Advantages
Cit method has been described by service researchers as offering a number of benefits:
- The data collected is from the respondent's perspective and in his or her own words
- Provides a rich source of data by allowing respondents to determine which incidents are the most relevant to them for the phenomenon being investigated
- Allows respondents to provide as free a range of responses as possible within an overall research framework
- There is no preconception or determination of what will be important to the respondent
- Does not restrict observations to a limited set of variables or activities
- Offers a lot of information of little known phenomenon’s and explains them thoroughly.
- Often used to create hypothesis, allowing for subsequent research on the topic
- Suggests areas for improvements to the managers
- · Really well suited for assessing customers from other cultures.
- · Allows researchers to minimise their bias because respondents decide what incidents are the most relevant.
- · Second the research process in inductive: it may generate the novel descriptions of previously undocumented phenomenons, conceptual structures and research questions that may be tested in the future.
Disadvantages
- Some academics have criticised CIT on its lack of reliability and validity.
- Incidents can be misinterpreted or misunderstood.
- Criticised for having a design that may be flawed by recall bias and memory lapses.
- Events may be reported incorrectly or untruthfully by the researcher.
- Abbreviated and incomplete description of the incident.
- Researchers may misunderstand and misinterpret people's stories.
- During data analysis, ambiguity with regards to categories and code may arise and it will be impossible to ask for clarifications.
- Because CIT is retrospective, data validity, may be affected by recall bias because respondents may forget important details.