Paul F. Lazarsfeld’s “Notes on the Logic of Generalization in Family Case Studies” examines the methodological challenges and logical foundations of drawing general conclusions from case history materials, especially in sociological research concerning families during the Great Depression. Lazarsfeld explores the interplay between case studies and statistical methods, emphasizing that statistical verification alone may be insufficient due to the complex array of interdependent variables affecting family dynamics. He highlights the importance of external knowledge and typological classification as necessary tools for hypothesis formulation and interpretation when variables multiply and statistical control falters. The text critically distinguishes between discovering general “laws” through case analysis and applying such laws to specific instances, revealing inherent limitations in causal inference and the epistemic uncertainty involved. Lazarsfeld proposes a pragmatic strategy for causal attribution in single cases, advocating for a triangulation of subjective reports, concrete event chains, and the exclusion of alternative explanations. The work acknowledges the role of opinion-based data and conflicting testimonies, addressing how they may inform hypothesis development when rigorous methods are impractical or unavailable. Ultimately, Lazarsfeld calls for an eclectic methodology and cautions against exclusive reliance on either statistical or intuitive approaches in family research, arguing that advancing sociological understanding requires the judicious integration of diverse techniques.