Mixed-Methods Case Studies

• In Event: Methodological Innovations in Mixed Methods Research

Abstract

Introduction. Case study research has a tradition of collecting multiple forms of data, including both and qualitative and quantitative data to gain deeper insight into the case (Stake, 1995; Yin, 2014). Conducting cross-case comparisons of sites (e.g., schools, clinics, organizations), investigators can examine common and unique features of each case. Case study complements mixed methods research, which aims for a more complete understanding through the collection, analysis, and integration of qualitative and quantitative data. Case study experts have suggested integrating qualitative and quantitative research in investigating the case (Yin, 2014), but guidance on designing and conducting mixed methods case studies remains relatively limited.

Purpose and Objectives. Given the potential for mixed methods case studies to investigate complex research problem, we undertook a review of recently published mixed methods case studies across academic disciplines. Our review has two major purposes 1) to understand contemporary mixed methods case study designs in applied research and 2) to categorize and identify methodological features to inform future research designs.

Perspectives or Theoretical Framework. We consider two overall ways in which mixed methods and case study can be integrated: 1) a “parent” mixed methods design that includes a nested case study (MM-CS) and 2) a “parent” case study design that includes a nested mixed methods design (CS-MM). The distinction provides an innovative typology to consider design choices.

Methods/Data Sources. We searched literature databases to identify a corpus of empirical mixed methods case studies across disciplines. The databases included ERIC, PubMed, and Academic Search Premier, which searches all major disciplines and other databases (e.g., PsychINFO). We reviewed and analyzed the published articles to describe the key methodological features of mixed methods case studies. We then deconstruct four exemplar mixed methods case studies that illustrate the approach in educational research, health sciences research, and methodological inquiry.

Results. Based on the corpus of articles examined, we report distinctions between mixed method nested within case studies and case studies nested within mixed methods research. Distinctions include the overall intent of the research, the methodological features, the application of a mixed methods design, and the report of the research. Given the foundational role of meaningful integration of qualitative and quantitative data in mixed methods, we then focus on comparing the two approaches (MM-CS and CS-MM) in terms of integration strategies, such as procedures for integration and the use of visual joint displays. We conclude with four exemplar mixed methods case studies and summarizing methodological components of each.

Scholarly Significance. Despite the popularity of mixed methods and case study research and ample methodological guidance for conducting each form of research alone, relatively little is known about the methodological procedures of integrating mixed methods and case study research. Considering and describing both MM-CS and CS-MM will enable researchers to make more informed design choices to address research questions.

Authors

• Timothy Guetterman, University of Michigan

• Michael Fetters, University of Michigan - Ann Arbor