Pooled Case Comparison: An Innovation for Cross-Case Study

Abstract

Comparative studies offer a means for developing more robust theory, but they are plagued by problems of decontextualization of data and marginalization of the voices of the researched. This article introduces pooled case comparison, a means of cross-study comparison that has the potential to minimize some of the limitations often inherent in such comparisons. In pooled case comparison, raw data from separate studies are combined for a fresh analysis. This article provides a rationale for pooled case comparison and situates the method within a framework of other approaches. A detailed example from one pooled case comparison is offered. This example, in the form of a playlet, juxtaposes voices of participants from two separate studies. The example illustrates how this particular form of data presentation maintains the centrality and integrity of participants' voices within their specific contexts. Finally, the authors consider potential contributions of pooled case comparison as well as possibilities for other applications of this method.

Conflict rationalisation: How family members cope with a diagnosis of brain stem death

“…sorting to: separate quantitative data from qualitative data [Clayton et al, 1999], interview data from observational data [West and Oldfather, 1995], to focus on one type of data, to identify a sub-sample of the primary participant population [Kearney et al, 1994] or so that analysis can be selectively limited to specific themes or topics [Gallo and Knafl, 1998]. The latter is the case in this study.…”

Being a friend and a mentor at the same time: a pooled case comparison

“…We wondered what role our friendships played in our mentoring relationships and decided to look back at our lasting friendships and mentorships. To do this, we used West and Oldfather's (1995) pooled case comparison approach to analyze the data from two separate mentoring studies we had conducted. One study did not consider friendship as a possible factor in the relationship between adviser and advisee (Young & Alvermann, 1996, 1997.…”

Implementing and Evaluating Performance Measurement Initiative in Public Leisure Facilities: An Action Research Project

“…A degree of generality can be achieved by having several applications and the risk of misjudging of a single event can be overcome (Voss et al 2002). Second, cross-case analysis can provide the opportunity to search for cross-case patterns (Eisenhardt 1989;West and Oldfather 1995), such as the common barriers centres encounter when they use the proposed system, and thus increase the robustness of analysis.…”