In the seminar, we were given an example of a case study where the subject was a person with a drastic change in brain functionality. The example made me think of a relative of mine, and that link made me further understand the notion of case studies. Please bare with me as I further explain my progress!
During a rock concert in 2011, my relative (a then middle aged lawyer) was hit in the head as a 400-pound camera fell down from above the crowd. He suffered a great hit, and the aftermaths of the injury brought a significant depression. Today my relative has become a recognized artist, and his works have been celebrated internationally. The twist of it all? He is believed to suffer from Savant Syndrome due to the accident! When the left hemisphere of the brain is damaged, as in the case of my relative, the natural tendencies to reason is suppressed. The right hemisphere instead takes over, and different talents such at drawing, painting or memorizing flourishes, turning people into so called savants.
Why is the story of my relative interesting for this week's theme? I believe it is an interesting example of a potential topic for a case study, and above all, it offered me a way to further understand the theme by relating it to my own experiences. Case studies are almost more of an approach than a method, combining both qualitative and quantitative research methods. The context of case studies are specific, and hence studying families without cars or a man who suddenly became a savant is possible by combining various methods to get the full picture. By going beyond space and time, and looking at the very specific measures that constitute the chosen study context, case studies offer sophisticated snapshots of a given phenomena. Data overlaps with analysis throughout the process, and it is hence a very interactive form of research to engage in.
During the lecture and seminar, I came to evolve my idea of case studies. In my first post, I wrote:
"A case study examines in-depth, purposeful samples to better understand a given phenomena. Case studies hence focus on samples within single setting, drawing conclusions that are specific rather than general."
If I were to conduct a case study on the given example of my relative, the sample would be him, the savant himself. I would examine all the aspects of the phenomena; I could conduct quantitative studies on the weight and pressure of the hit, I could conduct qualitative interviews with him and his surrounding networks etc, in order to be able to draw a specific conclusion around his case. By mixing qualitative and quantitative studies, which is one of the perks of case studies, I could gain enough material to understand this given phenomena. The conclusions I could draw from the data would perhaps not be very generalizable (the examined subject is just one person, after all), but I would be able to describe the cause and effect relationships of this specific phenomena.
In case studies, researchers do not pose initial hypotheses, in order to be able to extract anything from the study. To me, that's the charm of the method (or approach, as defined above). Without predetermined ideas of what to expect for results, the study can steer its own way. I.e., in the case of my relative, the learnings the study could earn me would enable me to pose relevant research questions for the case.
When Hanna Hasselqvist presented her research during the lecture, I further understood how different methods can be used in in-depth research. Even if her case study is very different from the one that could be carried out in the case of my relative, the idea is the same. By using various methods, one may understand the specific phenomena.
This week's theme has been very interesting, and it felt like a very good theme to conclude with!
Tjäna! Thank you for two thorough blog posts on this theme. In the first post you have found good examples of both qualitative and case study, and from where I see it, you also seemed to have grasped the main limitations and advantages pretty well. Especially the first paper which used qualitative content analysis felt interesting to me, since I used the same method in my own study on Bachelor level. You mentioned one of the possible limitations of the method being ending up with too many themes, and to this I can highly relate to. Clustering, categorization and further on forming the final themes indeed feels as quite an subjective process which has many pitfalls one should be aware of. To some extent, content analysis is always a matter of perception and seeing beyond the particular context as well. Several researchers engaging individually to the same process increases the objectivity, of course, and in this case it was luckily the two researchers both involved in the open coding.
ReplyDeleteAs for your reflections, I really enjoyed the fact that you brought a personal experience into the picture and I can also see why you did that – mirroring new knowledge in the context of our own experiences is probably one of the best ways of learning. Although in science, especially when using qualitative methods, we have to be careful with that – we have a natural tendency of spotting the pieces of information that feel relevant to just us.
Anyway, despite the very context-related nature of case studies and the rather questionable generalizability, they do create a framework for further studies no matter what the case. Understanding a specific phenomena in a specific context provides us knowledge when facing similar situations in the future.
Seems like I had a lot in my mind, sorry for that! And thanks again, great job!! :)
Hi,
ReplyDeleteQuite an interesting reflection!
You say the charm of the method is to not have a hypothesis, and I do agree that this can lead to many interesting directions and discoveries that wouldn't have been explored otherwise, but I think it is also necessary to be critical to this. I think there is a risk that the study will lose it's focus (or don't determine any at all), which is why I believe it is necessary to at least substitute the hypothesis with a rather specific research question. In the research you suggest, there would be many directions to chose from (e.g. why and how the brain changes or your relatives artistic expressions etc.), and depending on what sort of directions you chose make a different kind of process and data collection relevant. Not finding a specific direction would end up wasting a lot of time and recourses in irrelevant theory and data.
Your posts definitely made me think twice about the structure of case studies and I really appreciated reading it!
The description of case studies as "mirroring reality" wasn't mentioned in our seminar so I appreciate that you brought it up! It's great that you've mentioned a potential case study from your own experience as it explains pretty well the strengths of using this method. What you could've added is to address potential risks with case studies and also measuring other methods against case studies for this particular savant example. But all in all, thanks for an interesting input.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciated reading your post and how you related case study to a personal experience. I think applying potential research studies to real world situations is important in starting to develop our own research methods for our thesis work next year. Your description of a potential case study shows that you understood many of the methods of a case study quite well and that you understand the benefits. However, I do disagree somewhat on the lack of hypothesis being the “charm” of case study. I do not think it is necessarily required, but I think having a research question to base data collection on can be important in creating focus. In your example though, as it is a more specific case study of one person, perhaps it would not be needed.
ReplyDelete