Research can be defined as a systematic review done to explore the reality with the purpose of developing skills or improvement of one’s knowledge. When conducting an investigation, it is necessary to avoid confusion between assessment and analysis. Critiques will always look at the benefit of evaluating a given situation without outside criteria. Consequently, assessment will look at the outside explicit criteria. However, it is pretty difficult for quantitative researchers to undertake qualitative criteria, since it is hard to choose a paradigm. In addition, it is awkward and inappropriate to re-language quantitative terms or re-label them, since this may hinder validity and reliability in a quantitative evaluation (Morse, 1994, p. 95).
On the other hand, vividness is a crucial factor in nursing; this is usually the methodological congruence that looks at the quality of agreeing. Therefore, a good research should be connected theoretically. This will enable to develop heuristic relevance to the subject of study. In addition, vividness will enable rigor in documentation, use of proper ethics, procedures, and auditability. This implies that the significance of the study is significantly described, thus meeting the laid objectives. It will also make a significant contribution to understanding of the phenomenon; it will enable comparisons of two or more pivotal but rival theories in a discipline to explain the case study (Munhall, 2007, p. 377).
Thus, a case study should be as complete as possible. This will have a positive effect on the study in essence that evidence collected will be extensive and relevant to the study. Collected data should be investigated, since not all data collected is relevant. Therefore, information collected should be investigated to ensure it is meaningful. This implies that the researcher might be required to take more time in the field; this requires him or her to have enough time to collect more data for the completeness of the study (Munhall, 2007, p. 378).
Consequently, an explanatory case study looks to examine the evidence from varying perspectives and viewpoints or considers alternatives. This implies that the investigator should anticipate what the alternative interpretations are and be able to demonstrate how and why the rival explanations can be rejected on the basis of the facts provided by the study. In addition, the case study will report the present data so that the reader can draw conclusions regarding its worth. However, the report will give the investigator confidence in professional ethics. Therefore, evidence must be presented in a truthful and objective manner, bearing the challenges and supports experienced in the study. For example, the most critical evidence or fair treatment of all classes is not based on exclusions of data that do not support researchers’ conclusions (Munhall, 2007, p. 378).
The reviews and validity of the investigator’s interpretation should be done by participants; this will reduce biasness in the presentation of the conclusions reached. In addition, it will give the participants understanding of the whole case study (Munhall, 2007, p. 379). When this is done repeatedly, one tends to develop naturalistic generalization, which is a product of experience. One will derive tactic knowledge of how things are, why they are, and how people feel about them (Morse, 1991, p. 46).
Case study does have a unique issue related to ethics; ethical concerns can arise from the inquiry “shaped” by the investigator, data manipulations, non-reporting of contradictory data, and bias in the interpretation. Techniques identified in a case study are usually used in the evaluation of the study. This will ensure there is integrity of the case study (Munhall, 1994, p.186).
In addition, many case study researchers do make assertions on a small database; they do have the privilege of asserting what they find meaningful as a result of inquiry. But they also have responsibility regarding interpretation. Therefore, a good case study is patient reflective, willing to see a different view on the case. The ethics of caution is not contradictory to the ethics of interpretation. However, a case study approach should protect the anonymity of the participants or sides in the study; assurance of anonymity is particularly problematic when the researcher is investigating a unique situation (Morse, 1991, p. 56).
Last but not least, case study investigators must be comfortable with ambiguity and flexible enough to deal with unexpected results and treat them as an opportunity rather than menace. A willingness to comprehend the meaning in context and to accept more than one “truth” enhances one’s understanding and ability to conduct case studies. Therefore, a good case study researcher should have good communication skills. The art of listening and absorbing large amounts of data without bias, an aptitude for observing with an inquiring mind, and the facility for writing in an articulate and interesting style are imperative for quality case study researcher. In addition, a case study researcher should be mature, introspective, and reflective (Morse & Johnson, 1991, p. 84).
In conclusion, the ability of a researcher to conceptualize is essential for a case study; with the use of vast amount of data amassed, patterns must be identified, themes discovered, connections made, prepositions developed, and meaning abstracted. Imagination coupled with discipline is necessary for the case study investigator to produce creative scholarship. Therefore, a better knowledge of the case study nourishes one’s understanding of the phenomenon.