Studying Religion and Religions: Research Methods
Rels. 341 Lecture 2-3: Studying Religion and Research Methods
Common Flaws in Research Methods
Academic research in religious studies, particularly when employing empirical methods or textual analysis, is susceptible to several methodological pitfalls. Identifying and avoiding these flaws is crucial for producing reliable and unbiased scholarship.
1. Poorly Organized Survey Research
A prime example of flawed survey research is Faith for the Fearful? (1984) by Elda Susan Morran and Lawrence Schlemmer, published by the Center for Applied Social Sciences, Durban.
Flaws Identified in Faith for the Fearful?
Snowball Sample: The study relied on a non-random, snowball sampling method, which inherently introduces bias as participants are recruited through existing networks, not representative of the wider population.
Inaccurate Demographics: The survey reported that only of Church members were Black, whereas subsequent data, one year later, indicated that over were Black. This significant discrepancy highlights a severe limitation in the sample's representativeness.
Lack of Linguistic Distinction: The researchers failed to differentiate between significant language groups, specifically Afrikaans and English speakers, thereby overlooking crucial cultural and social distinctions within the community being studied.
Ignored Class Differences: No consideration was given to the class disparities existing between Afrikaners and the English populations, which could heavily influence religious practices and beliefs.
2. The Use of Proof Texts
This flaw involves taking religious texts or statements out of their original context to