It surprised me to read in Yin's article that Matthew Miles's piece "Qualitative data as an attractive nuisance"was based on a four-year study, and that it critiqued the short-comings of qualitative analysis and case study research without offering suggestions for overcoming the problems he identified. If as a researcher you are going to devote four years of your life on something and identifying its problems, not investing significant effort to think of solutions shows a lack of commitment. Social science research has the purpose of contributing to social thought and theory and improving understanding. Pointing out problems contributes very little to growth and improvement, it is only the first step.
Yin calls Miles' discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative data and case study as a "frequent confusion regarding types of evidence,...types of data collection methods,...and research strategies" (p.1). It is easy to confuse these interrelated methods and strategies when they are not clearly defined. Throughout the course I have referred to different books outside the course texts for definitions of various methods and strategies that have come up in the course, because I did not always find Knight and Luker to provide a clear definition of various methods. What I have found is the definitions of methods and research strategies differ from text to text depending on who is doing the defining. So I appreciate Yin's efforts to untangle this mess for me and distinguish the similarities and differences of various types of evidence, data collection methods and research strategies.
Yin, R.K. (1981). The case study crisis: Some answers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26(1), 58-65.