Case selection for robust generalisation: lessons from QuIP impact evaluation studies

References

• Beach, D., and P. Pedersen. 2012. Process Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Blamey, A., and M. Mackenzie. 2007. “Theories of Change and Realistic Evaluation.” Evaluation 13 (4): 439–455.
   Google Scholar
• Bond. 2015. Impact Evaluation. A Guide for Commissioners and Managers. London: Bond.
   Google Scholar
• Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2016. “(Mis)Conceptualizing Themes: Thematic Analysis, and Other Problems with Fugard and Potts; Sample-Size Tool for Thematic Analysis.” International Journal for Social Research Methodology 19 (6): 739–743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cartwright, N., and J. Hardie. 2012. Evidence-Based Policy: A Practical Guide to Doing It Better. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Copestake, J. 2014. “Credible Impact Evaluation in Complex Contexts: Confirmatory and Exploratory Approaches.” Evaluation 20 (4): 412–427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Copestake, J., G. Davies, and R. Remnant. 2019. “Generating Credible Evidence of Social Impact Using the Qualitative Impact Protocol (QuIP): The Challenge of Positionality in Data Coding and Analysis.” In Myths, Methods and Messiness: Insights for Qualitative Research Analysis, edited by B. Clift, G. Gore, S. Bekker, I. Batlle, K. Chudzikowskil, and J. Hatchard, 17–29. Bath: University of Bath.
   Google Scholar
• Copestake, J., M. Morsink, and F. Remnant. 2019. Attributing Development Impact: the Qualitative Impact Protocol Case Book. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Copestake, J., F. Remnant, C. Allan, W. van Bekkum, M. Belay, T. Goshu, P. Mvula, E. Thomas, and Z. Zerahun. 2018. “Managing Relationships in Qualitative Impact Evaluation of International Development Practice: QuIP Choreography as a Case Study.” Evaluation 24 (2): 169–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deaton, A., and N. Cartwright. 2018. “Understanding and Misunderstanding Randomized Controlled Trials.” Social Science and Medicine 210: 2–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dion, D. 1998. “Evidence and Inference in the Comparative Case Study.” Comparative Politics 30 (2): 127–145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. 2006. “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12 (2): 219–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelman, A., and T. Basboll. 2014. “When Do Stories Work? Evidence and Illustration in the Social Sciences.” Sociological Methods and Research 43 (4): 547–570.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goertz, G. 2017. Multimethod Research, Causal Mechanisms, and Case Studies: An Integrated Approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goertz, G., and S. Haggard. 2019. “Generalization, Case Studies, and Within-Case Causal Inference: Large-N Qualitative Analysis (LNQA).” Draft (version 14) Prepared for the Oxford Handbook on the Philosophy of Political Science Workshop, September 2019, Washington State University.
   Google Scholar
• Hagaman, A. K., and A. Wutich. 2016. “How Many Interviews Are Enough to Identify Metathemes in Multisited and Cross-Cultural Research?” Field Methods 29 (1): 23–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawson, R. 2013. The Science of Evaluation: A Realist Manifesto. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Pritchett, L., S. Samji, and J. Hammer. 2013. “It’s All About MeE: Using Structured Experiential Learning (“e”) to Crawl the Design Space.” Center for Global Development, Working Paper 322.
   Google Scholar
• Seawright, J. 2016. “The Case for Selecting Cases That are Deviant or Extreme on the Independent Variable.” Sociological Methods & Research 45 (3): 493–525.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seawright, J., and J. Gerring. 2008. “Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (2): 294–308.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skovdal, M., and F. Cornish. 2015. Qualitative Research for Development: A Guide for Practitioners. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Stern, E., N. Stame, J. Mayne, K. Forss, R. Davies, and B. Befani. 2012. Broadening the Range of Designs and Methods for Impact Evaluations. London: Department for International Development.
   Google Scholar
• Vogel, I. 2012. Review of the Use of ‘Theory of Change’ in International Development. London: Department for International Development. Accessed 4 April 2020. www.isabelvogel.co.uk.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, I. 2005. “Some Practical Sampling Procedures for Development Research.” In Methods in Development Research: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, edited by J. Holland, and J. Campbell, 37–52. Rugby: ITDG Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Woolcock, M. 2013. “Using Case Studies to Explore the External Validity of ‘Complex’ Development Interventions.” Evaluation 19 (3): 229–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. 2013. “Validity and Generalization in Future Case Study Evaluations.” Evaluation 19 (3): 321–332.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar