Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
On this page
IntuitionHow it worksWhen to use itStrengths & limitationsCommon pitfallsApplicationsFrequently asked🔒 Read the full methodSourcesRelated methods
Cite this pageSpotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →
Home›Qualitative›Multiple Case-Based Narrative Inquiry
Process / pipelineQualitative design / analysis

Multiple Case-Based Narrative Inquiry

Also known as: multi-case narrative inquiry, cross-case narrative research, comparative narrative inquiry, multi-site narrative inquiry

Multiple case-based narrative inquiry is a qualitative research design that applies narrative inquiry — the study of human experience through story — across two or more purposively selected cases. Each case is treated as a bounded narrative unit, enabling both within-case depth and cross-case comparison. The approach draws on Clandinin and Connelly's narrative inquiry tradition while adopting the replication logic of multiple case design to build richer, more transferable understandings of how people narrate and make meaning of their experiences.

ScholarGate
  1. Process / pipeline
  2. v1
  3. 2 Sources
  4. PUBLISHED
Cite this page →
Tools & resources
Download slides
Learn & explore

Read the full method

Members only

Sign in with a free account to read this section.

Sign in

Method map

The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.

Multiple case-based narrative inquiry
Comparative Case StudyInterpretive Narrative I…Longitudinal Narrative R…Multiple-Case StudyNarrative Inquiry

When to use it

Use multiple case-based narrative inquiry when your research question concerns how people in different contexts or positions story their experience of a shared phenomenon — for instance, how teachers in urban versus rural schools narrate professional identity, or how survivors of the same event construct different meaning across cultural settings. It is particularly valuable when you need both the depth of individual narrative and the comparative power of cross-case analysis, and when transferability of findings matters. Do NOT use it when you have only one case of interest (use narrative inquiry instead), when you need statistical generalization (use survey or experimental designs), when time or resources allow only superficial data collection (narrative data require sustained relational fieldwork), or when the cases are so different that comparison yields no meaningful contrast.

Strengths & limitations

Strengths
  • Retains the depth and voice of individual narrative accounts while enabling cross-case comparison unavailable in single-case narrative inquiry.
  • Replication logic (theoretical or literal) strengthens the credibility of patterns identified across cases.
  • Well-suited to research questions about how context shapes the stories people tell and the meanings they construct.
  • The relational, co-constructed nature of narrative inquiry produces rich, ethically grounded data.
  • Produces findings with greater transferability than single-case narrative studies, without sacrificing particularity.
  • Flexible regarding disciplinary home — used in education, health, social work, organizational studies, and beyond.
Limitations
  • Highly resource-intensive: each case requires sustained engagement, multiple interviews, and careful narrative composition.
  • Cross-case comparison risks flattening the uniqueness of individual stories if not handled with care.
  • Findings are not statistically generalizable; transferability depends on the richness of case description and reader judgment.
  • Managing relational ethics across multiple sites simultaneously is complex and demands reflexive attention throughout.
  • The narrative composition stage requires considerable writing skill and interpretive judgment from the researcher.

Frequently asked

How is this different from plain narrative inquiry?

Plain narrative inquiry typically focuses on one or a small number of individuals treated as a single case, aiming for depth in that life world. Multiple case-based narrative inquiry deliberately selects two or more bounded cases and adds a systematic cross-case comparison layer. The within-case work follows the same narrative inquiry principles, but the cross-case analysis allows patterns, contrasts, and contextual variations to emerge that a single case cannot reveal.

How many cases is enough?

There is no fixed rule, but 2–6 cases is typical. The upper bound is set by the depth that narrative inquiry requires: each case demands sustained relational fieldwork, multiple interviews, and careful narrative composition. Beyond 6–8 cases the workload usually makes genuine narrative depth impossible. The choice should be driven by theoretical or literal replication logic — selecting cases that will either confirm or contrast with each other — not by a desire for larger numbers.

Can the cases be organizations or communities rather than individuals?

Yes. Narrative inquiry has been applied at the level of organizations, professional communities, and cultural groups, where the collective story is the unit of analysis. In multiple case-based narrative inquiry, each case can be an individual, a family, a classroom, an organization, or a community, as long as the case is bounded and narrative data (stories, accounts, experiences) can be collected from within it.

How do I handle tensions between within-case depth and cross-case breadth?

The standard practice is to complete within-case narrative analysis before conducting cross-case comparison. This sequencing protects the integrity of each story. In the write-up, present condensed but faithful within-case narratives before moving to cross-case themes; this allows readers to evaluate both layers of interpretation. Resist the temptation to use cross-case categories as coding frames for within-case data — that would collapse narrative inquiry into thematic analysis.

Is member-checking required?

Member-checking — returning narrative texts to participants for review and response — is strongly recommended in narrative inquiry because the narrative text is a co-constructed representation, not a transcript. Participants may correct factual errors, clarify meaning, or add nuance. Clandinin and Connelly frame this as a relational and ethical obligation, not just a validity procedure.

Sources

  1. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. Jossey-Bass. ISBN: 978-0787943523
  2. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-1506336169

How to cite this page

ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Multiple Case-Based Narrative Inquiry. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/qualitative/multiple-case-based-narrative-inquiry

Related methods

Comparative Case StudyInterpretive Narrative InquiryLongitudinal Narrative ResearchMultiple-Case StudyNarrative Inquiry

Which method?

Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.

  • Comparative Case StudyQualitative↔ compare
  • Interpretive Narrative InquiryQualitative↔ compare
  • Longitudinal Narrative ResearchQualitative↔ compare
  • Multiple-Case StudyQualitative↔ compare
  • Narrative InquiryQualitative Research↔ compare
Compare side by side →

Similar methods

Comparative Narrative ResearchMultiple case-based biographical researchMultiple case-based life history researchMultiple case-based phenomenologyMultiple case-based oral historyInterpretive Narrative InquiryField-based narrative inquiryInterpretive multiple case study

Related reference concepts

Qualitative Research MethodsMixed-Methods Research in HealthcareIntersectionality as MethodStudy Designs and Types of EvidenceContextual Inquiry and EthnographyResearch Methods & Experimental Design

Spotted an issue on this page? Report or suggest a fix →

ScholarGate — Multiple case-based narrative inquiry (Multiple Case-Based Narrative Inquiry). Retrieved 2026-07-21 from https://scholargate.app/en/qualitative/multiple-case-based-narrative-inquiry · Dataset: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20539026
Quick facts
Originator
D. Jean Clandinin & F. Michael Connelly (narrative inquiry); Robert K. Yin (multiple case logic)
Year
2000s (synthesis of Clandinin & Connelly 2000 with multiple case study design)
Type
Qualitative research design
DataType
Interview narratives, life stories, field texts, documents from multiple bounded cases
Subfamily
Qualitative design / analysis
Related methods
Comparative Case StudyInterpretive Narrative InquiryLongitudinal Narrative ResearchMultiple-Case StudyNarrative Inquiry
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account