of congregational singing. Could there be enough data for analysis if I were to give attention to congregational singing in just one specific congregation? Would not the study be more revelatory if the focus went beyond just one congregation, and if so would it be possible to maintain the case study option as the primary methodological research tool?
I had determined that it was necessary to expand the study and to examine more than just a single phenomenon. Consequently, by engaging with more than a single congregation, the study could then be considered as a multiple case study. What benefit would this be to the overall study? It would directly address one of the pitfalls of the case study methodology which pertains to the formulation of
generalizations. Janet Ward Schofield, Professor of Psychology and Senior Scientist at the University of Pittsburgh, has recommended that this dilemma, which has often been seen as one of the weaknesses2 of this methodology can be solved by exploring “multi-site studies” which are heterogeneous in nature. One of the benefits derived
1
Robert K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Applied Social Research Methods Series, Vol. 5 (London: SAGE Publications, 1984), 23.
2Nisbet & Watt itemize some of the strengths and weaknesses of this methodology. For them that case
study deals with one specific instance seen as a strength. That one case can influence the explanation of a similar case. One weakness they identify pertains to the fact that the results are “not easily
generalizable” (8). Additionally, there is the likelihood of the analysis of the results being “personal and subjective” (8).
45
from this application is “increased generalizability.”1
In addressing the use of what he calls “multiple-case designs,” Yin proposes that one should never be casual in this approach because eventually “every case should serve a specific purpose within the overall scope of the inquiry.”2
Furthermore, the application of the multiple case study approach necessitates an understanding of the principle of “replication logic,” a situation in which parallel results arise from all of the cases and “replication is said to have taken place.”3
In this study, the need to be able to generalize was critical since the aim of the study speaks to that generalization principle in that the research question was geared towards a general understanding of how congregations are shaped by what they sing. Therefore it was necessary to design a methodology that would provide important generalizations regarding an epistemology addressing the effects of congregational singing that could be applicable to the study of any congregation. Beyond the need to generalize, in deciding to examine multiple cases, I also had to ensure that there was the likelihood of replication.4 In order to achieve the broadest possible replication which would have some bearing on the final generalizations, I deemed it necessary to design a case study that would incorporate an examination of the singing practices of current congregations on the one hand and a historical perspective on the other. With these as the two extremes, the median point was to include within the research design an examination of how the content of a hymnal can impact directly and indirectly the
1
Janet Ward Schofield, “Increasing the Generalizability of Qualitative Research in Case Study Method” in Case Study Method, ed. Roger Gomm, Martyn Hammersley and Peter Foster (London: SAGE Publications, 2009), 45.
2 Yin, 48. 3 Ibid. 4
Yin speaks of two types of replication: (1) literal replication means that the results are alike and (2) theoretical replication points to dissimilar results that exist for obvious reasons.
46
shape of the community that uses a particular hymnal. This gave a much needed balance to the research project.
Yet the question remained, how appropriate was the research design for this methodology in light of the underlying epistemological interest? Could a case be made for a case study methodology in which the multiple sites were so varied that they embraced acts of observing a contemporary congregation, reviewing the singing practice of a historical congregation, and examining the content of an ecumenical hymnal? It was a matter that I had to resolve especially considering that at the core of Yin’s definition of case study is the focus on and engagement with a contemporary context. How could the application of case study methodology to a historical context be validated? Would a historical perspective of congregational singing and a focus on the content of a hymnal be an aberration, according to Yin’s definition above?
Of course, one way to circumvent this issue would be to restrict the scope of the study so that it would focus only on one or more present day congregations. But I decided against that for the following reasons. First, given that one of the main purposes of case study, as well as any other related qualitative research methodology is to be explanatory, descriptive or exploratory,1 I wanted exposure to potential
sources of knowledge through a broader scope beyond the usual range of investigation to incorporate historical and textual outlooks. Second, I was not altogether convinced that by limiting the study to contemporary context that eventually the replication logic would become predictable, repetitive and uninteresting (although one could argue that there are an indeterminate number of variables within a singular case that could unfold unprecedented data for analysis). Third, I wanted to design multiple cases that
47
were truly heterogeneous and that by virtue of their differences the generalization to a theory (not necessarily to another case) would be credible in the final analysis.
As a result, I am certain that a case study methodology can be applied outside of a contemporary context. Consequently, I do not agree with Yin on this point that case study methodology can only be valid if it engages with data drawn exclusively from a contemporary context. However, that does not negate that in attempting to carry out case study methodology, constructing a methodological design that moves beyond the strict contemporary context is viable once there is the acknowledgement that a multiple site case study also entails the use of multiple methods to form part of that overarching methodology. I will now explore some of the major sources that form part of this design, paying attention to the pros and cons of each means whereby data was gathered.