Paper submitted to the Midwest Sociological Society 2008 annual meeting

I spent my holiday break writing a critical self-evaluation of my dissertation research and I am entering it as a paper in the graduate student competition of the Midwest Sociological Society annual meeting this March in St. Louis. The paper is entitled The Challenges and Benefits of Insider Status: A Critique of a Single-Case Study of the Sense-Making Behavior of a Clergy Member and the Interpretation of Scripture. The article revisits the research methodology question about the proper role of the researcher: detached observer (outsider) or active participant (insider)?

I argue in the paper that something more than a simple either/or answer is required. I make the case that the clergy profession as a field of study is so complex that some degree of insider status, e.g., experience in the field, seminary education, etc., is necessary in order to properly study and accurately represent the participants. In the paper, I demonstrate that the attributes I had in common with my dissertation informant: gender, ethnicity, seminary education, ordination, clergy experience, conservative religious childhood, etc., was a benefit rather than a detriment to the research project. My insider status enabled me to pick up on certain things in the informant's sermons and interviews that likely would have been missed by a detached observer. But my questions regarding these different points did not lead to simple confirmation of my assumptions. Very often the informant's replies served to educate me from a perspective very different from my own and helped the research project to achieve a significant depth of exploration.

As a result of this self-evaluation, I am modifying my research methodology to intentionally include participants as co-researchers through the utilization of the Co-Operative Inquiry Method of Peter Reason. In the self-evaluation, I recognize situations of bias and over-rapport occurred in the dissertation research that fortunately did not undermine the integrity of the project, but is a cause of concern . By asking future participants in the research to review and critique the transcripts of interviews conducted with participants other than themselves, I am hoping that they will help catch me in situations of presumption, bias, over-rapport, and so on. The methodology will also empower participants to educate me on the subtle distinctions of theology and doctrine that may more accurately represent their unique situation and thereby help to clarify the complexity of the field of study.