Case study researchers choose between single and multiple case research approaches. The literature recommends single cases for gaining in-depth understanding and multiple cases for acquiring broader understanding. This article presents the unconventional approach of a primary case informed by multiple secondary cases. It suggests that focusing on one case while following some additional secondary cases may, paradoxically and under certain conditions, be a better way of conducting in-depth, single case research. The secondary, or assisting, cases can help the researcher to identify issues to expect, questions to ask, and data to look for in the primary case.
Abrams, Charles.1964. Man’s struggle for shelter in an urbanizing world . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
Abramson, Paul R.1992. A case for case studies: An immigrant’s journal . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3.
Amsden, Alice H.1989. Asia’s next giant: South Korea and late industrialization . New York: Oxford University Press .
4.
Appadurai, Arjun.2002. Deep democracy: Urban governmentality and the horizon of politics. Public Culture14 (1): 21-47.
5.
Briggs, Xavier de Souza.2008. Democracy as problem solving: Civic capacity in communities across the globe. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
6.
Burawoy, Michael.1991. The extended case method. In Ethnography unbound: Power and resistance in the modern metropolis, ed. Michael Burawoy, Alice Burton , Ann Arnett Ferguson, and Kathryn J. Fox, 271-87. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
Corburn, Jason.2005. Street science: Community knowledge and environmental health justice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
Dahl, Robert.1961. Who governs? Democracy and power in the American city . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9.
Dandekar, Hemalata.1986. Some uses and potentials of qualitative methods in planning . Journal of Planning Education and Research6 (1): 42-49.
10.
Doebele, Williams A.1994. Urban land and macroeconomic development: Moving from ‘access for the poor’ to urban productivity. In Methodology for land and housing market analysis, ed. G. Jones and P. Ward, 44-54. London : University College of London Press.
11.
Feagin, Joe R., Anthony M. Orum, and Gideon Sjoberg, eds. 1991. A case for the case study. Chapel Hill : University of North Carolina Press.
12.
Freeman, Lance.2006. There goes the ’hood: Views of gentrification from the ground up. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
13.
Gaber, John, and Sharon L. Gaber .1997. Utilizing mixed-method research designs in planning: The case of 14th Street, New York City. Journal of Planning Education and Research17 (1): 95-103.
14.
Gans, Herbert J.1962. The urban villagers: Group and class in the life of Italian-Americans . New York: Free Press.
15.
Gans, Herbert J.1967. The Levittowners: Ways of life and politics in a new suburban community. New York: Pantheon.
16.
Gerring, John.2004. What is a case study and what is it good for? American Political Science Review98 (2): 341-54.
17.
Gerring, John.2007. Case study research: Principles and practices. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm Strauss.1967. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
19.
Guba, Egon G., and Yvonna S. Lincoln .1989. Fourth generation evaluation . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
20.
Innes de Neufville, Judith.1987. Knowledge and action: Making the link. Journal of Planning Education and Research6 (2): 86-92.
21.
Jacobs, Jane.1961. Death and life of great American cities. New York: Random House.
22.
Jones, Gareth, and Peter M. Ward, eds. 1994. Methodology for land and housing market analysis. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
23.
Kidder, Louise, and Michelle Fine.1987. Qualitative and quantitative methods: When stories converge. New Directions for Program Evaluation35:57-75.
24.
Leavitt, Jacqueline, and Susan Saegert.1990. From abandonment to hope: Community-households in Harlem. New York: Columbia University Press.
25.
Madsen, RoJean.1983. Use of evaluation research methods in planning and planning contexts. Journal of Planning Education and Research2 (2): 113-21.
26.
Maxwell, Joseph A.2004. Using qualitative methods for causal explanation. Field Methods16 (3): 243-64.
27.
Meyer, Christine B.2001. A case in case study methodology. Field Methods13 (4): 329-52.
28.
Mollenkopf, John H.1983. The contested city. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
Mukhija, Vinit.2000. Squatters as developers? Mumbai’s slum dwellers as equity partners in redevelopment. Doctoral diss., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge.
30.
Mukhija, Vinit.2003. Squatters as developers? Slum redevelopment in Mumbai . Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
31.
North, Douglass C., and Robert P. Thomas .1973. The rise of the Western world: A new economic history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Orum, Anthony M., and Joe R. Feagin .1991. A tale of two cases. In A case for the case study, ed. J. R. Feagin, A. M. Orum, and G. Sjoberg, 121-47. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
33.
Payne, Geoffrey.1997. Urban land tenure and property rights in developing countries: A review. London: IT Publications/Overseas Development Administration (ODA).
34.
Peattie, Lisa.1968. The view from the barrio. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press.
35.
Peattie, Lisa.1983. Realistic planning and qualitative research. Habitat International7(5-6): 227-34.
36.
Peattie, Lisa.1987. Planning: Rethinking Ciudad Guyana. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
37.
Peattie, Lisa.1990. Anthropology and planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research9 (2): 101-6.
38.
Peattie, Lisa.1995. An approach to urban research in the 1990s. In Perspectives on the city, ed. R. Stren , 389-415. Toronto, Canada: Center for Urban and Community Studies, University of Toronto.
39.
Ragin, Charles, C.2000. Fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40.
Ragin, Charles C., and Howard S. Becker .1992. What is a case? Exploring the foundations of social inquiry. New York: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Ryan, Grey W., and H. Russell Bernard .2003. Techniques to identify themes . Field Methods15 (1): 85-109.
42.
Sanyal, Bishwapriya, and Vinit Mukhija.2001. Institutional pluralism and housing delivery: A case of unforeseen conflicts in Mumbai, India. World Development29 (12): 2043-57.
43.
Schon, Donald A.1990. The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
44.
Stake, Robert E.1995. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45.
Tendler, Judith.1998. Good government in the tropics. Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press.
46.
Tipple, A. Graham, and Kenneth G. Willis, eds. 1991. Housing the poor in the developing world: Methods of analysis, case studies and policy. London: Routledge.
47.
Turner, John F. C.1967. Barriers and channels for housing development in modernizing countries. Journal of the American Institute of Planners33 (3): 167-81.
48.
Venkatesh, Sudhir A.2000. American project: The rise and fall of a modern ghetto . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
49.
Vestbro, Dick Urban, Yonca Hurol, and Nicholas Wilkinson, eds. 2005. Methodologies in housing research. Gateshead, UK: Urban International Press.
50.
Whyte, William F.1943. Street corner society: The social structure of an Italian slum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51.
Whyte, William F.1984. Learning from the field: A guide from experience. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
52.
Yin, Robert.1994. Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53.
Yin, Robert.2009. Case study research: Design and methods. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
