Point: Case studies provide detailed and in-depth information.

Evidence: For example, in psychology, case studies like the famous case of Phineas Gage, who survived a severe brain injury, offer rich details about his behaviour and changes in personality.

Explanation: This level of detail allows researchers to gain a deep understanding of specific cases, uncovering insights that might not be visible in larger studies. Case studies can reveal complex interactions between different factors, making them valuable for exploring unique situations in depth.

Point: Case studies may not be generalisable to the wider population.

Evidence: The findings from a case study on one individual, like Phineas Gage, might not apply to others, as his situation was unique and might not represent how others would react to similar circumstances.

Explanation: Because case studies focus on a single or a small number of cases, the results might not be applicable to everyone. This limits the ability to draw broad conclusions from the findings, meaning that what's true for one person might not be true for others.

Point: Case studies can be affected by the researcher's subjective interpretation and inaccurate recall.

Evidence: For example, when a researcher selects which details to include or focuses on certain aspects of a case, their personal biases may influence the findings. Additionally, if the information relies on the participant's memory, it may be inaccurate or incomplete.

Explanation: This subjectivity and potential inaccuracy can lower the validity of the case study because the findings might not fully or accurately represent the situation. The conclusions drawn could be biased or based on incorrect information, making the results less reliable.