narrative research difference between case study

Difference Between Case Study And Narrative Research

• Success Team
• January 19, 2023

Transcribe, Translate, Analyze & Share

Join 150,000+ incredible people and teams saving 80% and more of their time and money. Rated 4.9 on G2 with transcription , translation and analysis support for 100+ languages and dozens of file formats across audio, video and text.

Get a 7-day fully-featured trial!

Research is an important part of any organization or business. There are two main types of research: case studies and narrative research. Both are valuable tools for gathering and analyzing information, but they have some important differences. Understanding the difference between case study and narrative research can help you select the best research method for your particular project.

What is Case Study Research?

Case study research is a type of qualitative research that focuses on a single case, or a small number of cases, to examine in depth. It seeks to understand a phenomenon by examining the context of the case and looking at the experiences, perspectives, and behavior of the people involved. Case study research is often used to explore complex social phenomena, such as poverty, health, education, and social change.

What is Narrative Research?

Narrative research is also a type of qualitative research that focuses on understanding how people make sense of their experiences. It involves collecting and analyzing stories, or narratives, from participants. These stories can be collected through interviews, focus groups, or other data collection techniques. By examining the stories in detail, researchers can gain insights into how people think about and make sense of the world around them.

Differences Between Case Study and Narrative Research

The most important differences between case study and narrative research are the focus and the type of data collected. Case studies focus on a single case or a small number of cases, while narrative research focuses on understanding how people make sense of their experiences. Case studies typically rely on quantitative data, such as surveys and measurements, while narrative research relies on qualitative data, such as interviews, stories, and observations.

Which is Better?

The answer to this question depends on the research question and the type of data needed to answer it. If the goal is to understand a single case in depth, then a case study is the best approach. If the goal is to understand how people make sense of their experiences, then narrative research is the best approach. In some cases, it may be beneficial to use a combination of both approaches.

Case study and narrative research are both valuable tools for gathering and analyzing information. Understanding the difference between the two can help you select the best research method for your particular project. While case studies are useful for understanding a single case in depth, narrative research is better for understanding how people make sense of their experiences. In some cases, it may be beneficial to use a combination of both approaches.

How To Use The Best Large Language Models For Research With Speak

Step 1: Create Your Speak Account

To start your transcription and analysis, you first need to create a Speak account . No worries, this is super easy to do!

Get a 7-day trial with 30 minutes of free English audio and video transcription included when you sign up for Speak.

To sign up for Speak and start using Speak Magic Prompts, visit the Speak app register page here .

Step 2: Upload Your Research Data

In Speak, you can seamlessly upload, transcribe, and translate audio, video, and text files all at once! If you have video, you can use our AI video-to-text converter to convert video to text; if you have audio, you can use our AI audio-to-text converter to convert audio to text. You can also transcribe YouTube videos and use AI to analyze text . You can see compatible file types for each option below.

Accepted Audio File Types

Accepted video file types, accepted text file types, csv imports.

You can also upload CSVs of text files or audio and video files. You can learn more about CSV uploads and download Speak-compatible CSVs here .

With the CSVs, you can upload anything from dozens of YouTube videos to thousands of Interview Data.

Publicly Available URLs

You can also upload media to Speak through a publicly available URL.

As long as the file type extension is available at the end of the URL you will have no problem importing your recording for automatic transcription and analysis.

YouTube URLs

Speak is compatible with YouTube videos. All you have to do is copy the URL of the YouTube video (for example, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKfcLcHeivc ).

Speak will automatically find the file, calculate the length, and import the video.

If using YouTube videos, please make sure you use the full link and not the shortened YouTube snippet. Additionally, make sure you remove the channel name from the URL.

Speak Integrations

As mentioned, Speak also contains a range of integrations for Zoom , Zapier , Vimeo and more that will help you automatically transcribe your media.

This library of integrations continues to grow! Have a request? Feel encouraged to send us a message.

Step 3: Calculate and Pay the Total Automatically

Once you have your file(s) ready and load it into Speak, it will automatically calculate the total cost (you get 30 minutes of audio and video free in the 7-day trial - take advantage of it!).

If you are uploading text data into Speak, you do not currently have to pay any cost. Only the Speak Magic Prompts analysis would create a fee which will be detailed below.

Once you go over your 30 minutes or need to use Speak Magic Prompts, you can pay by subscribing to a personalized plan using our real-time calculator .

You can also add a balance or pay for uploads and analysis without a plan using your credit card .

Step 4: Wait for Speak to Analyze Your Research Data

If you are uploading audio and video, our automated transcription software will prepare your transcript quickly. Once completed, you will get an email notification that your transcript is complete. That email will contain a link back to the file so you can access the interactive media player with the transcript, analysis, and export formats ready for you.

If you are importing CSVs or uploading text files Speak will generally analyze the information much more quickly.

Step 5: Visit Your File Or Folder

Speak is capable of analyzing both individual files and entire folders of data.

When you are viewing any individual file in Speak, all you have to do is click on the "Prompts" button.

If you want to analyze many files, all you have to do is add the files you want to analyze into a folder within Speak.

You can do that by adding new files into Speak or you can organize your current files into your desired folder with the software's easy editing functionality.

Step 6: Select Speak Magic Prompts To Analyze Your Research Data

What are magic prompts.

Speak Magic Prompts leverage innovation in artificial intelligence models often referred to as "generative AI".

These models have analyzed huge amounts of data from across the internet to gain an understanding of language.

With that understanding, these "large language models" are capable of performing mind-bending tasks!

With Speak Magic Prompts, you can now perform those tasks on the audio, video and text data in your Speak account.

Step 7: Select Your Assistant Type

To help you get better results from Speak Magic Prompts, Speak has introduced "Assistant Type".

These assistant types pre-set and provide context to the prompt engine for more concise, meaningful outputs based on your needs.

To begin, we have included:

Choose the most relevant assistant type from the dropdown.

Step 8: Create Or Select Your Desired Prompt

Here are some examples prompts that you can apply to any file right now:

• Create a SWOT Analysis
• Give me the top action items
• Create a bullet point list summary
• Tell me the key issues that were left unresolved
• Tell me what questions were asked
• Create Your Own Custom Prompts

A modal will pop up so you can use the suggested prompts we shared above to instantly and magically get your answers.

If you have your own prompts you want to create, select "Custom Prompt" from the dropdown and another text box will open where you can ask anything you want of your data!

Step 9: Review & Share Responses

Speak will generate a concise response for you in a text box below the prompt selection dropdown.

In this example, we ask to analyze all the Interview Data in the folder at once for the top product dissatisfiers.

You can easily copy that response for your presentations, content, emails, team members and more!

Speak Magic Prompts As ChatGPT For Research Data Pricing

Our team at Speak Ai continues to optimize the pricing for Magic Prompts and Speak as a whole.

Right now, anyone in the 7-day trial of Speak gets 100,000 characters included in their account.

If you need more characters, you can easily include Speak Magic Prompts in your plan when you create a subscription.

You can also upgrade the number of characters in your account if you already have a subscription.

Both options are available on the subscription page .

Alternatively, you can use Speak Magic Prompts by adding a balance to your account. The balance will be used as you analyze characters.

Completely Personalize Your Plan 📝

Here at Speak, we've made it incredibly easy to personalize your subscription.

Once you sign-up, just visit our custom plan builder and select the media volume, team size, and features you want to get a plan that fits your needs.

No more rigid plans. Upgrade, downgrade or cancel at any time.

Claim Your Special Offer 🎁

When you subscribe, you will also get a free premium add-on for three months!

That means you save up to $50 USD per month and $150 USD in total.

Once you subscribe to a plan, all you have to do is send us a live chat with your selected premium add-on from the list below:

• Premium Export Options (Word, CSV & More)
• Custom Categories & Insights
• Bulk Editing & Data Organization
• Recorder Customization (Branding, Input & More)
• Media Player Customization
• Shareable Media Libraries

We will put the add-on live in your account free of charge!

What are you waiting for?

Refer Others & Earn Real Money 💸

If you have friends, peers and followers interested in using our platform, you can earn real monthly money.

You will get paid a percentage of all sales whether the customers you refer to pay for a plan, automatically transcribe media or leverage professional transcription services.

Use this link to become an official Speak affiliate.

Check Out Our Dedicated Resources📚

• Speak Ai YouTube Channel
• Guide To Building Your Perfect Speak Plan

Book A Free Implementation Session 🤝

It would be an honour to personally jump on an introductory call with you to make sure you are set up for success.

Just use our Calendly link to find a time that works well for you. We look forward to meeting you!

Easily and instantly transcribe your video-to-text with our AI video-to-text converter software. Then automatically analyze your converted video file with leading artificial intelligence through a simple AI chat interface.

Get a 7-day fully-featured trial of Speak! No card required.

Trusted by 150,000+ incredible people and teams

Save 80% & more of your time and costs!

Use Speak's powerful AI to transcribe, analyze, automate and produce incredible insights for you and your team.

Using narrative analysis in qualitative research

Last updated

7 March 2023

Reviewed by

Jean Kaluza

Short on time? Get an AI generated summary of this article instead

After spending considerable time and effort interviewing persons for research, you want to ensure you get the most out of the data you gathered. One method that gives you an excellent opportunity to connect with your data on a very human and personal level is a narrative analysis in qualitative research. 

Master narrative analysis

Analyze your qualitative data faster and surface more actionable insights

• What is narrative analysis?

Narrative analysis is a type of qualitative data analysis that focuses on interpreting the core narratives from a study group's personal stories. Using first-person narrative, data is acquired and organized to allow the researcher to understand how the individuals experienced something. 

Instead of focusing on just the actual words used during an interview, the narrative analysis also allows for a compilation of data on how the person expressed themselves, what language they used when describing a particular event or feeling, and the thoughts and motivations they experienced. A narrative analysis will also consider how the research participants constructed their narratives.

From the interview to coding , you should strive to keep the entire individual narrative together, so that the information shared during the interview remains intact.

Is narrative analysis qualitative or quantitative?

Narrative analysis is a qualitative research method.

Is narrative analysis a method or methodology?

A method describes the tools or processes used to understand your data; methodology describes the overall framework used to support the methods chosen. By this definition, narrative analysis can be both a method used to understand data and a methodology appropriate for approaching data that comes primarily from first-person stories.

• Do you need to perform narrative research to conduct a narrative analysis?

A narrative analysis will give the best answers about the data if you begin with conducting narrative research. Narrative research explores an entire story with a research participant to understand their personal story.

What are the characteristics of narrative research?

Narrative research always includes data from individuals that tell the story of their experiences. This is captured using loosely structured interviews . These can be a single interview or a series of long interviews over a period of time. Narrative research focuses on the construct and expressions of the story as experienced by the research participant.

• Examples of types of narratives

Narrative data is based on narratives. Your data may include the entire life story or a complete personal narrative, giving a comprehensive account of someone's life, depending on the researched subject. Alternatively, a topical story can provide context around one specific moment in the research participant's life. 

Personal narratives can be single or multiple sessions, encompassing more than topical stories but not entire life stories of the individuals.

• What is the objective of narrative analysis?

The narrative analysis seeks to organize the overall experience of a group of research participants' stories. The goal is to turn people's individual narratives into data that can be coded and organized so that researchers can easily understand the impact of a certain event, feeling, or decision on the involved persons. At the end of a narrative analysis, researchers can identify certain core narratives that capture the human experience.

What is the difference between content analysis and narrative analysis?

Content analysis is a research method that determines how often certain words, concepts, or themes appear inside a sampling of qualitative data . The narrative analysis focuses on the overall story and organizing the constructs and features of a narrative.

Free AI content analysis generator

Make sense of your research by automatically summarizing key takeaways through our free content analysis tool.

What is the difference between narrative analysis and case study in qualitative research?

A case study focuses on one particular event. A narrative analysis draws from a larger amount of data surrounding the entire narrative, including the thoughts that led up to a decision and the personal conclusion of the research participant. 

A case study, therefore, is any specific topic studied in depth, whereas narrative analysis explores single or multi-faceted experiences across time. ​​

What is the difference between narrative analysis and thematic analysis?

A thematic analysis will appear as researchers review the available qualitative data and note any recurring themes. Unlike narrative analysis, which describes an entire method of evaluating data to find a conclusion, a thematic analysis only describes reviewing and categorizing the data.

• Capturing narrative data

Because narrative data relies heavily on allowing a research participant to describe their experience, it is best to allow for a less structured interview. Allowing the participant to explore tangents or analyze their personal narrative will result in more complete data. 

When collecting narrative data, always allow the participant the time and space needed to complete their narrative.

• Methods of transcribing narrative data

A narrative analysis requires that the researchers have access to the entire verbatim narrative of the participant, including not just the word they use but the pauses, the verbal tics, and verbal crutches, such as "um" and "hmm." 

As the entire way the story is expressed is part of the data, a verbatim transcription should be created before attempting to code the narrative analysis.

Video and audio transcription templates

• How to code narrative analysis

Coding narrative analysis has two natural start points, either using a deductive coding system or an inductive coding system. Regardless of your chosen method, it's crucial not to lose valuable data during the organization process.

When coding, expect to see more information in the code snippets.

• Types of narrative analysis

After coding is complete, you should expect your data to look like large blocks of text organized by the parts of the story. You will also see where individual narratives compare and diverge.

Inductive method

Using an inductive narrative method treats the entire narrative as one datum or one set of information. An inductive narrative method will encourage the research participant to organize their own story. 

To make sense of how a story begins and ends, you must rely on cues from the participant. These may take the form of entrance and exit talks. 

Participants may not always provide clear indicators of where their narratives start and end. However, you can anticipate that their stories will contain elements of a beginning, middle, and end. By analyzing these components through coding, you can identify emerging patterns in the data.

Taking cues from entrance and exit talk

Entrance talk is when the participant begins a particular set of narratives. You may hear expressions such as, "I remember when…," "It first occurred to me when…," or "Here's an example…."

Exit talk allows you to see when the story is wrapping up, and you might expect to hear a phrase like, "…and that's how we decided", "after that, we moved on," or "that's pretty much it."

Deductive method

Regardless of your chosen method, using a deductive method can help preserve the overall storyline while coding. Starting with a deductive method allows for the separation of narrative pieces without compromising the story's integrity.

Hybrid inductive and deductive narrative analysis

Using both methods together gives you a comprehensive understanding of the data. You can start by coding the entire story using the inductive method. Then, you can better analyze and interpret the data by applying deductive codes to individual parts of the story.

• How to analyze data after coding using narrative analysis

A narrative analysis aims to take all relevant interviews and organize them down to a few core narratives. After reviewing the coding, these core narratives may appear through a repeated moment of decision occurring before the climax or a key feeling that affected the participant's outcome.

You may see these core narratives diverge early on, or you may learn that a particular moment after introspection reveals the core narrative for each participant. Either way, researchers can now quickly express and understand the data you acquired.

• A step-by-step approach to narrative analysis and finding core narratives

Narrative analysis may look slightly different to each research group, but we will walk through the process using the Delve method for this article.

Step 1 – Code narrative blocks

Organize your narrative blocks using inductive coding to organize stories by a life event.

Example: Narrative interviews are conducted with homeowners asking them to describe how they bought their first home.

Step 2 – Group and read by live-event

You begin your data analysis by reading through each of the narratives coded with the same life event.

Example: You read through each homeowner's experience of buying their first home and notice that some common themes begin to appear, such as "we were tired of renting," "our family expanded to the point that we needed a larger space," and "we had finally saved enough for a downpayment."

Step 3 – Create a nested story structure

As these common narratives develop throughout the participant's interviews, create and nest code according to your narrative analysis framework. Use your coding to break down the narrative into pieces that can be analyzed together.

Example: During your interviews, you find that the beginning of the narrative usually includes the pressures faced before buying a home that pushes the research participants to consider homeownership. The middle of the narrative often includes challenges that come up during the decision-making process. The end of the narrative usually includes perspectives about the excitement, stress, or consequences of home ownership that has finally taken place. 

Step 4 – Delve into the story structure

Once the narratives are organized into their pieces, you begin to notice how participants structure their own stories and where similarities and differences emerge.

Example: You find in your research that many people who choose to buy homes had the desire to buy a home before their circumstances allowed them to. You notice that almost all the stories begin with the feeling of some sort of outside pressure.

Step 5 – Compare across story structure

While breaking down narratives into smaller pieces is necessary for analysis, it's important not to lose sight of the overall story. To keep the big picture in mind, take breaks to step back and reread the entire narrative of a code block. This will help you remember how participants expressed themselves and ensure that the core narrative remains the focus of the analysis.

Example: By carefully examining the similarities across the beginnings of participants' narratives, you find the similarities in pressures. Considering the overall narrative, you notice how these pressures lead to similar decisions despite the challenges faced. 

Divergence in feelings towards homeownership can be linked to positive or negative pressures. Individuals who received positive pressure, such as family support or excitement, may view homeownership more favorably. Meanwhile, negative pressures like high rent or peer pressure may cause individuals to have a more negative attitude toward homeownership.

These factors can contribute to the initial divergence in feelings towards homeownership.

Step 6 – Tell the core narrative

After carefully analyzing the data, you have found how the narratives relate and diverge. You may be able to create a theory about why the narratives diverge and can create one or two core narratives that explain the way the story was experienced.

Example: You can now construct a core narrative on how a person's initial feelings toward buying a house affect their feelings after purchasing and living in their first home.

Narrative analysis in qualitative research is an invaluable tool to understand how people's stories and ability to self-narrate reflect the human experience. Qualitative data analysis can be improved through coding and organizing complete narratives. By doing so, researchers can conclude how humans process and move through decisions and life events.

Learn more about qualitative transcription software

Should you be using a customer insights hub.

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 6 February 2023

Last updated: 6 October 2023

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 April 2023

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next.

Users report unexpectedly high data usage, especially during streaming sessions.

Users find it hard to navigate from the home page to relevant playlists in the app.

It would be great to have a sleep timer feature, especially for bedtime listening.

I need better filters to find the songs or artists I’m looking for.

Log in or sign up

Get started for free

Qualitative Research in Corporate Communication

A blogs@baruch site, chapter 4: five qualitative approaches to inquiry.

In this chapter Creswell guides novice researchers (us) as we work through the early stages of selecting a qualitative research approach. The text outlines the origins, uses, features, procedures and potential challenges of each approach and provides a great overview. Why identify our approach to qualitative inquiry now? To offer a way of organizing our ideas and to ground them in the scholarly literature (69). The author includes a chart on page 104 that provides a convenient comparison of major features.

The 5 approaches are NARRATIVE RESEARCH, PHENOMENOLOGY, GROUNDED RESEARCH, ETHNOGRAPHY, and CASE STUDY.

NARRATIVE RESEARCH

In contrast to the other approaches, narrative can be a research method or an area of study in and of itself. Creswell focuses on the former, and defines it as a study of experiences “as expressed in lived and told stories of individuals” (70). This approach emerged out of a literary, storytelling tradition and has been used in many social science disciplines.

Narrative researchers collect stories, documents, and group conversations about the lived and told experiences of one or two individuals. They record the stories using interview, observation, documents and images and then report the experiences and chronologically order the meaning of those experiences. Other defining features are available on p. 72.

These are the primary types of narrative:

• Biographical study, writing and recording the experiences of another person’s life.
• Autoethnography, in which the writing and recording is done by the subject of the study (e.g., in a journal).
• Life history, portraying one person’s entire life.
• Oral history, reflections of events, their causes and effects.

For all of the research approaches, Creswell first recommends determining if the particular approach is an appropriate tool for your research question. In this case, narrative research methodology doesn’t follow a rigid process but is described as informal gathering of data.

The author provides recommendations for methodologies on pps 74-76 and introduces two interesting concepts unique to narrative research: 1) Restorying is the process of gathering stories, analyzing them for key elements, then rewriting (restorying) to position them within a chronological sequence. 2) Creswell describes a collaboration that occurs between participants and researchers during the collection of stories in which both gain valuable life insight as a result of the process.

Narrative research involves collecting extensive information from participants; this is its primary challenge. But ethical issues surrounding the stories may present weightier difficulties, such as questions of the story’s ownership, how to handle varied impressions of its veracity, and managing conflicting information. For further reading on the activities of narrative researchers Creswell recommends Clandinin and Connelly’s Narrative Inquiry (2000).

PHENOMENOLOGY

Phenomenology is a way to study an idea or concept that holds a common meaning for a small group (3-15) of individuals. The approach centers around lived experiences of a particular phenomenon, such as grief, and guides researchers to distill individual experiences to an essential concept. Phenomenological research generally hones in on a single concept or idea in a narrow setting such as “professional growth” or “caring relationship.”

The evolution of phenomenology from its philosophical roots with Heidegger’s and Sartre’s writing often emerges in current researchers’ exploration of the ideas (77). In contrast to the other four approaches, phenomenology’s tradition is important for establishing themes in the data. In addition to its relationship to philosophy, another key phenomenology feature is bracketing, a process by which the researcher identifies and sets aside any personal experience with the phenomena under study (78).

Phenomenology has two main subsets. Hermeneutic, by which a researcher first follows his/her own abiding concern or interest in a phenomenon; then reflects upon the essential themes that constitute the nature of this lived experience; describex the phenomenon; crafts an interpretation and finally mediates the different resultant meanings. The second type, transcendental, is more empirical and focused on a data analysis method outlined on page 80.

Cresswell favors a systematic methodology outlined by Moustakas (1994) in which participants are asked two broad, general questions: 1) What have you experienced in terms of the phenomenon? 2) What context of situations have typically influenced your experiences of the phenomenon? For some researchers, the author believes phenomenology may be too structured. He also mentions the additional challenge of identifying a sample of participants who share the same phenomenon experience.

Creswell recommends two sources for further reading on phenomenology: Moustakas’s Phenomenological Research Methods (1994) and van Manen’s Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy (1990).

GROUNDED THEORY RESEARCH

Grounded theory seeks to generate or discover a theory-a general explanation– for a social process, action or interaction shaped by the views of participants (p. 83). One key factor in grounded theory is that it does not come “off the shelf” but is “grounded” from data collected from a large sample. Creswell recommends an approach to this qualitative research prescribed by Corbin & Strauss (2007).

The author describes several defining features of grounded theory research (85). The first is that it focuses on a process or actions that has “movement” over time. Two examples of processes provided include the development of a general education program or “supporting faculty become good researchers.” An important aspect of data collection in this research is “memoing.” In which the researcher “writes down ideas as data are collected and analyzed,” usually from interviews.

Data collection is best be described as a “zigzag” process of going out to the field to gather information and then back to the office to analyze it and back out to the field. The author discusses various ways of coding the information into major categories of information (p. 86).

Another approach to grounded theory is that of Charmaz (2006). Creswell notes that Charmaz “places more emphasis on the views, values, belief, feelings, assumptions and ideologies of individuals than on the methods of research.” (p. 87)

The author states that this is a good design to use when there isn’t a theory available to “explain or understand a process.” (p. 88). Creswell further notes that the research question will focus on “understanding how individuals experience the process and identify steps in the process” that can often involve 20 to 60 interviews.

Some challenges in using this design is that the researcher must set aside “theoretical ideas or notions so that the analytic, substantive theory can emerge.” (p. 89) It is also important that the researcher understand that the primary outcome of this research is a “theory with specific components: a central phenomenon, causal conditions, strategies, conditions and context, and consequences,” according to Corbin & Strauss’ (p. 90). However, if a researcher wants a less structured approach the Charmaz (2006) method is recommended.

ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH

Ethnography is a qualitative research design in which the unit of analysis is typically greater than 20 participants and focuses on an “entire culture-sharing group.” (Harris, 1968). In this approach, the “research describes and interprets the shared and learned patterns of values, behaviors, beliefs, and language” of the group. The method involves extended observations through “participant observation, in which the researcher is immersed in the day-to-day lives of the people and observes and interviews the group participants.” (p. 90).

Creswell notes that there is a lack of orthodoxy in ethnographic research with many pluralistic approaches. He lists a number of other researchers (p.91) but states that he draws on Fetterman’s (2009) and Wolcott’s (2008a) approaches in this text.

Some defining features of ethnographic research are listed on pages 91 and 92. They include that: it “focuses on developing a complex, complete description of the culture of a group, a culture-sharing group;” that ethnography however “is not the study of a culture, but a study of the social behaviors of an identifiable group of people;” that the group “has been intact and interacting for long enough to develop discernable working patterns,” and that ethnographers start with a theory drawn from “cognitive science to understand belief and ideas” or materialist theories (Marxism, acculturation, innovation, etc.)

Some types of ethnographies include “confessional ethnography, life history, autoethnography, feminist ethnography, visual ethnography,”etc., however, Creswell emphasizes two popular forms. The first is the realist ethnography-used by cultural anthropologists, it is “an objective account of a situation, typically written in the third-person point of view and reporting objectively on the information learned from participants.” (p. 93). The second is the critical ethnography in which the author advocates for groups marginalized in society (Thomas, 1993). This type of research is typically conducted by “politically minded individuals who seek through their research, to speak out against inequality and domination” (Carspecken & Apple, 1992). (p. 94).

The procedures for conducting an ethnography are listed on p. 94-96. One key element in these procedures is the gathering of information where the group works or lives through fieldwork (Wolcott, 2008a); and respecting the daily lives of these individuals at the site of study. Some key challenges in this type of research are that one must have an “understanding of cultural anthropology, the meaning of a social-cultural system, and the concepts typically explored by those studying cultures. Also, data collection requires a lot of time on the field. (p. 96)

CASE STUDY RESEARCH

In case study research, defined as the “the study of a case within a real-life contemporary context or setting” Creswell takes the perspective that such research “is a methodology: a type of design in qualitative research that may be an object of study, as well as a product of inquiry.” Further, case studies have bounded systems, are detailed and use multiple sources of information (p. 97). Creswell references the work of Stake (1995) and Yin (2009) because of their systematic handling of the subject.

The author draws attention to several features of the case study approach, but emphasizes a critical element “is to define a case that can be bounded or described within certain parameters, such as a specific place and time.” Other components of the research method include its intent-which may take the form of intrinsic case study or instrumental case study (p. 98); its reliance on in-depth understanding; and its utilization of case descriptions, themes or specific situations. Finally, researchers typically conclude case studies with “assertions” from their learning (p. 99).

The text touches on several types of case studies that can be differentiated by size, activity or intent and that can involve single or multiple cases (p.99). In instances of collective case study design where the researcher may use multiple case studies to examine one issue, the text recommends Yin (2009) logic of replication be used. Creswell goes on to point out that if the researcher wishes to generalize from findings, care needs to be taken to select representative cases. This could be useful, time-saving information for class members considering this method.

In outlining procedures for conducting a case study (p.100), Creswell recommends “that investigators first consider what type of case study is most promising and useful” and advocates cases that show different perspectives on a problem, process or event.” Data analysis can be holistic (considering the entire case) or embedded (using specific aspects of the case).

Some of the challenges of case study research are determining the scope of the research and deciding on the bounded system and determining whether to study the case itself or how the case illustrates an issue. In the instance of multiple cases, the author makes the somewhat counter intuitive assertion that “the study of more than one case dilutes the overall analysis” (p. 101).

THE FIVE APPROACHES COMPARED

Creswell gives an overview of the commonality of the five research methods (p. 102) before explaining key differences among more similar seeming types of research, e.g. narrative research, ethnography. Here the author underlines that “the types of data one would collect and analyze would differ considerably.” He uses the example of the study of a single individual to make his argument, recommending narrative research instead of ethnography, which has a broader scope and case study, which may involve multiple cases.

In considering differences, Creswell puts forth that the research methods accomplish divergent goals, have different origins and employ distinct methods of analyzing data – the author underlines the data analysis stage as being the most exaggerated point of difference (p. 103). The final product, “the result of each approach, the written report, takes shape from all the processes before it.

In Table 4.1 (p. 104) Creswell provides a framework table that contrasts the characteristics of the five qualitative approaches. Given its stated suitability for both “journal-article length study” and dissertation or book-length work, class members may find it a handy reference for the mini study assignment and beyond.

Tricia Chambers, Eric Lugo, Kathryn Lineberger

8 thoughts on “ CHAPTER 4: Five Qualitative Approaches to Inquiry ”

I plan to use Narrative Research in my paper. It would be nice if I can know some recording skills of group conversation. I agree, Hui! There were none detailed in this chapter though. ~KL Haha, guess I can get some from google then.

For the mini-study, I’m hoping to use narrative research. Initially, I was planning on it as well as content analysis for my thesis in the fall, but after reading this chapter, I have some more work to do! Phenomenology or grounded theory might be better suited for what I want to accomplish. Needless to say, this chapter review got me thinking!

It seems to me that my area of interest might be carried out best with an ethnographic study. Since I want to look at communicators in the performing arts industry, I think that fits the description of a culture sharing group. The method also seems to fit what I would hope to do for my study, observe participants in their workplace and conduct interviews.

However, I would like to look more into the idea of overlapping approaches because I think it would also be interesting to look at specific PR campaigns or marketing campaigns carried out by my participants and this would likely fall under the case-study approach.

This chapter is definitely most useful for the initial phase of the research paper. For my research, I want to look into understanding consumer behavior and specific aspects of a company’s behavior/marketing tactics (maybe CSR) that affects its brand perception (using Dole Food Company). In taking this direction for my study, I think I’m stuck somewhere between phenomenology or ethnographic research.

I think my research might align more with phenomenography, because I don’t know if I’ll exactly be looking into any specific subcultures as ethnographic research does.

This chapter definitely got me thinking about what I’d like to accomplish with my mini-study and later on my thesis. What I’ve been exposed to the most in the corporate communications program are case studies because they’re part of learning. Logically it seems that Phenomenology or Ethnographic research is where my research idea will lead me, but I’m still in the phase of getting a refined research question of out my bigger ideas. At least now I know the routes I can go.

I would like to know if the five categories of the attributes related to illness representation were defined through the research, or beforehand? You mention the researchers were able to use these attributes to formulate their hypothesis and I was wondering if it was defined by them then how would this effect results because I think I want to define some factors myself, but I don’t want to introduce any bias? Should I even worry about this?

Hi Sheena, you might ask the Chapter 5 team about this. ~KL

That was a great break down of the different types of studies presented in the book. This was very helpful to me as I was unsure of what type of study I was going to do, but after reading this summary I have a much better idea. I want to study putting loved ones in a nursing home versus seeking out home-based alternatives, and I think a phenomenological study is where I am leaning towards.

I feel strongly pulled to the phenomenological framework, even though it’s definition is causing me the most confusion! I Anti-corporate sentiment is a human experience, and I think it would be interesting to find a small group of anarchists or anti-capitalists or just young people who participated in the Occupy movement and understand their concept of this phenomena.

I will need to determine whether a phenomenological study allows for methods interpretation outside interviews or focus groups. I feel that much of what I am studying is a phenomenon perpetuated by the media, and I would like to incorporate content analysis and document research into my analysis.

Comments are closed.

Case Study and Narrative Inquiry as Merged Methodologies: A Critical Narrative Perspective

• 19(2):160940692093788

• University of Cape Town

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Saima Zubair

• Duncan Shaw

• Erika Åberg
• Edith Hernández

• Aaron Smith
• Soyhan Egitim

• Pierre Bourdieu
• PIERRE BOURDIEU

• F. Michael Connelly
• Paulo Freire
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Narrative Analysis 101

Everything you need to know to get started

By: Ethar Al-Saraf (PhD)| Expert Reviewed By: Eunice Rautenbach (DTech) | March 2023

If you’re new to research, the host of qualitative analysis methods available to you can be a little overwhelming. In this post, we’ll  unpack the sometimes slippery topic of narrative analysis . We’ll explain what it is, consider its strengths and weaknesses , and look at when and when not to use this analysis method. 

Overview: Narrative Analysis

• What is narrative analysis (simple definition)
• The two overarching approaches  
• The strengths & weaknesses of narrative analysis
• When (and when not) to use it
• Key takeaways

What Is Narrative Analysis?

Simply put, narrative analysis is a qualitative analysis method focused on interpreting human experiences and motivations by looking closely at the stories (the narratives) people tell in a particular context.

In other words, a narrative analysis interprets long-form participant responses or written stories as data, to uncover themes and meanings . That data could be taken from interviews, monologues, written stories, or even recordings. In other words, narrative analysis can be used on both primary and secondary data to provide evidence from the experiences described.

That’s all quite conceptual, so let’s look at an example of how narrative analysis could be used.

Let’s say you’re interested in researching the beliefs of a particular author on popular culture. In that case, you might identify the characters , plotlines , symbols and motifs used in their stories. You could then use narrative analysis to analyse these in combination and against the backdrop of the relevant context.

This would allow you to interpret the underlying meanings and implications in their writing, and what they reveal about the beliefs of the author. In other words, you’d look to understand the views of the author by analysing the narratives that run through their work.

The Two Overarching Approaches

Generally speaking, there are two approaches that one can take to narrative analysis. Specifically, an inductive approach or a deductive approach. Each one will have a meaningful impact on how you interpret your data and the conclusions you can draw, so it’s important that you understand the difference.

First up is the inductive approach to narrative analysis.

The inductive approach takes a bottom-up view , allowing the data to speak for itself, without the influence of any preconceived notions . With this approach, you begin by looking at the data and deriving patterns and themes that can be used to explain the story, as opposed to viewing the data through the lens of pre-existing hypotheses, theories or frameworks. In other words, the analysis is led by the data.

For example, with an inductive approach, you might notice patterns or themes in the way an author presents their characters or develops their plot. You’d then observe these patterns, develop an interpretation of what they might reveal in the context of the story, and draw conclusions relative to the aims of your research.

Contrasted to this is the deductive approach.

With the deductive approach to narrative analysis, you begin by using existing theories that a narrative can be tested against . Here, the analysis adopts particular theoretical assumptions and/or provides hypotheses, and then looks for evidence in a story that will either verify or disprove them.

For example, your analysis might begin with a theory that wealthy authors only tell stories to get the sympathy of their readers. A deductive analysis might then look at the narratives of wealthy authors for evidence that will substantiate (or refute) the theory and then draw conclusions about its accuracy, and suggest explanations for why that might or might not be the case.

Which approach you should take depends on your research aims, objectives and research questions . If these are more exploratory in nature, you’ll likely take an inductive approach. Conversely, if they are more confirmatory in nature, you’ll likely opt for the deductive approach.

Need a helping hand?

Strengths & Weaknesses

Now that we have a clearer view of what narrative analysis is and the two approaches to it, it’s important to understand its strengths and weaknesses , so that you can make the right choices in your research project.

A primary strength of narrative analysis is the rich insight it can generate by uncovering the underlying meanings and interpretations of human experience. The focus on an individual narrative highlights the nuances and complexities of their experience, revealing details that might be missed or considered insignificant by other methods.

Another strength of narrative analysis is the range of topics it can be used for. The focus on human experience means that a narrative analysis can democratise your data analysis, by revealing the value of individuals’ own interpretation of their experience in contrast to broader social, cultural, and political factors.

All that said, just like all analysis methods, narrative analysis has its weaknesses. It’s important to understand these so that you can choose the most appropriate method for your particular research project.

The first drawback of narrative analysis is the problem of subjectivity and interpretation . In other words, a drawback of the focus on stories and their details is that they’re open to being understood differently depending on who’s reading them. This means that a strong understanding of the author’s cultural context is crucial to developing your interpretation of the data. At the same time, it’s important that you remain open-minded in how you interpret your chosen narrative and avoid making any assumptions .

A second weakness of narrative analysis is the issue of reliability and generalisation . Since narrative analysis depends almost entirely on a subjective narrative and your interpretation, the findings and conclusions can’t usually be generalised or empirically verified. Although some conclusions can be drawn about the cultural context, they’re still based on what will almost always be anecdotal data and not suitable for the basis of a theory, for example.

Last but not least, the focus on long-form data expressed as stories means that narrative analysis can be very time-consuming . In addition to the source data itself, you will have to be well informed on the author’s cultural context as well as other interpretations of the narrative, where possible, to ensure you have a holistic view. So, if you’re going to undertake narrative analysis, make sure that you allocate a generous amount of time to work through the data.

When To Use Narrative Analysis

As a qualitative method focused on analysing and interpreting narratives describing human experiences, narrative analysis is usually most appropriate for research topics focused on social, personal, cultural , or even ideological events or phenomena and how they’re understood at an individual level.

For example, if you were interested in understanding the experiences and beliefs of individuals suffering social marginalisation, you could use narrative analysis to look at the narratives and stories told by people in marginalised groups to identify patterns , symbols , or motifs that shed light on how they rationalise their experiences.

In this example, narrative analysis presents a good natural fit as it’s focused on analysing people’s stories to understand their views and beliefs at an individual level. Conversely, if your research was geared towards understanding broader themes and patterns regarding an event or phenomena, analysis methods such as content analysis or thematic analysis may be better suited, depending on your research aim .

Let’s recap

In this post, we’ve explored the basics of narrative analysis in qualitative research. The key takeaways are:

• Narrative analysis is a qualitative analysis method focused on interpreting human experience in the form of stories or narratives .
• There are two overarching approaches to narrative analysis: the inductive (exploratory) approach and the deductive (confirmatory) approach.
• Like all analysis methods, narrative analysis has a particular set of strengths and weaknesses .
• Narrative analysis is generally most appropriate for research focused on interpreting individual, human experiences as expressed in detailed , long-form accounts.

If you’d like to learn more about narrative analysis and qualitative analysis methods in general, be sure to check out the rest of the Grad Coach blog here . Alternatively, if you’re looking for hands-on help with your project, take a look at our 1-on-1 private coaching service .

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

Thanks. I need examples of narrative analysis

Here are some examples of research topics that could utilise narrative analysis:

Personal Narratives of Trauma: Analysing personal stories of individuals who have experienced trauma to understand the impact, coping mechanisms, and healing processes.

Identity Formation in Immigrant Communities: Examining the narratives of immigrants to explore how they construct and negotiate their identities in a new cultural context.

Media Representations of Gender: Analysing narratives in media texts (such as films, television shows, or advertisements) to investigate the portrayal of gender roles, stereotypes, and power dynamics.

Where can I find an example of a narrative analysis table ?

Please i need help with my project,

how can I cite this article in APA 7th style?

please mention the sources as well.

My research is mixed approach. I use interview,key_inforamt interview,FGD and document.so,which qualitative analysis is appropriate to analyze these data.Thanks

Which qualitative analysis methode is appropriate to analyze data obtain from intetview,key informant intetview,Focus group discussion and document.

I’ve finished my PhD. Now I need a “platform” that will help me objectively ascertain the tacit assumptions that are buried within a narrative. Can you help?

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Narrative Analysis: Methods and Examples

Narrative analysis is a powerful qualitative research tool. Narrative research can uncover behaviors, feelings and motivations that aren’t expressed explicitly….

Narrative analysis is a powerful qualitative research tool. Narrative research can uncover behaviors, feelings and motivations that aren’t expressed explicitly. It also provides rich linguistic data that may shed light on various aspects of cultural or social phenomena.

Narrative analysis provides researchers with detailed information about their subjects that they couldn’t get through other methods. Narrative analysis in qualitative research reveals hidden motivations that aren’t easy to perceive directly. This is especially true in research conducted with cultural subjects where the researcher must peel the many layers of a culture.

Let’s look at how narrative research is performed, what it can tell us about the subject, and some examples of narrative research.

What Is Narrative Research?

Examples of narrative research, difference between narrative analysis and case study, analyzing results in the narrative method.

Narrative analysis is a form of qualitative research in which the researcher focuses on a topic and analyzes the data collected from case studies, surveys, observations or other similar methods. The researchers write their findings, then review and analyze them.

To conduct narrative analysis, researchers must understand the background, setting, social and cultural context of the research subjects. This gives researchers a better idea of what their subjects mean in their narration. It’s especially true in context-rich research where there are many hidden layers of meaning that can only be uncovered by an in-depth understanding of the culture or environment.

Before starting narrative research, researchers need to know as much about their research subjects as possible. They interview key informants and collect large amounts of text from them. They even use other sources, such as existing literature and personal recollections.

From this large base of information, researchers choose a few instances they feel are good examples of what they want to talk about and then analyze them in depth.

Through this approach, researchers can gain a holistic view of the subject’s life and activities. It can show what motivates people and provide a better view of the society that the subjects live in by enabling researchers to see how individuals interact with one another.

• It’s been used by researchers to study indigenous peoples of various countries, such as the Maori in New Zealand.
• It can be used in medicine. Researchers, for instance, can study how doctors communicate with their patients during end-of-life care.
• The narrative model has been used to explore the relationship between music and social change in East Africa.
• Narrative research is being used to explore the differences in emotions experienced by different generations in Japanese society.

Through these examples of narrative research, we can see its nature and how it fills a gap left by other research methods.

Many people confuse narrative analysis in qualitative research with case studies. Here are some key differences between the two:

• A case study examines one context in depth, whereas narrative research explores how a subject has acted in various contexts across time
• Case studies are often longer and more detailed, but they rarely provide an overview of the subject’s life or experiences
• Narrative analysis implies that researchers are observing several instances that encompass the subject’s life, which is why it provides a richer view of things

Both tools can give similar results, but there are some differences that lead researchers to choose one or the other or, perhaps, even both in their research design.

Once the narratives have been collected, researchers notice certain patterns and themes emerging as they read and analyze the text. They note these down, compare them with other research on the subject, figure out how it all fits together and then find a theory that can explain these findings.

Many social scientists have used narrative research as a valuable tool to analyze their concepts and theories. This is mainly because narrative analysis is a more thorough and multifaceted method. It helps researchers not only build a deeper understanding of their subject, but also helps them figure out why people act and react as they do.

Storytelling is a central feature of narrative research. The narrative interview is an interactive conversation. This process can be very intimate and sometimes bring about powerful emotions from both parties. Therefore, this form of qualitative research isn’t suitable for everyone. The interviewer needs to be a good listener and must understand the interview process. The interviewee also needs to be comfortable to be able to provide authentic narratives.

Understanding what kind of research to use is a powerful tool for a manager. We can use narrative analysis in many ways. Narrative research is a multifaceted method that has the potential to show different results based on the researcher’s intentions for their study.

Learning how to use such tools will improve the productivity of teams. Harappa’s Thinking Critically course will show you the way. Learners will understand how to better process information and consider different perspectives in their analysis, which will allow for better-informed decision making. Our faculty will provide real-world insights to ensure an impactful learning experience that takes professionals at every stage of their careers to the next level.

Explore Harappa Diaries to learn more about topics such as Phenomenological Research , Types Of Survey Research , Examples Of Correlational Research and Tips to Improve your Analytical Skills to upgrade your knowledge and skills.

Last updated 2nd August 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. As we resolve the issues resulting from this, we are also experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > The Case for Case Studies
• > Analytic Narratives and Case Studies

Book contents

• The Case for Case Studies
• Strategies for Social Inquiry
• Copyright page
• Contributors
• Preface and Acknowledgments
• 1 Using Case Studies to Enhance the Quality of Explanation and Implementation
• Part I Internal and External Validity Issues in Case Study Research
• Part II Ensuring High-Quality Case Studies
• Part III Putting Case Studies to Work: Applications to Development Practice
• 9 Process Tracing for Program Evaluation
• 10 Positive Deviance Cases: Their Value for Development Research, Policy, and Practice
• 11 Analytic Narratives and Case Studies
• 12 Using Case Studies for Organizational Learning in Development Agencies
• 13 Connecting Case Studies to Policy and Practice

11 - Analytic Narratives and Case Studies

from Part III - Putting Case Studies to Work: Applications to Development Practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2022

Margaret Levi and Barry Weingast focus on a particular type of case in which the subject is an outcome that results from strategic interaction, when one person’s decision depends on what another does. “A weakness of case studies per se is that there typically exist multiple ways to interpret a given case,” they begin. “How are we to know which interpretation makes most sense? What gives us confidence in the particular interpretation offered?” An analytic narrative first elucidates the principal players, their preferences, key decision points and possible choices, and the rules of the game. It then builds a model of the sequence of interaction including predicted outcomes and evaluates the model through comparative statics and the testable implications the mode generates. Most analytic narratives model situations as extensive form games. However, although game theory is useful, there is no hard rule that requires us to formalize. In this kind of case study, the findings do not generalize to other contexts, but instead point to the characteristics of situations to which a similar strategic logic applies.

11.1 Introduction

Analytic narratives ( Reference Bates, Greif, Levi, Rosenthal and Weingast Bates et al., 1998 , Reference Bates, Greif, Levi, Rosenthal and Weingast 2000 ; Reference Levi and Mayntz Levi, 2002 , Reference Levi, Shapiro, Smith and Masoud 2004 ) involve selecting a problem or puzzle, then building a model to explicate the logic of an explanation for the puzzle or problem, often in the context of a unique case. The method involves several steps. First, the use of narrative to elucidate the principal players, their preferences, the key decision points and possible choices, and the rules of game, all in a textured and sequenced account. Second, building a model of the sequence of interaction, including predicted outcomes. And, third, the evaluation of the model through comparative statics and the testable implications the model generates. The analytic narrative approach is most useful to scholars who seek to evaluate the strength of parsimonious causal mechanisms in the context of a specific and often unique case. The requirement of explicit formal theorizing (or at least theory that could be formalized) compels scholars to make causal statements and to identify a small number of variables as central to understanding the case.

Case studies abound in the study of development. A weakness of case studies per se is that there typically exist multiple ways to interpret a given case. How are we to know which interpretation makes most sense? What gives us confidence in the particular interpretation offered? This problem is particularly difficult where the uniqueness of the situation precludes the collection of a data set that encompasses multiple cases. Many scholars augment their case study with a model. The model adds some discipline to the account. For example, observed choices must be consistent with the assumption about preferences in the model. A model is necessary, but not sufficient: that is, a model alone does not an analytic narrative make.

The analytic narrative approach provides a means to help get around these questions. The essence of many cases is unique, including the French Revolution, the American Civil War, or the surprising and quick development of Spain following the death of long-time dictator, Francisco Franco, in 1975. Analytic narratives deal with these cases by building a model that has multiple implications, and then testing an implication of the model that provides the possibility for both confidence in the claims and comparison across cases.

For example, Reference Weingast, Bates, Greif, Levi, Rosenthal and Weingast Weingast’s (1998) case study of the American Civil War builds on a unique feature of American institutions to explain long-term political stability – namely, the “balance rule”: the idea that both Northern free states and Southern slave states would be admitted in pairs, giving each set of states a veto over national policy. This institution fell apart in the 1850s. Weingast tests his account of this failure by using game theory to reveal a path not taken, given the interest calculations of those making choices about what path to take. This enabled him to estimate a counterfactual involving what would have happened had a contingency in the case study not occurred. Thus, the main thesis of the case – the balance rule – is unique and cannot be tested directly, but other implications of the approach can be tested so as to give confidence in the overall account.

A second example addresses the effect on public goods provision of a 2004 decentralization reform in postconflict Sierra Leone ( Reference Clayton, Noveck and Levi Clayton et al. 2015 ). The specificities of most laws are unique; even when the words are replicated, implementation varies across and within countries. In this instance, the narrative reveals the key stakeholders at the local level: elected councilors and paramount chiefs. The interests of the former should lead them to prefer successful implementation, ceteris paribus; but in some localities they conceded to the paramount chiefs, who preferred the status quo. Given other reforms that increased the power of the councilors and reduced that of the chiefs, the question becomes why the councilors deferred. What are the relevant comparative statics? This question produced a series of testable implications. The case, although unique, sheds light on the more general problem of the variation in the impact of decentralization on the delivery of health and education services.

This chapter proceeds as follows. In Section 11.2 , we discuss criteria for case section. Section 11.3 discusses identifying processes and mechanisms, while Section 11.4 discusses the limitations of the approach. In Section 11.5 , we briefly discuss the implications of the approach for the development context. Our take-aways follow.

11.2 Criteria for Case Selection

The analytic narrative approach combines a commitment to rational choice, a deep interest in a particular case, a method for devising a generalizable model of the case, and a means of providing empirical evidence, even in unique cases.

The combination also entails an aim most area specialists lack: to go beyond detailing the case to elaborate more general conditions for the problem or puzzle. This exercise requires criteria for selection of cases other than their intellectual appeal as puzzles demanding solutions. Standard approaches to case selection emphasize the bases for choice among a sample of cases which are informative about the causal chain of interest, because of the absence, presence, or extreme values of key variables. One traditional method advocates pairs of cases that are either “most similar,” hopefully allowing the analyst to identify similar mechanisms in the two cases, or “most different,” hopefully allowing the analyst the ability to isolate a mechanism that accounts for the differences. These traditional methods fail when more than one causal variable is relevant.

Bearing similarities to the analytic narratives approach is process tracing ( Reference George and Bennett George and Bennett 2005 ; Reference Collier Collier 2011 ; Bennett, Chapter 4 , this volume), which shares an emphasis on both sequencing and fine-grained description as means for making causal inferences. Process tracing also shares a concern with generating testable implications, but its emphasis is on key variables rather than the key actors, their interaction, and their strategies. This makes game-theoretic analysis largely irrelevant to process tracing.

Analytic narratives include features that make the cases amenable to modeling, which not all puzzles or problems are. Essential to the model building is the choice of cases in which the key actors interact strategically. That is, the choices of one actor depend on the choices of the other. In addition, analytic narratives consider situations that can be modeled as an extensive-form game, which generates a subgame perfect equilibrium.

Another necessary feature of an analytic narrative is the opportunity to get at an important process or mechanism not easily accessible through other means. For example, the extensive-form game allows the analysis to demonstrate the existence of a self-enforcing institution that often solves an important economic or political problem through creating a credible commitment. The advantage of the game is that it reveals the logic of why, in equilibrium, it is in the interest of the players to fulfill their threats or promises against those who leave the equilibrium path.

The formalization itself is not a requirement of a successful analytic narrative; indeed, in some cases, there are too many actors and no benefit from reducing the multiple players to the small number required for a game-theoretical model. Levi’s case on conscription ( Reference Bates, Greif, Levi, Rosenthal and Weingast Bates et al. 1998 ) illustrates how one can still use the logic of extended form games to assess the strategies and actions – and paths not taken – without formalization. Another example is Reference Ferrara Ferrara’s (2003) analytic narrative of the Burmese uprising in 1988 as a means to understand both a particular historical event and the more general question of the relationship between coercion and protest.

The final expectation of an analytic narrative is that the causal mechanisms and the structures or relationships must be generalizable to other cases under specifiable conditions. We deal with this issue below.

11.3 Identifying Sequence and Mechanisms

Analytics, in this approach, refer to the building of models derived from rational choice, particularly the theory of extensive-form games. Footnote 1 The steps toward building the model include:

First, extracting from the narratives the key actors, their goals, the sequence of options available to an actor at a given moment, and the effective rules that influence actors’ behaviors.

Second, elaborating the strategic interactions that produce an equilibrium that constrains some actions and facilitates others. By making clear and explicit the assumptions about who the key actors and their preferences are, it is possible to challenge the assumptions to produce new insights and competitive interpretations of the data.

Third, the equilibrium analysis leads to comparative static predictions that produce testable implications even if they’re not the main assertion of the case.

We emphasize this third criterion. An important advantage of relying on game theory is that this method often produces comparative statics – that is, predictions about how the equilibrium shifts in response to changes in the exogenous variables. This approach allows the analyst to identify the reasons for the shift from one equilibrium to another. It therefore produces expectations of behaviors in the form of testable implications if the key actors are staying on the equilibrium path and if they are not. A case study that includes a model may involve the first two criteria, but generally not the third. This is especially true for unique cases where it is hard to test the model directly. Both authors have written many case studies of this type. These cases may provide insights, but they are not analytical narratives (see, e.g., Reference Levi Levi 1988 ; Reference Weingast, Morris, Oppenheimer and Soltan Weingast 2004 ). Analytic narratives require testable implications derived from the comparative statics that the narrative helps reveal.

The narrative of analytic narratives establishes the principal players, their goals, and their preferences while also illuminating the effective rules of the game, constraints, and incentives. Narrative is the story being told but as a detailed and textured account of context and process, with concern for sequence, temporality, and key events. By meeting these criteria, the narrative offers a means to arbitrate among possible explanations for observational equivalences – that is, two distinct processes that lead to the same outcome.

Comparative statics are crucial for comparative research because they generate hypotheses of what could have taken place under different conditions. Comparative statics therefore clarify the relationship between the key endogenous and exogenous variables. Moreover, the consideration of “off-the-equilibrium-path” behavior typically reveals reasons and reasoning for why actors took one path and not another. Indeed, what actors believe will happen were they to make a different choice typically influences the choices they do make. As Niall Reference Ferguson Ferguson (1999) observed in his study of the causes of World War I, to understand why Britain entered what would otherwise have been a continental war, we need to know what the British believed would happen had they not entered the war. Another important aspect of the game-theoretic approach is that the off-the-path behavior of an equilibrium disciplines each player’s beliefs, for they must be consistent with all the other player’s strategies (see Reference Weingast, Tetlock and Belkin Weingast 1996 ).

For example, consider the illustrative “deterrence game” in the appendix of Analytic narratives ( Reference Bates, Greif, Levi, Rosenthal and Weingast Bates et al. 1998 ). Two countries interact: the home country and an opponent. The home country maintains a large, expensive army; the opponent does not attack. Is the large army the reason for peace as it deters the opponent from attacking? Or is it a waste of resources because the opponent has no interest in attacking? These two hypotheses are observationally equivalent: both offer explanations for why the opponent does not attack, yet they differ dramatically as to the reason for the observation. Different people have different beliefs that can only be understood contextually:

[T]he observationally equivalent interpretations rest on markedly different theories of behavior. To settle upon an explanation, we must move outside the game and investigate empirical materials. We must determine how the opponent’s beliefs shape their behavior. This blend of strategic reasoning and empirical investigation helps to define the method of analytic narratives.

This approach provides the researcher with some discipline. As the deterrence game illustrates, absent a game and an equilibrium structure, it is possible to posit a wide range of beliefs that motivate action. How do we choose among these different accounts? In the context of a game, beliefs about another player’s actions are part of the equilibrium. Not just any sets of beliefs will work. In the deterrence game, the opponent must have a belief about how the home country will react to an attack; and, in equilibrium, this belief must hold in practice.

This form of explicit theory provides criteria to enable the researcher to distill the narrative and ensure that the explanation need not rely too much on factors outside the model.

11.4 Overcoming the Limits of Analytic Narratives

The analytic narrative approach, at least in its original formulation, had several potential limitations, some recognized by the authors and others revealed by various critiques.

11.4.1 Generalizing

The Achilles’ heel of analytic narratives – as with any approach to case studies – is in the capacity to generalize, given that each narrative represents an effort to account for a particular puzzle in a particular place and time with a model and theory tailored to that situation. Even so, it is possible to use the cases to make some more general points.

Although the approach is not straightforwardly deductive, it nonetheless relies on rational choice, which is a general theory of how structures shape individual choices and, consequently, collective outcomes. Rational choice, particularly in its game-theoretic form, highlights certain properties of the structure and strategic choices that arise. Although the specific game may not be portable, it may yield explanations that can be tested in the form of collective action problems, principal–agent issues, credible commitments, veto points, and the like. Analytic narratives provide a way to suggest the characteristics of situations to which these apply and in what ways. For example, the models of federalism, as initially developed by William Reference Riker Riker (1964) and further developed by Weingast and his collaborators ( Reference Weingast Weingast 1995 ; Reference Weingast Montinola, Qian, and Weingast 1995 ), are useful in explicating a large number of problems in a wide range of countries, including the case Reference Weingast, Bates, Greif, Levi, Rosenthal and Weingast Weingast (1998) addresses in his Analytic narratives chapter.

Moreover, the analytic narrative approach also demands identification of causal mechanisms. A wide range of mechanisms, such as emotions, resentment, and other aspects of behavioral economics, can offer a fine-grained explanation of the link between actions and alternatives ( Reference Elster Elster 1998 , Reference Elster 1999 ). Others have fruitfully made these links in such situations as insurgency in El Salvador ( Reference Wood, Goodwin, Jasper and Polletta Wood 2001 ) and violence in Eastern Europe and the Balkans ( Reference Petersen Petersen 2002 , Reference Petersen 2011 ) while meeting the requirement that they “generate new predictions at the aggregate or structural level” ( Reference Stinchcombe Stinchcombe 1991 : 385).

11.4.2 Surprise, Contingency, and Conjunction

Daniel Reference Carpenter Carpenter’s (2000) critique of Analytic narratives raised several issues that the approach needed to confront to fulfill its promise. Carpenter worried that we narrowed the conceptualization of narrative in a way that was likely to neglect the surprises history offers, the contingencies that affect outcomes, and the conjunctures that make parsimony so difficult. The first and last are easiest to address since nothing about the method precludes either. The approach actually makes it possible to take surprises into account since they often take the form of events that would change comparative static outcomes. Reference de Figueiredo, Rakove and Weingast De Figueiredo, Rakove, and Weingast (2006) illustrate one means by which game-theoretic models can be generalized to encompass surprises. Those American colonists already suspicious of Britain were apt to believe the worst interpretation of any British act and to believe that large-scale rebellion was inevitable. The result was a self-confirming equilibrium to explain the surprise element in the eruption of the American Revolution. Nothing is foreordained by an analytic narrative, which, on the contrary, often reveals factors as significant that we might not otherwise have noted. For example, in Gretchen Reference Helmke Helmke’s (2005) analysis of courts in autocratic regimes, her counterintuitive finding is that a nonindependent judiciary has the power, under certain circumstances, to rule against its government.

Carpenter also raises conjunctural analysis: the idea that multiple, interlacing factors occur at once – say, a war and a depression – so that the causal factors are difficult to disentangle. Reference Carpenter Carpenter’s concern (2000 : 657–658) is that “[i]f one changes the values of two variables at once, or renders the values of one variable dependent on those of another – precisely as historians who rely on conjunctures tend to do – then the embedded independence assumption comes, well, with high costs.” Reference Skocpol Skocpol (2000) and Reference Katznelson and Milner Katznelson and Milner (2002) share Carpenter’s concern.

Conjunctures are a problem for every form of analysis, not just analytic narratives. Moreover, by relying on game theory, analytic narratives may be uniquely suited to addressing conjunctures. By providing a specific model of events, a game-theoretic model helps disentangle conjunctures by potentially making predictions about what would have happened had only one of the conjoining events occurred instead.

Carpenter claims that contingency disappears from the analytic narrative approach because, as he perceives it, there is less likelihood of multiple equilibria – that is, alternative stable states of the world. He goes on to say that “[i]t would have been theoretically appealing for the authors to give examples where history in some way ‘selects’ some equilibria and makes others impossible (kind of like a trembling hand, or stability, or coalition-proofness criterion)” Reference Carpenter Carpenter (2000 , 657).

But this criticism reflects a misreading of the analytic narrative approach. The use of game theory means that in many instances multiple equilibria will arise. Hence, the existence of multiple equilibria is part of the analytic narrative approach even if the case studies in the original volume do not make that evident. Contingency in the form of multiple equilibria is therefore a feature of the approach.

Even when there are clear focal points and strategies, factors in the situation can change unexpectedly. Some contextual changes may have clear and significant consequences, others have butterfly effects, and still others have little or no effect. The narrative is crucial here for sorting out what matters for what. In Rosenthal’s Analytic narratives chapter, the potential birth of a Catholic heir to James II affects the calculations of both monarch and elites, but its importance lies in how it changes the strategies of the elites even unto the point of revolution ( Reference Rosenthal, Bates, Greif, Levi, Rosenthal and Weingast Rosenthal 1998 : 92). Why elites resorted to revolution rather than peaceful institutional change becomes apparent through the narrative and the associated model.

Uncertainty and lack of information are prevalent features of the unraveling of events in history, and they are major bases of contingency. Ahlquist and Levi’s work on leadership illustrates the effect of uncertainty ( Reference Ahlquist and Levi Ahlquist and Levi 2011 , Reference Ahlquist and Levi 2013 ). They find that followers, members, and citizens are very concerned to have competent representation; followers, members, and citizens therefore do their best to figure out who will be a good leader based on the track record of potential candidates. Nonetheless, unknowns remain, often in the form of other variables that are uncertain. For example, no one can know for sure how opponents will react to a given leader, what the economy will do, or how leaders will respond under circumstances distinctive from those in which they were selected. This uncertainty has direct consequences for other facets of the organization, such as its governance arrangements and mechanisms of accountability. If members knew and understood all the implications of their original choice, they might make a different one – if they could. Yet, uncertainty instead leads them to coordinate around a specific leader and leadership style, and they may well continue to maintain that person in office for years.

Analytic narratives must include problems of randomness or contingency, but not if they are too extreme. The example of unions makes the point. Members address their leadership problem in the face of uncertainty about the occurrence of strikes and only partial information about the reaction of employers to their demands. Because the interactions between unions and managers involve unpredictable elements, and because leaders cannot always deliver what they promise, leadership turnover may result. However, as Reference Ahlquist and Levi Ahlquist and Levi (2013) show, this turnover is not only relatively rare but also highly delimited by the organizational culture and governance arrangements that ensure new leaders will share many of the characteristics of their predecessors.

The analytic narrative approach rests on cases where there is some, but hardly complete, contingency in the path of history, cases that the model helps in understanding what was likely to happen. Nothing about the approach, however, limits it to cases of determinateness or low contingency. Extensive-form games have long proved useful in studying settings of high uncertainty and contingency.

11.5 Analytic Narratives for Use in Development Policy and Practice

In this section we turn, briefly, to suggest the implications of the analytic narrative approach to problems of development.

Economists have long proposed an economic role for political institutions, such as the market infrastructure embodied in the provision of secure property rights, enforcement of contracts, and, generally, the provision of justice and the rule of law ( Reference Weingast Weingast 1995 ). Governments that use violence against minorities and opponents, confiscate citizens’ wealth, and create economic privileges (such as dispensing monopoly rights) fail to provide adequate market infrastructure. As Adam Smith recognized more than two centuries ago, the risk of violence and of plunder leads men to avoid hard work, initiative, and investment. In discussing settings in which “the occupiers of land in the country were exposed to every sort of violence,” Smith argued that “men in this defenceless state naturally content themselves with their necessary subsistence; because to acquire more might only tempt the injustice of their oppressors” ( Reference Smith Smith 1776 : III.iii.12:405). Further, a “person who can acquire no property, can have no other interest but to eat as much, and to labour as little as possible” ( Reference Smith Smith 1776 : III.ii.9:387–88).

But, if secure property rights, enforcement of contracts, and the provision of justice are necessary for economic development, how are such institutions built and, especially, sustained?

Reference North and Weingast North and Weingast (1989 ) developed the hypothesis of credible commitments to answer this question. Governments seeking to implement the economists’ prescriptions for political institutions had to commit to honoring rights of citizens and to use agreed upon political procedures to make political decisions. They developed their hypothesis in the context of a unique case: the English Glorious Revolution of 1688–1689. Although this revolution and its institutional consequences were unique to that case, North and Weingast provided some important evidence favoring their larger, general argument about credible commitments. Focusing on public finance, they showed that the ability of the English government to borrow money changed dramatically. Government debt had never been much above 5 percent of estimated GDP in the seventeenth century. But in the eight years following the Glorious Revolution, it rose by nearly an order of magnitude, to 40 percent of estimated GDP. Because debt repayment depends critically on credible commitments, the massive increase in debt in a short time suggests that a new mechanism for making credible commitments had emerged.

Sure enough, subsequent studies have identified some of the devices used to create credible commitments and have leant support to the hypothesis. Footnote 2 First, Reference Cox Cox (2012 ) has shown that a number of other variables also increased dramatically, consistent with the credible commitment hypothesis. Specifically, per the North and Weingast narrative, Cox demonstrates that parliament gained control over taxation and the issuance of public debt. Similarly, the ministerial responsibility system emerged: while parliament faced difficulties in holding the king accountable for public decisions, they could hold the king’s ministers accountable, forcing them to honor parliament’s interests. Second, scholars have undertaken a range of studies of public debt at similar events. For example, Reference Summerhill Summerhill (2015) has shown that nineteenth-century imperial Brazil provided the institutions for credible commitment to public debt, yet it failed to provide the institutional foundations for private financial markets and hence this fundamental basis for economic development. Reference Mo and Weingast Mo and Weingast (2013 : ch 4) reveal the means by which the South Korean regime under President Park Chung provided credibility to its promises to honor property rights and a range of other programs, such as education, underpinning that country’s economic development.

As a second illustration, consider political stability, another element widely agreed as important for economic development. Coups, civil wars, ethnic conflict, and other forms of disorder cripple a country’s ability to develop. Reference Cox, North and Weingast Cox, North, and Weingast (2019) show that disorder in the form of violent takeover of regimes occurs surprisingly often in the developing world: the median regime of the poorest half of countries lasts only seven years. Just how do a minority of countries provide for political stability?

Reference Mittal and Weingast Mittal and Weingast (2012) provide three conditions for political stability, one of which they call the “limit condition”: the idea that all successful constitutions reduce the stakes of power, for example, by providing incentives for political officials to honor a range of citizen rights. Limited government does not imply small government (as modern political debate suggests), but a government that can honor restrictions on its behavior, such as abiding by election results, refraining from the use of violence to repress enemies, and, generally, honoring citizen rights.

The logic of the limit condition is that high stakes make it much more likely that people who feel threatened by the government will support coups. For example, landowners in Chile under the presidency of Salvadore Allende supported the military coup in 1973 to protect themselves. Similar events led to disorder in Spain (1936–1939) and Kenya (2007–2008). One way that constitutions reduce the stakes of politics is through various forms of countermajoritarian institutions.

Mittal and Weingast develop their hypothesis in the context of the American case, where the institutional features of the US Constitution are unique. Subsequent work has revealed similar features in a range of cases of stable constitutions. Countermajoritarian provisions serve two valuable roles in preserving political stability. First, they often aid in the instantiation of democracy. When groups see themselves as potentially worse off under democracy, they are likely to resist democratization. The reality is that powerful – and sometimes inimical – groups often have the power to hold up democratization, such as slaveholders in the early American Republic, Whites in South Africa in the 1990s, the supporters of the authoritarian regime of Francisco Franco in Spain following the death of the dictator in 1975, the military dictatorship in Chile in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and the communist regime in Poland in 1989. In each of these cases, countermajoritarian provisions to protect powerful groups aided democratization and, eventually, the lightening of the relevant constraints. Similarly, electoral laws often bias elections in favor of constituencies that favor the previous regime (Chile and Spain). These provisions also become part of the limit condition once democracy has been initiated.

Others have also used analytic narratives to discuss the difficulties of achieving transitions to democracy. Reference Ferrara Ferrara (2003) suggests conditions under which widespread protest and uprising has little effect, given the strategic use of coercion. His case is Burma, but the implications are more general. On the other hand, Reference Nalepa Nalepa (2010) considers the conditions under which pacts and negotiated settlements among elites facilitate the transition from autocracy to more open access regimes. She finds that the transition will prove unstable (if it even takes place) unless a specific type of limit condition holds: namely, that key players receive credible commitments that the “skeletons in their closets” will not be revealed or that they will receive amnesty for politically problematic behavior during the old regime. Her analytic narrative focuses on Eastern Europe but is applicable to a wide range of cases where transitional justice is at issue.

Analytic narrative approaches are also useful in understanding why some reforms succeed while others do not in countries experiencing development. Methodologically, this demands explicit recognition of the comparative statics, on the one hand, and the off-the-path-behavior, on the other. These features distinguish analytic narratives from other case studies, enabling them to reveal processes and causal mechanisms that might otherwise go undetected and to provide the bases for generalizations that might otherwise not be possible. Some authors already self-consciously attempt analytic narratives (e.g., Reference Hosman Hosman 2009 on Nigeria’s failed oil policies), but many do not. Even so, we could get additional leverage on reform by transforming existing case studies into analytic narratives.

Among the many accounts of reform, we have selected two categories of cases where analytic narratives clearly increase explanatory power for the particular instance as well as making the findings transportable to other situations.

The first set is where the same laws have different effects in different places. The study of the Sierra Leone decentralization reforms ( Reference Clayton, Noveck and Levi Clayton, Noveck, and Levi 2015 ) display not only varying impact but also reasons for that variation. Sierra Leone has a long history of tension among elites at different levels of government and a more recent history of tensions among key local elites. This case explores the consequences of the latter for effective public service delivery once decentralization is introduced.

A rich literature (cited in the case study) reveals contradictory expectations of the effects of local interelite dynamics. The narrative reveals considerable county-level variations in power sharing between the traditional power-holders, the paramount chiefs, and the newer power-holders, the elected councilors. This variation provides an opportunity to derive expectations specific to the case and then assess their plausibility. Indeed, from the narrative the authors hypothesized that competitive relationships among the two improve services while collusion reduces their quality.

The first challenge was to offer a measure of elite dynamics to be used in a statistical investigation of the implications of differences. To test the impact of this relationship required, first, a measure of the nature of their interaction. The probability of collusion was operationalized by using data that reports on the following direct relationships: the median number of times councilors report having contacted a chief in the previous month, the percentage of councilors that report having had a dispute with a chief during the past month, and the percentage of councilors that report that they are related to a Paramount Chief either through blood or marriage.

But what accounts for the distinctiveness of power-sharing arrangements? The strategic interaction underlying the implementation of the reforms reveals two possible equilibria of collusion and competition. Digging deeper uncovers factors that possibly change the strategic interactions among the key actors and, thus, the comparative statics. The authors considered the gender, age, and party of the councilors as well as the degree of electoral competition. But the most telling explanatory factor was one that could only be known by knowing the case in depth: the proportion of councilors who were in the Civilian Defense Force (CDF) during the war. Former CDF councilors were likely to have forged deep ties with the paramount chiefs who were the primary sources of funding.

The next step was to determine the extent to which these different kinds of power-sharing arrangements – and the probable causes of them – actually influenced service delivery. Drawing out testable implications that could in fact be explored with the available survey material enabled the authors to provide additional confidence in the hypotheses they had derived. Further statistical tests indeed suggested that collusion, particularly that produced by the proportion of councilors who had been in the CDF, leads to far poorer service delivery than does competition.

Bangladesh, Honduras, China, and the United States all have similar labor laws on their books but very distinctive actual protection and enforcement of labor protections in the supply chains of global brands. Reference Berliner, Greenleaf, Lake, Levi and Noveck Berliner et al. (2015a , Reference Berliner, Greenleaf, Lake, Levi and Noveck 2015b ) investigate the clusters of stakeholders and what transforms the relations of power among them. To do this, they consider the strategic interactions among key players and what transforms the current equilibrium or status quo. Using the logic of game theory but not formalizing it, they are aware that it is off the equilibrium path for workers to organize and make demands unless they are assured that they will not be punished for their actions by losing their jobs or being sent to jail. Footnote 3 That only happens when brands find it in their interest to improve worker rights and benefits, and this only occurs if government is upholding its laws or the reputation of brands among consumers is being threatened.

Unfortunately, both of these circumstances are most likely to occur when there is an unexpected (if predictable) catastrophe such as a major fire or building collapse where workers’ lives are tragically lost. Reflecting comparative statics, such a shift leads to reform, but whether the commitments are credible depends on the creation of legal institutions that are hard to change and that incorporate sufficient administrative capacity to implement the rules. The testable implications may differ among the cases, but they are the organizing principles of the cases. The findings are not promising for labor rights. Honduras and Bangladesh lack the government capacity to maintain a positive labor rights regime over a long period of time. In China, the government has the capacity but not the will to establish meaningful labor rights, although it does ensure some protections. The United States, which once had both the will and capacity, now lacks the first and possibly the second and so has undergone a reversal. The result in all these instances is that the pressure on brands to discipline their supply chains is episodic or nonexistent.

The second set of cases document instances where societal interests come to trump private interests, making it possible to actually implement policies that will serve the population as a whole. As we saw with the labor illustration, it is difficult enough to ensure the protection of the interests of a neglected group within the society. It is arguably harder to protect general interests, as the case of corruption in Indonesia ( Reference Kuris Kuris 2012a , Reference Kuris 2012b ) documents. And it is arguably harder still to implement policies where the interests of the world at large are at issue, as the case of deforestation in Brazil ( Reference Jackson Jackson 2014 , Reference Jackson 2015 ) details.

Of course, in each of these cases a range of stakeholders are the beneficiaries or losers from policy change. To transform past practice required some combination of leadership, interests, expert knowledge disseminated widely, trust relationships, monitoring, new forms of direct enforcement, credible commitments, and mobilizations that changed the incentives of both government officials and recalcitrant stakeholders. All of these features are documented in these cases, and documented well. Lacking is a structure to the accounts that makes it possible to observe the causal mechanisms and derive testable implications. The comparative statics are not sufficiently explicit. While the Sierra Leone decentralization and labor standards cases do not provide an actual formalization of the game, the presentation of the material makes it possible not only to derive but also to test implications that enhance confidence in the claims of the authors and make them generalizable to other cases.

11.6 Creating Take-Aways

Multiple interpretations are inherent in the traditional case study method. Moving beyond traditional approaches, analytic narratives provide two methods for establishing the generalizability of findings from case studies. First, the model in an analytic narrative often affords a range of explanations and predictions. Although the main account of a unique case may not be testable, the model may yield other predictions that can be tested, either in this case or in other cases. Second, as with other methods, out-of-sample tests constitute an important route to generalization. The presumption today in social science research is that the authors will provide those tests themselves. However, seldom does the level of knowledge for the out of sample case rival the detailed understanding of the original case that puzzled the author. The demonstration of generalizability must rest on a larger community of scholars who take the findings applicable to one place and time to illuminate a very different place and time. Each case then becomes a case among many that are grist for the mill of scholars, experts on particular countries and sectors, and policy-makers who must work collaboratively to sort out the lessons learned.

In this chapter, we have outlined the analytic narrative approach and, in Section 11.5 , suggested the potential value of the approach for problems of development. Reflecting the interest of the authors employing the approach, the applications tend to focus on political issues, such as political stability and violence. The approach also applies to case studies of particular economic reforms, and we believe it will produce valuable results in this area.

In summary, the goal of analytic narratives is to provide several forms of discipline on the structure of case studies, such as a game, with emphasis on comparative statics and on off-the-path-behavior, and on predictions that can be tested on aspects of the case even if the main assertion about the case cannot.

1 In principle, the rational choice component can be replaced with decision-making criteria from behavioral economics, although we have not pursued that path.

2 While a number of studies have criticized the North and Weingast thesis and evidence ( Reference Sussman and Yafeh Sussman and Yafeh, 2007 ; Reference Pincus, Robinson, Galieni and Sened Pincus and Robinson, 2014 ), none have argued against the debt-credibility hypothesis; and, further, we believe Reference Cox Cox (2012) and related work provides the latest review and statement of the evidence.

3 Reference Golden Golden (1997) makes similar observations in the European context.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Analytic Narratives and Case Studies
• By Margaret Levi , Barry R. Weingast
• Edited by Jennifer Widner , Princeton University, New Jersey , Michael Woolcock , Daniel Ortega Nieto
• Book: The Case for Case Studies
• Online publication: 05 May 2022
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108688253.012

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Narrative approaches to case studies

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Med Libr Assoc
• v.107(1); 2019 Jan

Distinguishing case study as a research method from case reports as a publication type

The purpose of this editorial is to distinguish between case reports and case studies. In health, case reports are familiar ways of sharing events or efforts of intervening with single patients with previously unreported features. As a qualitative methodology, case study research encompasses a great deal more complexity than a typical case report and often incorporates multiple streams of data combined in creative ways. The depth and richness of case study description helps readers understand the case and whether findings might be applicable beyond that setting.

Single-institution descriptive reports of library activities are often labeled by their authors as “case studies.” By contrast, in health care, single patient retrospective descriptions are published as “case reports.” Both case reports and case studies are valuable to readers and provide a publication opportunity for authors. A previous editorial by Akers and Amos about improving case studies addresses issues that are more common to case reports; for example, not having a review of the literature or being anecdotal, not generalizable, and prone to various types of bias such as positive outcome bias [ 1 ]. However, case study research as a qualitative methodology is pursued for different purposes than generalizability. The authors’ purpose in this editorial is to clearly distinguish between case reports and case studies. We believe that this will assist authors in describing and designating the methodological approach of their publications and help readers appreciate the rigor of well-executed case study research.

Case reports often provide a first exploration of a phenomenon or an opportunity for a first publication by a trainee in the health professions. In health care, case reports are familiar ways of sharing events or efforts of intervening with single patients with previously unreported features. Another type of study categorized as a case report is an “N of 1” study or single-subject clinical trial, which considers an individual patient as the sole unit of observation in a study investigating the efficacy or side effect profiles of different interventions. Entire journals have evolved to publish case reports, which often rely on template structures with limited contextualization or discussion of previous cases. Examples that are indexed in MEDLINE include the American Journal of Case Reports , BMJ Case Reports, Journal of Medical Case Reports, and Journal of Radiology Case Reports . Similar publications appear in veterinary medicine and are indexed in CAB Abstracts, such as Case Reports in Veterinary Medicine and Veterinary Record Case Reports .

As a qualitative methodology, however, case study research encompasses a great deal more complexity than a typical case report and often incorporates multiple streams of data combined in creative ways. Distinctions include the investigator’s definitions and delimitations of the case being studied, the clarity of the role of the investigator, the rigor of gathering and combining evidence about the case, and the contextualization of the findings. Delimitation is a term from qualitative research about setting boundaries to scope the research in a useful way rather than describing the narrow scope as a limitation, as often appears in a discussion section. The depth and richness of description helps readers understand the situation and whether findings from the case are applicable to their settings.

CASE STUDY AS A RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Case study as a qualitative methodology is an exploration of a time- and space-bound phenomenon. As qualitative research, case studies require much more from their authors who are acting as instruments within the inquiry process. In the case study methodology, a variety of methodological approaches may be employed to explain the complexity of the problem being studied [ 2 , 3 ].

Leading authors diverge in their definitions of case study, but a qualitative research text introduces case study as follows:

Case study research is defined as a qualitative approach in which the investigator explores a real-life, contemporary bounded system (a case) or multiple bound systems (cases) over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information, and reports a case description and case themes. The unit of analysis in the case study might be multiple cases (a multisite study) or a single case (a within-site case study). [ 4 ]

Methodologists writing core texts on case study research include Yin [ 5 ], Stake [ 6 ], and Merriam [ 7 ]. The approaches of these three methodologists have been compared by Yazan, who focused on six areas of methodology: epistemology (beliefs about ways of knowing), definition of cases, design of case studies, and gathering, analysis, and validation of data [ 8 ]. For Yin, case study is a method of empirical inquiry appropriate to determining the “how and why” of phenomena and contributes to understanding phenomena in a holistic and real-life context [ 5 ]. Stake defines a case study as a “well-bounded, specific, complex, and functioning thing” [ 6 ], while Merriam views “the case as a thing, a single entity, a unit around which there are boundaries” [ 7 ].

Case studies are ways to explain, describe, or explore phenomena. Comments from a quantitative perspective about case studies lacking rigor and generalizability fail to consider the purpose of the case study and how what is learned from a case study is put into practice. Rigor in case studies comes from the research design and its components, which Yin outlines as (a) the study’s questions, (b) the study’s propositions, (c) the unit of analysis, (d) the logic linking the data to propositions, and (e) the criteria for interpreting the findings [ 5 ]. Case studies should also provide multiple sources of data, a case study database, and a clear chain of evidence among the questions asked, the data collected, and the conclusions drawn [ 5 ].

Sources of evidence for case studies include interviews, documentation, archival records, direct observations, participant-observation, and physical artifacts. One of the most important sources for data in qualitative case study research is the interview [ 2 , 3 ]. In addition to interviews, documents and archival records can be gathered to corroborate and enhance the findings of the study. To understand the phenomenon or the conditions that created it, direct observations can serve as another source of evidence and can be conducted throughout the study. These can include the use of formal and informal protocols as a participant inside the case or an external or passive observer outside of the case [ 5 ]. Lastly, physical artifacts can be observed and collected as a form of evidence. With these multiple potential sources of evidence, the study methodology includes gathering data, sense-making, and triangulating multiple streams of data. Figure 1 shows an example in which data used for the case started with a pilot study to provide additional context to guide more in-depth data collection and analysis with participants.

Key sources of data for a sample case study

VARIATIONS ON CASE STUDY METHODOLOGY

Case study methodology is evolving and regularly reinterpreted. Comparative or multiple case studies are used as a tool for synthesizing information across time and space to research the impact of policy and practice in various fields of social research [ 9 ]. Because case study research is in-depth and intensive, there have been efforts to simplify the method or select useful components of cases for focused analysis. Micro-case study is a term that is occasionally used to describe research on micro-level cases [ 10 ]. These are cases that occur in a brief time frame, occur in a confined setting, and are simple and straightforward in nature. A micro-level case describes a clear problem of interest. Reporting is very brief and about specific points. The lack of complexity in the case description makes obvious the “lesson” that is inherent in the case; although no definitive “solution” is necessarily forthcoming, making the case useful for discussion. A micro-case write-up can be distinguished from a case report by its focus on briefly reporting specific features of a case or cases to analyze or learn from those features.

DATABASE INDEXING OF CASE REPORTS AND CASE STUDIES

Disciplines such as education, psychology, sociology, political science, and social work regularly publish rich case studies that are relevant to particular areas of health librarianship. Case reports and case studies have been defined as publication types or subject terms by several databases that are relevant to librarian authors: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ERIC. Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) does not have a subject term or publication type related to cases, despite many being included in the database. Whereas “Case Reports” are the main term used by MEDLINE’s Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and PsycINFO’s thesaurus, CINAHL and ERIC use “Case Studies.”

Case reports in MEDLINE and PsycINFO focus on clinical case documentation. In MeSH, “Case Reports” as a publication type is specific to “clinical presentations that may be followed by evaluative studies that eventually lead to a diagnosis” [ 11 ]. “Case Histories,” “Case Studies,” and “Case Study” are all entry terms mapping to “Case Reports”; however, guidance to indexers suggests that “Case Reports” should not be applied to institutional case reports and refers to the heading “Organizational Case Studies,” which is defined as “descriptions and evaluations of specific health care organizations” [ 12 ].

PsycINFO’s subject term “Case Report” is “used in records discussing issues involved in the process of conducting exploratory studies of single or multiple clinical cases.” The Methodology index offers clinical and non-clinical entries. “Clinical Case Study” is defined as “case reports that include disorder, diagnosis, and clinical treatment for individuals with mental or medical illnesses,” whereas “Non-clinical Case Study” is a “document consisting of non-clinical or organizational case examples of the concepts being researched or studied. The setting is always non-clinical and does not include treatment-related environments” [ 13 ].

Both CINAHL and ERIC acknowledge the depth of analysis in case study methodology. The CINAHL scope note for the thesaurus term “Case Studies” distinguishes between the document and the methodology, though both use the same term: “a review of a particular condition, disease, or administrative problem. Also, a research method that involves an in-depth analysis of an individual, group, institution, or other social unit. For material that contains a case study, search for document type: case study.” The ERIC scope note for the thesaurus term “Case Studies” is simple: “detailed analyses, usually focusing on a particular problem of an individual, group, or organization” [ 14 ].

PUBLICATION OF CASE STUDY RESEARCH IN LIBRARIANSHIP

We call your attention to a few examples published as case studies in health sciences librarianship to consider how their characteristics fit with the preceding definitions of case reports or case study research. All present some characteristics of case study research, but their treatment of the research questions, richness of description, and analytic strategies vary in depth and, therefore, diverge at some level from the qualitative case study research approach. This divergence, particularly in richness of description and analysis, may have been constrained by the publication requirements.

As one example, a case study by Janke and Rush documented a time- and context-bound collaboration involving a librarian and a nursing faculty member [ 15 ]. Three objectives were stated: (1) describing their experience of working together on an interprofessional research team, (2) evaluating the value of the librarian role from librarian and faculty member perspectives, and (3) relating findings to existing literature. Elements that signal the qualitative nature of this case study are that the authors were the research participants and their use of the term “evaluation” is reflection on their experience. This reads like a case study that could have been enriched by including other types of data gathered from others engaging with this team to broaden the understanding of the collaboration.

As another example, the description of the academic context is one of the most salient components of the case study written by Clairoux et al., which had the objectives of (1) describing the library instruction offered and learning assessments used at a single health sciences library and (2) discussing the positive outcomes of instruction in that setting [ 16 ]. The authors focus on sharing what the institution has done more than explaining why this institution is an exemplar to explore a focused question or understand the phenomenon of library instruction. However, like a case study, the analysis brings together several streams of data including course attendance, online material page views, and some discussion of results from surveys. This paper reads somewhat in between an institutional case report and a case study.

The final example is a single author reporting on a personal experience of creating and executing the role of research informationist for a National Institutes of Health (NIH)–funded research team [ 17 ]. There is a thoughtful review of the informationist literature and detailed descriptions of the institutional context and the process of gaining access to and participating in the new role. However, the motivating question in the abstract does not seem to be fully addressed through analysis from either the reflective perspective of the author as the research participant or consideration of other streams of data from those involved in the informationist experience. The publication reads more like a case report about this informationist’s experience than a case study that explores the research informationist experience through the selection of this case.

All of these publications are well written and useful for their intended audiences, but in general, they are much shorter and much less rich in depth than case studies published in social sciences research. It may be that the authors have been constrained by word counts or page limits. For example, the submission category for Case Studies in the Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) limited them to 3,000 words and defined them as “articles describing the process of developing, implementing, and evaluating a new service, program, or initiative, typically in a single institution or through a single collaborative effort” [ 18 ]. This definition’s focus on novelty and description sounds much more like the definition of case report than the in-depth, detailed investigation of a time- and space-bound problem that is often examined through case study research.

Problem-focused or question-driven case study research would benefit from the space provided for Original Investigations that employ any type of quantitative or qualitative method of analysis. One of the best examples in the JMLA of an in-depth multiple case study that was authored by a librarian who published the findings from her doctoral dissertation represented all the elements of a case study. In eight pages, she provided a theoretical basis for the research question, a pilot study, and a multiple case design, including integrated data from interviews and focus groups [ 19 ].

We have distinguished between case reports and case studies primarily to assist librarians who are new to research and critical appraisal of case study methodology to recognize the features that authors use to describe and designate the methodological approaches of their publications. For researchers who are new to case research methodology and are interested in learning more, Hancock and Algozzine provide a guide [ 20 ].

We hope that JMLA readers appreciate the rigor of well-executed case study research. We believe that distinguishing between descriptive case reports and analytic case studies in the journal’s submission categories will allow the depth of case study methodology to increase. We also hope that authors feel encouraged to pursue submitting relevant case studies or case reports for future publication.

Editor’s note: In response to this invited editorial, the Journal of the Medical Library Association will consider manuscripts employing rigorous qualitative case study methodology to be Original Investigations (fewer than 5,000 words), whereas manuscripts describing the process of developing, implementing, and assessing a new service, program, or initiative—typically in a single institution or through a single collaborative effort—will be considered to be Case Reports (formerly known as Case Studies; fewer than 3,000 words).

• Section 2: Home
• Developing the Quantitative Research Design
• Qualitative Descriptive Design
• Design and Development Research (DDR) For Instructional Design
• Qualitative Narrative Inquiry Research

What is a Qualitative Narrative Inquiry Design?

Tips for using narrative inquiry in an applied manuscript, summary of the elements of a qualitative narrative inquiry design, sampling and data collection, resource videos.

• Action Research Resource
• Case Study Design in an Applied Doctorate
• SAGE Research Methods
• Research Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window
• Dataset Examples (SAGE) This link opens in a new window
• IRB Resource Center This link opens in a new window

Narrative inquiry is relatively new among the qualitative research designs compared to qualitative case study, phenomenology, ethnography, and grounded theory. What distinguishes narrative inquiry is it beings with the biographical aspect of C. Wright Mills’ trilogy of ‘biography, history, and society’(O’Tolle, 2018). The primary purpose for a narrative inquiry study is participants provide the researcher with their life experiences through thick rich stories. Narrative inquiry was first used by Connelly and Calandinin as a research design to explore the perceptions and personal stories of teachers (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990). As the seminal authors, Connelly & Clandinin (1990), posited:

Although narrative inquiry has a long intellectual history both in and out of education, it is increasingly used in studies of educational experience. One theory in educational research holds that humans are storytelling organisms who, individually and socially, lead storied lives. Thus, the study of narrative is the study of the ways humans experience the world. This general concept is refined into the view that education and educational research is the construction and reconstruction of personal and social stories; learners, teachers, and researchers are storytellers and characters in their own and other's stories. In this paper we briefly survey forms of narrative inquiry in educational studies and outline certain criteria, methods, and writing forms, which we describe in terms of beginning the story, living the story, and selecting stories to construct and reconstruct narrative plots. 

Attribution: Reprint Policy for Educational Researcher: No written or oral permission is necessary to reproduce a tale, a figure, or an excerpt fewer that 500 words from this journal, or to make photocopies for classroom use. Copyright (1990) by the American Educational Research Association; reproduced with permission from the publisher. 

• Example Qualitative Narrative Inquiry Design

First, the applied doctoral manuscript narrative inquiry researcher should recognize that they are earning a practical/professional based doctorate (Doctor of Education), rather than a research doctorate such as a Ph.D. Unlike a traditional Ph.D. dissertation oral defense where the candidates focus is on theory and research, the NU School of Education applied doctoral candidate presents their finding and contributions to practice to their doctoral committee as a conceptual professional conference level presentation that centers on how their study may resolve a complex problem or issue in the profession. When working on the applied doctoral manuscript keep the focus on the professional and practical benefits that could arise from your study. If the Applied Doctoral Experience (ADE) student is unsure as to whether the topic fits within the requirements of the applied doctoral program (and their specialization, if declared) they should reach out to their research course professor or dissertation chair for guidance. This is known as alignment to the topic and program, and is critical in producing a successful manuscript. Also, most applied doctoral students doing an educational narrative inquiry study will want to use a study site to recruit their participants. For example, the study may involve teachers or college faculty that the researcher will want to interview in order to obtain their stories. Permission may be need from not only the NU Institutional Review Board (IRB), but also the study site. For example, conducting interviews on campus, procuring private school district or college email lists, obtaining archival documents, etc. 

The popularity of narrative inquiry in education is increasing as a circular and pedagogical strategy that lends itself to the practical application of research (Kim, 2016). Keep in mind that by and large practical and professional benefits that arise from a narrative inquiry study revolve around exploring the lived experiences of educators, education administrators, students, and parents or guardians. According to Dunne (2003), 

Research into teaching is best served by narrative modes of inquiry since to understand the teacher’s practice (on his or her own part or on the part of an observer) is to find an illuminating story (or stories) to tell of what they have been involved with their student” (p. 367).

• Temporality – the time of the experiences and how the experiences could influence the future;
• Sociality – cultural and personal influences of the experiences; and;
• Spatiality – the environmental surroundings during the experiences and their influence on the experiences. 

From Haydon and van der Riet (2017)

• Narrative researchers collect stories from individuals retelling of their life experiences to a particular phenomenon. 
• Narrative stories may explore personal characteristics or identities of individuals and how they view themselves in a personal or larger context.
• Chronology is often important in narrative studies, as it allows participants to recall specific places, situations, or changes within their life history.

Sampling and Sample Size

• Purposive sampling is the most often used in narrative inquiry studies. Participants must meet a form of requirement that fits the purpose, problem, and objective of the study
• There is no rule for the sample size for narrative inquiry study. For a dissertation the normal sample size is between 6-10 participants. The reason for this is sampling should be terminated when no new information is forthcoming, which is a common strategy in qualitative studies known as sampling to the point of redundancy.

Data Collection (Methodology)

• Participant and researcher collaborate through the research process to ensure the story told and the story align.
• Extensive “time in the field” (can use Zoom) is spent with participant(s) to gather stories through multiple types of information including, field notes, observations, photos, artifacts, etc.
• Field Test is strongly recommended. The purpose of a field study is to have a panel of experts in the profession of the study review the research protocol and interview questions to ensure they align to the purpose statement and research questions.
• Member Checking is recommended. The trustworthiness of results is the bedrock of high-quality qualitative research. Member checking, also known as participant or respondent validation, is a technique for exploring the credibility of results. Data or results are returned to participants to check for accuracy and resonance with their experiences. Member checking is often mentioned as one in a list of validation techniques (Birt, et al., 2016).

Narrative Data Collection Essentials

• Restorying is the process of gathering stories, analyzing themes for key elements (e.g., time, place, plot, and environment) and then rewriting the stories to place them within a chronological sequence (Ollerenshaw & Creswell, 2002).
• Narrative thinking is critical in a narrative inquiry study. According to Kim (2016), the premise of narrative thinking comprises of three components, the storyteller’s narrative schema, his or her prior knowledge and experience, and cognitive strategies-yields a story that facilitates an understanding of the others and oneself in relation to others.

Instrumentation

• In qualitative research the researcher is the primary instrument.
• In-depth, semi-structured interviews are the norm. Because of the rigor that is required for a narrative inquiry study, it is recommended that two interviews with the same participant be conducted. The primary interview and a follow-up interview to address any additional questions that may arise from the interview transcriptions and/or member checking.

Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26 (13), 1802-1811. http://dx.doi.org./10.1177/1049732316654870

Cline, J. M. (2020). Collaborative learning for students with learning disabilities in inclusive classrooms: A qualitative narrative inquiry study (Order No. 28263106). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2503473076). 

Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1990). Stories of Experience and Narrative Inquiry. Educational Researcher, 19 (5), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2018.1465839

Dunne, J. (2003). Arguing for teaching as a practice: A reply to Alasdair Macintyre. Journal of Philosophy of Education . https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.00331 

Haydon, G., & der Riet, P. van. (2017). Narrative inquiry: A relational research methodology suitable to explore narratives of health and illness. Nordic Journal of Nursing Research , 37(2), 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057158516675217

Kim, J. H. (2016). Understanding Narrative Inquiry: The crafting and analysis of stories as research. Sage Publications. 

Kim J. H. (2017). Jeong-Hee Kim discusses narrative methods [Video]. SAGE Research Methods Video https://www-doi-org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.4135/9781473985179

O’ Toole, J. (2018). Institutional storytelling and personal narratives: reflecting on the value of narrative inquiry. Institutional Educational Studies, 37 (2), 175-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2018.1465839

Ollerenshaw, J. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2002). Narrative research: A comparison of two restorying data analysis approaches. Qualitative Inquiry, 8 (3), 329–347. 

• << Previous: Design and Development Research (DDR) For Instructional Design
• Next: Action Research Resource >>
• Last Updated: Jul 28, 2023 8:05 AM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1013605

© Copyright 2024 National University. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Consumer Information

Sex Differences in Colonic Mucosal Microbiome of Irritable Bowel Syndrome Patients Compared to Healthy Controls

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• ORCID record for Swapna Mahurkar-Joshi
• For correspondence: [email protected]
• Info/History
• Supplementary material
• Preview PDF

Background: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a female-predominant disorder of brain-gut interactions. Our previous study on colonic mucosal microbiota demonstrated significant differences between IBS bowel habit subtypes and showed that gut microbiota is associated with abdominal pain in IBS patients. However, there is no consensus on sex-related differences in mucosal microbiota in IBS compared to healthy controls (HC). We aimed to identify sex-related differences in the mucosal microbes associated with IBS. Methods: Sigmoid mucosal biopsies were obtained from 97 Rome+ IBS patients and 54 healthy controls (HC). Mucosal microbiome was characterized using 16S rRNA sequencing and analyzed and general linear models were used to test group differences between IBS diagnosis and sex. Sex-specific relationships between mucosal microbiome and IBS symptoms were assessed using sparse partial least squares (sPLS) regression. Results: Beta diversity was significantly different between men and women overall (p=.03) but not within IBS or HC. IBS women showed lower abundance of Catenibacterium and Ruminoclstridium_9 and increased abundance of Bacteroides, Escherichia/Shigella, Lachnoclostridium and Ruminococcaceae compared to men with IBS (p<0.05). However, healthy women had a lower abundance of six distinct genera compared to healthy men. In women, higher IBS symptoms were associated with an increased abundance of bacteria including prevotella_9, and paraprevotella, however, in men, IBS symptoms were associated with increased abundances of genera such as Dialister. Interestingly, increased abundance of Desulfovibrio was associated with higher symptoms in women but lower symptoms in men. Conclusion: There are distinct sex-related differences in the mucosal microbiome between IBS and healthy participants supporting the importance of studying sex-specific mechanisms in IBS pathophysiology.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

NIH P50 DK64539, U54 DK123755, R21 DK104078, UL1TR0001881, VA IK2CX001717 (JPJ)

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of California Los Angeles

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Data Availability

The 16S sequences and associated metadata used in this study are part of several ongoing projects within our research group. Due to the active nature of these projects and our ongoing efforts in writing and publishing additional papers, we are not able to publicly release the entire dataset at this time. However, we are committed to transparency and scientific collaboration. Therefore, specific data requests can be accommodated on a case-by-case basis. We plan to submit the sequence and associated metadata to an appropriate publicly available archive once all ongoing projects are completed.

View the discussion thread.

Supplementary Material

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager
• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One

Subject Area

• Gastroenterology
• Addiction Medicine (336)
• Allergy and Immunology (658)
• Anesthesia (177)
• Cardiovascular Medicine (2573)
• Dentistry and Oral Medicine (310)
• Dermatology (218)
• Emergency Medicine (390)
• Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (915)
• Epidemiology (12088)
• Forensic Medicine (10)
• Gastroenterology (743)
• Genetic and Genomic Medicine (3994)
• Geriatric Medicine (376)
• Health Economics (667)
• Health Informatics (2578)
• Health Policy (992)
• Health Systems and Quality Improvement (959)
• Hematology (357)
• HIV/AIDS (825)
• Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13574)
• Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (783)
• Medical Education (396)
• Medical Ethics (107)
• Nephrology (423)
• Neurology (3759)
• Nursing (206)
• Nutrition (559)
• Obstetrics and Gynecology (718)
• Occupational and Environmental Health (688)
• Oncology (1958)
• Ophthalmology (569)
• Orthopedics (233)
• Otolaryngology (301)
• Pain Medicine (247)
• Palliative Medicine (72)
• Pathology (469)
• Pediatrics (1088)
• Pharmacology and Therapeutics (453)
• Primary Care Research (442)
• Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3353)
• Public and Global Health (6429)
• Radiology and Imaging (1365)
• Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (793)
• Respiratory Medicine (859)
• Rheumatology (394)
• Sexual and Reproductive Health (401)
• Sports Medicine (336)
• Surgery (431)
• Toxicology (51)
• Transplantation (184)
• Urology (164)