Prospective Case Study

Deductive Theory-Testing

Just as unexplained empirical observations create the need for inductive theory-building, the presence of multiple competing theories creates the need for deductive theory-testing using the methods dictated by the phenomenon being researched. Deductive theory-testing, however, is usually associated with quantitative research methods in social sciences. Nevertheless, because only a few elements of our social environment are amenable to quantification, the generalizability of our theories beyond the scarce quantifiable aspects of the social processes often remains unexplored. The use of qualitative research methods in deductive theory-testing, although less common, holds substantial promise, because it enables researchers to extend the deductive theory-testing approach to those aspects of social processes that are not amenable to quantification.

Limitations of Traditional (Post Hoc) Case Study Designs

The validity of post hoc case studies in theory-testing can be questioned on the grounds that the case study outcomes are already known to the researcher at the time of hypotheses formulation: The researcher formulates theory-based hypotheses already knowing which hypotheses are supported by the outcomes of the case study. Because theories in social sciences are not fully formalized, the process of hypotheses formulation is not free from the researcher's retrospective rationalization and selective biases. The researcher thus can be tempted to cherry-pick the cases that support a given theory or to select a theory that a particular case supports. Post hoc study designs may also conceal serious methodological flaws in sampling and data collection: Left-censoring or survivor bias in sampling, or attributional biases and post hoc rationalization in informants' responses present a common problem in post hoc studies. For these reasons, in medicine and other disciplines where the application of formal logical inference in hypothesis formulation is problematic but the need for rigor is high, the preference is given to prospective longitudinal study designs that require that hypotheses, follow-up times, and evaluation criteria be established in advance. PCS design thus can provide additional rigor to deductive theory-testing in case studies.

1. Baseline Case Study

The critical objective of the first, baseline case study of a social process is to define how a given theory would interpret this process, what predictions it would make about its outcome, and why. This study is conducted to develop the following PCS design elements:

• Formulation of research question(s) and the selection of the theories to be tested
• Selection and justification of the study site/context, where the competing theories can be tested, and selection of the data collection and analysis methods
[Page 747]
• Analysis of the case and formulation of the patterns of testable hypotheses/predictions of the future outcomes that can be made using the theory subjected to testing (these specific, low-level hypotheses tie the theory to the case study and serve as predictions of the anticipated social process development that follow from this theory)
• Specification of the time period when the follow-up study should be conducted and description of its methodology
• Formulation of criteria for outcome evaluation in the follow-up study (e.g., What will be considered a “success” or a “failure”? What outcome(s) will be deemed to support a given theory?)

The baseline study in the PCS design is a critical part of formal data collection: It is focused on establishing connections between theories and the live social process that will be used as a test bed in this quasiexperimental PCS design. The primary concern at this stage of the PCS is establishing construct validity, ensuring that the formulated predictions indeed follow from the theories under investigation.

...