Rituals and Data Analytics: A Mixed-Methods Model to Process Personal Beliefs.

Daniel Burgos

doi:10.9781/ijimai.2021.07.002

Authors

Daniel Burgos Universidad Internacional De La Rioja

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2021.07.002

Keywords:

Data Analytics, Mixed-methods, Pragmatism, Semi-automatic Process, Ritual

Supporting Agencies

Special thanks go to Prof. Lluís Oviedo from the Pontifical Antonianum University (Rome, Italy) as PhD supervisor, who supported the research process all the way, and to Prof Bernardo Pérez as PhD programme director from the Theological Institute of Murcia at Universidad de Murcia (Spain), who encouraged me throughout the process. The author also thanks all the host universities, libraries, and interviewees that sympathised with this research.

Abstract

The goal of this research is to delve into ritual, religious, and secular phenomenology. It concentrates specifically on the relationship between pagan, cultural, celebratory, and traditional rituals and any other form of representation of a social sentiment focused on identifying, enjoying, or replacing a feeling (e.g. transcendence) as well as how these rituals overlap, replace, nourish, or make use of religious rituals bi-directionally. To achieve this goal, the research develops a semi-automatic process that leans on a mixed-methods approach, to explore the degree of ritual identity. This approach combines qualitative and quantitative research, applying a number of tools, such as systematic literature review, semi-structured interviews, data-analytics generic framework, and case studies. After a thorough systematic review of 251 publications, a semi-structured interview is designed and applied to 51 subjects. 10 significant aspects that define rituals are extracted. Subsequently, this list is completed with the 17 common elements of ritual identity from the systematic literature review. These combined indicators constitute the basis for building a data-analytics generic framework of ritual affinity through weighing each element’s relevance and presence to obtain a degree of total affinity. That framework is then applied to 34 representative case studies. The core findings reinforce the initial hypothesis, determining that rituals follow a similar pattern of structure and preparation according to a predetermined set of common elements, whether linked to religious or secular settings.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

E. Haynes, R. Garside, J. Green, M.P. Kelly, J. Thomas, C. Guell, “Semiautomated text analytics for qualitative data synthesis”, Research Synthesis Methods, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 452–464, 2019.

A. J. Johs, D.E. Agosto, R.O. Weber, “Qualitative investigation in explainable artificial intelligence: A bit more insight from social science”. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.07130, 2020.

G. Abeza, N. O’Reilly, M. Dottori, B. Séguin, O. Nzindukiyimana, “Mixed methods research in sport marketing”, International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 40–56, 2015.

J. W. Creswell, V.L.P. Clark, “Designing and conducting mixed methods research”, Sage Publications, 2017.

R. B. Johnson, A.J. Onwuegbuzie, “Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come”, Educational Researcher, vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 14–26, 2014.

P. Leavy, “Research design: Quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, artsbased, and community-based participatory research approaches”, Guilford Publications, 2017.

R. Wille, “Conceptual landscapes of knowledge: A pragmatic paradigm for knowledge processing”, in Classification in the Information Age, pp. 344–356, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1999.

R. Wille, “Methods of conceptual knowledge processing”, in Formal Concept Analysis, pp. 1–29, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2006.

K. F. Punch, “Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches”, Sage: London, 1998.

A. Tashakkori, C. Teddlie (Eds.), “Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research”, Sage Publications:Thousand Oaks, CA, 2010.

P. Bazeley, ”Issues in mixing qualitative and quantitative approaches to research”, in Applying Qualitative Methods to Marketing Management Research, pp. 141, 156, 2004.

C. R. Kothari, “Research methodology: Methods and techniques”, New Age International, 2004.

R. Kumar, R. “Research methodology: A step-by-step guide for beginners”, Sage Publications Limited:Thousand Oaks, CA, 2019.

S. Kumar, P. Phrommathed, P. “Research methodology”, Springer, pp. 43–50, 2005.

G. Rodríguez Gómez, J. Gil Flores, E. García Jiménez, “Metodología de la investigación cualitativa”, Aljibe: Málaga, 1999.

N. Astrakhantsev, D. Turdakov, N. Vassilieva, “Semi-automatic data extraction from tables”, in RCDL, pp. 14–20, 2013.

A. Jaimes, J.R. Smith, “Semi-automatic, data-driven construction of multimedia ontologies”, in 2003 International Conference on Multimedia and Expo ICME ’03 Proceedings (Cat. No. 03TH8698), Vol. 1, pp. I–781, IEEE, 2013.

R. Newell, P. Burnard, “Research for evidence-based practice”, Blackwell Publishing, 2006.

G. V. Glass, “Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research”, Educational Researcher, vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 3–8, 1976.

M. Hunt, M. “How science takes stock: The story of meta-analysis”, Russell Sage Foundation, 1997.

J. L. Barrett, J. L. “Cognitive science, religion and theology: From human minds to divine minds”, Templeton Press: West Conshohocken, PA, 2011.

C. Bell, “Ritual theory, ritual practice”, Oxford University Press, 1992.

T. F. Driver “Liberating rites: Understanding the transformative power of ritual”, BookSurge Publishing, 2006.

M. Eliade, ”The sacred and the profane: The nature of religion”, Harvest,1957.

R. L. Grimes, “The craft of ritual studies”, Oxford University Press, 2014.

B. Malley, J. Barrett, “Can ritual form be predicted from religious belief? A test of the Lawson–McCauley hypotheses”, Journal of Ritual Studies, pp. 1-14, 2003.

O. Zell-Ravenheart, M.G. Zell-Ravenheart, “Creating circles and ceremonies”, Red Wheel/Weiser, 2006.

V. W. Turner, “The forest of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu ritual”, (Vol. 101). Cornell University Press, 1967.

A. Van Gennep, “The rites of passage”, University of Chicago Press, 2011.

A. Warburg, W.F. Mainland, W. F. “A lecture on serpent ritual”, Journal of the Warburg Institute, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 277–292, 1939.

J. D. Kelly, M. Kaplan, “History, structure, and ritual”, Annual Review of Anthropology, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 119–150, 1990.

R. N. McCauley, E.T. Lawson, “Bringing ritual to mind”, in Ecological approaches to cognition: Essays in honor of Ulric Neisser, pp. 285-312, Psychology Press, 1999.

F. Staal, “The meaninglessness of ritual”, Numen, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 2-22, 1979.

S. E. Fredericks, “Environmental Guilt and Shame: Signals of Individual and Collective Responsibility and the Need for Ritual Responses”, Oxford University Press, 2001.

P. Freston, “Evangelicals and Politics in Asia, Africa and Latin America”, Cambridge University Press: New York, 2001.

E. R. Leach, “G. Ritualization in man: Ritualization in man in relation to conceptual and social development”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, vol. 251, no. 772, pp. 403-408, 1966.

M. A. Duncan, “Duncan’s Ritual of Freemasonry”, Courier Corporation, 2007.

I. Strenski, “What’s rite? Evolution, exchange and the big picture”, Religion, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 219-225, 1991.

N. C. Chen, M. Drouhard, R. Kocielnik, J. Suh, C.R. Aragon, “Using machine learning to support qualitative coding in social science: Shifting the focus to ambiguity.”, ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1–20, 1998.

R. Likert, “A technique for the measurement of attitudes”, Archives of Psychology, 1932.

A. Joshi, S. Kale, S. Chandel, D.K. Pal, “Likert scale: Explored and explained”, British Journal of Applied Science & Technology, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 396-403, 2015.

M. Deutsch, L. Solomon, “Reactions to evaluations by others as influenced by self-evaluations”, Sociometry, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 93–112, 1959.

P. Skolnick, “Reactions to personal evaluations: A failure to replicate”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 62–67, 1971, doi: 10.1037/h0030709 1971.

S. E. Taylor, E. Neter, H.A. Wayment, “Self-evaluation processes”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 21, no. 12, pp. 1278–1287, 1995.

M. Conley-Tyler, “A fundamental choice: Internal or external evaluation?”, Evaluation Journal of Australasia, vol. 4, no. 1–2, pp. 3–11, 2005.

H. Yang, J. Shen, “When is an external evaluator no longer external? Reflections on some ethical issues”, American Journal of Evaluation, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 378–382, 2006.