The purpose of this article is to provide insights into the issue of researcher "projection" within case study analyses. It is argued that a potential source of projection lies in the cognitive information processes of the researcher. A case study (written by the authors of this article) serves as a self-study to illustrate the projection potential in case analytic studies. Implications of projection in case analyses are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Babbie, E.
(1990). Survey research methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
2.
Cantor, N.
, & Mischel, W. (1977). Traits as prototypes: Effects on recognition memory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 38-48.
3.
Cantor, N.
, & Mischel, W. (1979). Prototypes in person perception. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 12). New York: Academic Press.
4.
Charlier, M.
(1994, August 22). Nature's ambush: How two firefighters survived the tragedy of South Canyon blaze. Wall Street Journal, pp. A1, A6.
5.
Devereux, G.
(1967). From anxiety to method in the behavioral sciences. Paris: Mouton.
6.
Feldman, J.
(1981). Beyond attribution theory: Cognitive processes in performance appraisal. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 127-148.
7.
Forsyth, D. R.
(1990). Group dynamics (2nd Ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
8.
Gill, J.
, & Johnson, P. (1991). Research methods for managers. London: Paul Chapman.
9.
Hensley, T.
, & Griffin, G. (1986). Victims of groupthink: The Kent State University board of trustees and the 1977 gymnasium controversy. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30, 497-531.
10.
Janis, I. L.
(1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
11.
Janis, I. L.
(1983). Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
12.
Lord, R. G.
(1985). An information processing approach to social perceptions, leadership and behavioral measurement in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 87-128.
13.
Manz, C. C.
, & Sims, H. P., Jr. (1982). The potential for groupthink in autonomous work groups. Human Relations, 44, 539-550.
14.
Moorhead, G.
, Ference, R., & Neck, C. P. (1991). Group decision fiascoes continue: Space shuttle Challenger and a revised framework. Human Relations, 44, 539-549.
15.
Moorhead, G.
, & Griffin, R. W. (1992). Organizational behavior: Managing people and organizations. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
16.
Moorhead, G.
, & Montanari, J. (1986). An empirical investigation of the groupthink phenomenon. Human Relations, 39, 399-410.
17.
Neck, C. P.
, & Moorhead, G. (1992). Jury deliberations in the trial of U.S. v. John DeLorean: A case analysis of groupthink avoidance and an enhanced framework. Human Relations, 45, 1077-1090.
18.
Neck, C. P.
, & Moorhead, G. (1995). Groupthink remodeled: The importance of leadership, time pressure, and methodical decision-making procedures. Human Relations, 48, 537-557.
19.
Neisser, U.
(1976). Cognition and reality. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
20.
Report of the South Canyon Fire Accident Investigation Team. (1994). Glenwood Springs, CO.
21.
Robbins, S. P.
(1993). Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
22.
Rosch, E.
, Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basis objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382-439.
23.
Shaw, M. E.
(1981). Group dynamics: The psychology of small group behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
24.
Smith, S.
(1984). Groupthink and the hostage rescue mission. British Journal of Political Science, 15, 117-123.
25.
Tsujimoto, R. N.
(1978). Memory bias toward normative and novel trait prototypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1391-1401.
26.
Tsujimoto, R. N.
, Wilde, J., & Robertson, D. R. (1978). Distorted memory for exemplars of a social structure: Evidence for schematic memory processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 1402-1414.
27.
Tversky, A.
(1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84, 327-352.
28.
Wyer, R. S.
, & Srull, T. K. (1980). The processing of social stimulus information. A conceptual integration. In R. Hastie, T. M. Ostrom, E. B. Ebbesen, R. S. Wyer, D. L. Hamilton, & E. E. Carlston (Eds.), Person memory: Cognitive basis for social perception (pp. 227-300). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29.
Yin, R.
, & Heald, K. (1975). Using the case study method to analyze policy studies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 20, 371-381.
