Methods

Case study

A case study investigates one person, a small set of people or another clearly bounded case in depth. Multiple kinds of evidence can establish a detailed account rather than reducing the case to one score. Rare or unusual cases can challenge a general theory, but a striking case does not tell us how common a pattern is.

What can detailed evidence from one person with an unusual memory impairment reveal about memory?

How it works

  1. Specify the case and the question it can illuminate. In a hypothetical follow-up assessment, distinguish the person’s current functioning from historical reports. Set boundaries for the investigation so that information is gathered for a defined scientific purpose rather than because every detail seems interesting.
  2. Combine relevant assessments, observations and records while preserving the distinction between sources. Note disagreements rather than forcing every observation into a single story. Where a comparison task is appropriate, ask which abilities appear preserved and which are impaired, and how confidently each was measured.
  3. Construct an explanation that considers the person’s history and other plausible influences. Separate observations from proposed mechanisms. Identify which conclusions concern this individual and which would need comparison cases or another design. Protect identity and avoid unnecessary personal detail in the report.

Evidence: (Spielman et al., 2020); (Corkin et al., 1997)

MRI investigation of H.M.

Published study

Corkin and colleagues’ 1997 primary paper used MRI to characterize H.M.’s medial temporal lobe lesion. The reported damage involved multiple structures, including hippocampal and adjacent cortical regions. This illustrates how a detailed investigation can refine an influential clinical account. It should not be retold as a randomized test or as evidence that one isolated structure explains every feature of his memory impairment.

Evidence: (Corkin et al., 1997)

What can you conclude?

Develop a detailed account, study uncommon phenomena and identify observations that theories need to explain.

Evidence: (Spielman et al., 2020); (Corkin et al., 1997)

Limits and common mistakes

  • An unusual case cannot by itself estimate population prevalence or establish broad representativeness.
  • Multiple features of the case may offer competing explanations; the history cannot usually be experimentally reassigned.

A mistake to catch

Turning an informative individual into a universal rule or presenting a clinical history as a controlled experiment.

Evidence: (Spielman et al., 2020); (Corkin et al., 1997)

Sources and inspection notes

Links checked October 21, 2026. Inspection scope is stated for each source; an access date is not a publication date.

  1. Corkin, S., Amaral, D. G., González, R. G., Johnson, K. A., & Hyman, B. T. (1997). H. M.’s medial temporal lobe lesion: Findings from magnetic resonance imaging. The Journal of Neuroscience : The Official Journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 17(10), 3964–3979. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.17-10-03964.1997Consulted source

    Case study: published example only; MRI characterization of H.M.’s lesion and multiple affected medial temporal structures Primary empirical paper, full text accessible and abstract plus clinical background read 21 October 2026. DOI 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.17-10-03964.1997. Does not support a claim that only the hippocampus was damaged.

  2. Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/2-2-approaches-to-research

    Case study: summary, allows and limits; detailed investigation, rare cases and limits to generalization Open teaching chapter by the textbook authors, read 21 October 2026. Not a primary empirical study.

Keep reading

Spielman, R. M., Jenkins, W. J., & Lovett, M. D. (2020). Psychology 2e. OpenStax. https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/2-2-approaches-to-research

Nearest related OpenStax Psychology 2e reading. This is a course connection, not evidence for every specialist detail above.

Related methods

Try the methods · Read a study · Explore psychological measures