A major debate exists in the neuropsychology community concerning whether case study is preferable to group study of brain-damaged patients. So far, the discussion has been limited to the advantages and disadvantages of both methods, with the assumption that neurolinguists pursue a single goal attainable by one or the other method. Practical considerations determine the substance and methodologies of research, and they often influence and constrain the questions asked, contrary to a popular myth that the research question comes first. A historical review of case and group studies and their contributions to the development of neurolinguistics, and of some work in progress or recently completed, including some studies using a hybrid design, reveals a wide range of options between the pure case study and ideal large group study, with specific benefits found in each. There is a logical progression to the kinds of studies the behavioral scientist can do: first, a phenomenological study, either case or group, to describe what may be pertinent to the topic; then, examination of the phenomenon's frequency of occurrence, its elements, and perhaps their interactions; studies of different subgroups; and finally descriptive or theory-driven group studies of the phenomenon's universality. (MSE)