{"title":"Alternative Lenses for Qualitative Religion Research: Interstitial, Inverted, and Dialogical Approaches","authors":"T. Hjelm","doi":"10.1163/15700682-12341529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis article explores new ways of looking at qualitative data in the study of religion. I call them the interstitial, inverted, and dialogical approaches. The interstitial approach provides an alternative to traditional triangulation by treating discrepancies between, say, self-reporting and observation of religious attendance not as a problem, but as an interstice where new information can be found. The inverted approach examines how discourses about “the other” – the other’s religion, in this case – enable researchers to analyze positive self-identifications, even when those are left unarticulated. Finally, the dialogical approach responds to a recurrent problem in qualitative religion research: researchers often assume that they ways in which people talk about religion have particular consequences. The dialogical approach enables researchers to demonstrate whether and how this is indeed so. The three approaches show how epistemological reframing – all three are, in different ways, constructionist approaches – enables novel thinking about “religion.”","PeriodicalId":44982,"journal":{"name":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Method & Theory in the Study of Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15700682-12341529","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article explores new ways of looking at qualitative data in the study of religion. I call them the interstitial, inverted, and dialogical approaches. The interstitial approach provides an alternative to traditional triangulation by treating discrepancies between, say, self-reporting and observation of religious attendance not as a problem, but as an interstice where new information can be found. The inverted approach examines how discourses about “the other” – the other’s religion, in this case – enable researchers to analyze positive self-identifications, even when those are left unarticulated. Finally, the dialogical approach responds to a recurrent problem in qualitative religion research: researchers often assume that they ways in which people talk about religion have particular consequences. The dialogical approach enables researchers to demonstrate whether and how this is indeed so. The three approaches show how epistemological reframing – all three are, in different ways, constructionist approaches – enables novel thinking about “religion.”
期刊介绍:
Method & Theory in the Study of Religion publishes articles, notes, book reviews and letters which explicitly address the problems of methodology and theory in the academic study of religion. This includes such traditional points of departure as history, philosophy, anthropology and sociology, but also the natural sciences, and such newer disciplinary approaches as feminist theory and studies. Method & Theory in the Study of Religion also concentrates on the critical analysis of theoretical problems prominent in the study of religion.