Embracing the research design crisis: How the disruption of case selection in the field can uncover new discoveries
Written by Rachel A. Schwartz, University of Oklahoma
Political science has seen a welcome increase in instruction on conducting field research that recognizes the need for adaptability. However, despite advances in the professional discussion of “repetition” in the field, strategies for adapting to case selection failures (a frequent problem faced by researchers in the field) remain unclear. I synthesize the reasons why case selection breaks down and suggest four strategies to help scholars iterate when things break down. 1) Reconsider what constitutes a “case” when fieldwork overturns our understanding of the population to which the original case belongs. 2) Refocus the analysis from outcome to process when new insights call into question the value of the outcome variable in the original case. 3) Return to dominant theoretical models as a source of comparison when unforeseen changes cut off access to data or the field. 4) Delete cases that have become irrelevant as the comparison logic of the project changes due to fieldwork. By embracing such moments of seeming crisis, we train field researchers to be more productive in making the most of the inductive discoveries and new theoretical insights that often emerge when original plans crumble. You can.
