The case study approach;
how to design a good interview
guide and make arrangements
for interviews
Arild Holt-Jensen
Professor, University of Bergen
Norway
• What is a case study?
• Misunderstandings related to case studies
(based on Flyvbjerg 2011)
• Quantitative and Qualitative methods
• Types of qualitative research
• Forms of interviews
• Semistructured interviews – interview
guide
• Formulate appropriate questions
• Interviewing practice; preparation and
afterwork
What is a case study?
• ’An intensive analysis of an individual unit
stressing environmental factors in relation to
environment’ (Webster dictionary 2009)
• Today we see case studies as a main approach
to social scientific knowledge, but still many
scientists think they cannot provide reliable
information about general laws and structures.
• Case studies are, however, the main focus in
what Sayer (1984) calls ’intensive concrete
research’ and recommends as a major
approach in human geography
Types of research (Sayer 1984)
Misunderstandings about case studies
1. General theoretical knowledge is more valuable
than concrete case knowledge
2. One cannot generalize on the basis of case
studies; so useless for scientific development
3. Case studies useful for generating hypotheses in
first stages of a total research process, but other
methods needed for theory building
4. The case study contains a bias towards
verification, a tendency to confirm researchers
preconceived ideas
5. Difficult to summarize and develop general
theories on the basis of specific case studies
Flyvbjerg(2011):the cited notions are wrong
• Case study work needed for students to
develop from booklearning beginners to
virtuose experts! You learn more from
experienced reality than from books or
lectures!
• Deviant cases are main sources of theory
development and prove that ’place
matters’ in a world of general globalisation.
• Formal generalisation is overvalued as a
source of scientific development, the ’force
of the example’ and transferability are
underestimated
Flyvbjerg (2011) continued
• The case study is useful for both
generating and testing of hypotheses, but
is not limited to that.
• You may learn more from deviant cases
than the typical or average case: the
region with (deviant) successful
development – can ideas be transferred?
• Researchers often learn from case studies
that their preconceived views were wrong
and lead to new ideas(AHJ:Rauland 1968)
Conclusion on case studies
• The case study approach often lead to
falsification of precoceived notions rather than
theory verification, But there is danger of
subjectivism (f.ex in selection of informants) .
• There are more discoveries stemming from
intense observations than by statistics from
a large group.
• Students can safely be let loose in case
study reality, which provides a useful
training ground with insights into real life
practices which academic teaching often
does not provide.
We need both quantitative and
qualitative methods
• There is
complementarity
between Case studies
and Statistical methods
like there is between
extensive
’generalisation’ and
intensive ’concrete
research’ in Sayer’s
model.
Main types of qualitative research
• Oral : most used. To get knowledge by
speaking to people (interviews)
• Textual : collect documentaries, fiction
and also landscapes used as text (photos,
paintings)
• Observational: excursion, get aquainted,
can be participant observation and
narratives based on that.
ORAL METHODS
General methodsSpecific m. Research
• Biography • Autobiography
Individual
• Biography
• Oral history
• Interviews
• Surveys
• Unstructured
• Semi-structured
• Structured
• Focus groups
• Surveys – structured
• Questionnaires-structured
*
General/
Structural
Textual sources and observational
methods
• Textual sources and methods
– Documentary sources: newspapers, archives, maps
– Creative sources: novels, poems, films, arts and music
– Landscape: as text: social differences, building types
• Observational methods
– Tourist lookaround: get a feeling of the place
– Excursion with guide or with textual background
– Participant observation: passive or active? Problem/concern:
influence/affect the study/
object-subject relations- to understand semiotics (metaphors,signs)
Which methods should we use?
Oral, textual, observational
• We must use the tools most appropriate
for the research questions of the case
• Often we have to use a combination of
methods in case investigations, but with
main focus on the oral tools
• Interviews gives direct access to
informants. In contrast to questionnaires
they do not intend to be representative;
but to understand individuals.
My MA in Rauland mountain farm district
• Very simple structured
interviews (questionaire)in
all the 350 households.
• Hypotheses: transition to
market economy with
reduction of old farm
practices lead to population
and industrial decline.
• That summer: local festival
for ‘Myllarguten’(1801-72),
a famous hardanger fiddle
player. Was this the new
industry to live from???
• Hypotheses falsified!
Interviews: direct access to informants
• In Rauland I just had one page of factual questions as
in population/agricultural census.
• But used 2 summers on the survey,lived in families
and used bicycle. Learned much from observations,
social life, informal talks.
• The questionaire approach gave statistical data like a
census, but due to my presence and observations it
gave indepth knowledge that was absent in the recent
census!
• Combination of structured questionnaire and
unstructured talks was an asset, but in most case
studies time limit means semi-structured interviews
is the best compromise
Semi-structured interviews
• Aim: Not to be representative – but to
understand how individual people
(informants) experience the problem you
focus on.
• Interviewing: Face to face conversation
with a purpose
• Critics from positivists: Interviewers bias
the respondents answers by ’leading
questions’. This is a problem we have to
deal with! But: Objectivism; does it exsist?
More about forms of interviews
• Structured interviews: Predetermined
/standardised list of questions (’What are
the sources of incomes in your household?’)
• Semi-structured interviews: Degree of
predetermined questions, but more like a
talk based on an interview guide to secure
you cover questions related to your problem
formulation.
• Unstructured interviews: Talks where
questions are defined by the informants
response (Often used: life stories or ’tell us
about what you did last week’)
Strength of interviewing
• Filling the gaps of knowledge
• Investigate complex behaviour /motivations
• Collect diversity of meaning
– Opinions, experiences
– Variations by position in society, ethnicity, class,
gender, age / How meaning differ among people
– Example: NEHOM cases: 20 in debth interviews in
each urban housing area=ca 5 as
’informants’/decision makers, 15 with
’respondents’/local inhabitants, which the local
initiatives we had as focus, were aimed at
Interviewing techniques
• Interview guide:Used in semi-structured interviews to
remind the researcher on issues to cover – topics and
key concepts to cover – but flexibility in progress so
that it works as a conversation between equals/ create
trust to avoid biased answers.
• Formulate appropriate and good questions:
– Language: use neutral, commonly understood concepts –
problems in daily speech with scientific defined concepts
– Avoid ambiguity/double meanings / be neutral and nonoffensive
– Avoid leading questions!!!!! (Do you not also agree that
the District High Scool provides many solutions to the
regional development? Give us examples!)
Types of questions/ progress in interviews
• Descriptive: Roles – ice breaking
• Contextual (storytelling): Identify events
/people /places
• Opinions: Personal /individual meanings
• Structural: Why this meanings – into peoples
ideology
• Contrast /comparison: Reflect on contrary
meanings
• Controversial questions: confronting more
sensitive issues in end of interview
Interview guide – things to consider
• Research questions are usually too broad to
serve as productive interview questions So
focus on the local context in which the locals
are the specialists.
• If you ask a question they will answer it. But
this means that the ’evidence’ you are gathering
may not accurately reflect real opinions. The
respondent may not have understood the
question.
• Therefore: Prepare follow-up questions
• Adress topics from ’the side’ (compare with
similar cases)
Interview guide- things to consider
• People’s espoused theories (the things they
believe they believe) differ from the theories
they use. So to avoid this trap: ask about
concrete examples (what they have done rather
than about general principles)
• Interviews are social occasions. The
interviewed will want to put his best foot
forward. Don’t take the first answer as final.
– Therefore: Ask for elaboration
– Ask for opposing ideas
– Ask about Other Influencing Conditions
Interview guide –things to consider
• Testimony statement (’this is the truth’)
alone is weak evidence: In general we need
multiple sources of evidence with
triangulation between different sources and
methods.
• If your study is based entirely on interviews
you need to interview so many in each group
of respondents that you feel you do not need
more interviews to get new opinions or data.
• It may be an idea to ask the same question
with different phrases or from different angles.
Interviewing practice – preparations
• Decide how many you need to
interview, which groups of key
informants and respondents you need to
meet (considering the time at disposal).
• Agree on formulations in the interview
guide
• Take contact by phone /internet as early
as possible to arrange time of interview
meetings with key informants and
respondents
• Decide division of work within group
After the interviews
• Write down your notes – immediately: Write
all you remember; behaviour, non-textual
responses, what possibly can have biased the
answers you got
• Transcribe from recording device as soon as
possible.
• Interpretation of the data collected
(Hermeneutic approach)- ’reduce your data’
• Write the report – divide the work between you
and decide how to present it.
Structure of report (possible)
• Problem formulation (aims of study)
• Case study areay (based on statistics,
written and internet sources)
• Theory that is relevant
• Methods used and weaknesses in
fieldwork situation/ interviews done
• Results of fieldwork (presentation of your
work
• Conclusions (playback to problem
formulation - aims of study)
TWO LAST BULLPOINTS ca 50% of report
Fieldwork means
knowledge
victory!
GOOD LUCK !
Some references
• Flyvbjerg, B.(2011) Case study p. 301-316 in
Denzin,N.K. & Lincoln,Y.S(eds) The Sage Handbook
of Qualitative Research.4th ed. Sage; Thousand
Oaks,CAL
• Holt-Jensen, A. (1968) Fjellbygda Rauland. Ad
Novas –Norwegian Geographical Studies.
Universitetsforlaget, Oslo
• Dunn, K.(2005) Interviewing.Ch.6 p. 79-105 in
Hay,I.(ed):Qualitative Research Methods in Human
Geography.2nd Ed. Oxford University Press; UK
• Yin, R.K.(2009) Case Study Research. 4th ed. Sage;
London – Thousand Oaks, CAL. Particularly Ch.4:
Collecting Case Study Evidence