80 PART ONE: INTRODUCTION The methodology from grounded theory is used to try to create theological concepts and applied insights.215 Stevens thus makes a case for the hermeneutics of experience as outlined earlier and encourages us to use the principles of grounded theory in practical theology.216 Applying those principles in this study, the analysis of the data is inductive in nature: it aims at collecting individually and collectively expressed concepts and insights from the interviews through a thematic analysis of the data in order to generate new theory. However, in order to interpret these themes properly, they need to consider the biographic narratives in which they function. The use of qualitative content analysis methods with their focus on meaning enables this and results in theological insights grounded in the biographic experiences of the monastics.217 2.4 THE EMPIRICAL PROCESS Having laid out my methodology above, I will proceed by giving an account of the actual empirical process. Together with the use of mixed methods (literary review and ethnography in describing the phenomenon, and in-depth interviews and content analysis to establish a grounded theology), this is part of enhancing this study’s validity and reliability. Even though the person of the researcher plays a role in any kind of research, this is particularly true for qualitative research such as this. One’s observations of, and interactions with, the research objects are highly subjective inmany regards. By providing a detailed account of his/her activities, choices, observations, and interventions, the researcher gives insight into 215 Bruce A. Stevens, “Grounded Theology? A Call for a Community of Practice,” Practical Theology 10, no. 2 (April 3, 2017): 204, https://doi.org/10.1080/1756073X.2017.1308455 (italics in original). 216 Stevens himself has used this method to explore the notion of ‘luck’: Bruce A. Stevens, “Grounded Theology: A New Method to Explore Luck,” Theology Today 73, no. 2 (2016): 117– 28, https://doi.org/10.1177/0040573616650140. 217 Ji Young Cho and Eun Hee Lee explore the relationship between classic grounded theory and qualitative content analysis, describing their origins, similarities, and differences. The latter might be a more precise definition of my research methods, with the former being the more well-known tradition or methodological family referred to in previous quotes. See Ji Young Cho and Eun Hee Lee, “Reducing Confusion about Grounded Theory and Qualitative Content Analysis: Similarities and Differences,” Qualitative Report 19, no. 32 (2014): 1–20; Philipp Mayring, “Qualitative Content Analysis,” Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum Qualitative Social Research 1, no. 2 (2000): Art. 20, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-1.2.1089.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw