Bandingkan metode
Tinjau metode pilihan Anda berdampingan; baris yang berbeda akan disorot.
| Studi Kasus Kritis× | Studi Kasus Interpretif× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang | Kualitatif | Kualitatif |
| Keluarga | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Tahun asal≠ | 1980s–2006 (formalized) | 1978–1995 (Stake's foundational works) |
| Pencetus≠ | Bent Flyvbjerg (formalized); Robert K. Yin (case study typology) | Robert E. Stake; extended by Bent Flyvbjerg |
| Tipe | Qualitative research design | Qualitative research design |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219–245. DOI ↗ | Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Sage. ISBN: 978-0803957671 |
| Alias | critical case, strategic case study, critical-instance case study, paradigmatic case study | intrinsic case study, constructivist case study, qualitative case study, naturalistic case study |
| Terkait | 6 | 6 |
| Ringkasan≠ | A critical case study is a case study design in which the researcher deliberately selects a case that is strategically important for testing, confirming, challenging, or extending an existing proposition, theory, or policy claim. Rather than choosing a typical or representative case, the researcher argues that if the finding holds here — in this most-likely, least-likely, or paradigmatic instance — it can reasonably be expected to hold more broadly. This purposive logic transforms a single case into a powerful analytical tool. | Interpretive case study is a qualitative research design in which the researcher selects a bounded real-world case — a person, program, event, organization, or community — and seeks to understand it from the inside, through the meanings participants themselves construct. Unlike explanatory or descriptive case study, the interpretive variant foregrounds the researcher's active role in making sense of complex, context-laden data rather than testing hypotheses or cataloguing facts. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|