Integrity of Analysis Reliability

In order to ensure integrity of study implementation and analysis, measures of validity and reliability were applied. Reliability of research determines the degree to which a

research instrument produces consistent results over time and variety of conditions when/as replicated by another researcher. Consistency of measurement or stability of measure over a variety of conditions ideally obtain similar results (Drost, 2011). Reflexivity is warranted in this as in all academic research. Threats to reliability potentially derive from researcher or participant error and/or bias in the form of systematic or random errors. Within this research, primary issues identified as potentially informing alternative explanations of the survey and interview findings included: 1) Researcher presumptions potentially allowing theoretical bias to inform results; 2) Researcher error in the data collection and/or analysis phases of the research; and, 3) Participant error in providing accurate survey and/or interview responses due to a variety of logistic or other variables. These issues are briefly addressed below:

First, researcher presuppositions are unavoidable. The construction of a thesis

presupposes a certain perspective of reality. In quantitative research, the investigator’s role is minimized and/or neutralized due to the objective nature of the procedures; whereas, in qualitative research, the researcher’s attitude, approach, and relationship towards the participants plays an inevitable role (Hood, 2010). The weaknesses of each method are counterbalanced by respective strength of the other (i.e., the inherent subjective, localized, insider, smaller yet ‘thick, internalized description’ of the ethnographer in qualitative analysis is balanced by the more objective, universalized, outsider, larger, external description

obtained through quantitative analysis). Whereas emic and etic perspectives each provide only half of the story, an integration of methodology provides a fuller narrative of the phenomenon at hand (Morris, 1999). For Manicas (2009), the qualitative researcher seeks to understand phenomena as well as the subject themselves, although he cautions that an absolutely objective, theory-neutral interpretation of either is out of reach. For him, reflexivity puts strong requirements on questions in interviewing, but does not require a positivist criterion of validity, reliability, and generalizability be satisfied in order to achieve adequate communication and understanding of the ‘other’s’ perception and position.

Within this study, the researcher attempted to avoid unintended hetero-interpretation in order to allow to gain understanding of religious conversion from the converts’

perspectives and sought in good faith to obtain full and relevant information from participating subjects. The primary investigator was an ‘outsider,’ having never been an Atheist yet was, in part, an ‘insider’ with respect to personal belief as a Christian. I did not make personal beliefs known to the subjects in order to maintain a neutral posture. However, this common ‘insider’ status aided in establishing rapport with and creating a safe,

encouraging environment for subjects to fully tell their conversion stories. Susceptibility towards personal bias was kept in mind during data analysis, with attempts made to select narrative data with neutrality through conforming to pre-determined model and structure.

Second, in an effort to increase internal consistency and decrease researcher error throughout data collection and analysis, the primary researcher of this study engaged with all participants throughout the assessment process, including all interactions from initial contact to assessment and final correspondence. In survey construction, a wide range of Substance and Function response options were provided per question in order to allow for a balance of potential responses and in order to avoid research bias or outcomes. Further, internal

consistency of inquiry was enhanced through length of survey construction as well as variety of questions assessing similar Function and/or Substance influences so as to allow for

conducted, transcribed and coded every interview to ensure consistency of interview structure and analysis. When engaging consultant(s) to assist with qualitative and quantitative

analysis, the primary researcher actively participated in the analysis process. Agreement between the primary researcher and consultants were reached as to the integrity and internal consistency of analysis in both survey and interview tools. Research protocol was

established to control for participant errors through clearly identifying intent, expectations, procedures, and parameters of the research study with pre-survey information and consent forms. Subjects were allowed time and preference in participating in survey and interview assessment in order to optimize participant responses.

Third, participant bias also poses a threat to reliability of the research in the giving of unintended false responses due to the risk of auto-biographical reconstruction. Research controlled for participant bias through providing secured anonymity, controlled private environment (as able) and safe, comfortable levels of dialogue engagement for interview interaction, allowing for honest, authentic narratives. Post-conversion stories can be

generated and potentially re-imagined in light of a new reality as perceived in the mind of the convert. Significant shift in worldview and life experience, particularly embracing a new spiritual reality, can bring past circumstances into a different framework of understanding. As such, the interviewer sought to obtain from the interviewee as clear of remembrance of pre-conversion perceptions, experiences, and events as possible. Interestingly, participants in this study appeared quite sober minded in self-analysis and interpretation of personal history. However, due to the subjective nature of narratives, limitation in full, honest disclosure was expected. In order to counter the possible negative effect of compromised self-understanding and autobiographical reconstruction, an increased number of participants (50) was used in the study in order to ascertain larger patterns of movement from disbelief to belief.

Further, biographical reconstruction can be viewed as positive affirmation of convert taking on the new role and rhetoric of their religious faith. In fact, this research highlights various areas of transformation a convert experiences as revealed through conversion surveys

and narratives. In this light, auto-biographical reconstruction is expected and observed as evidence of religious conversion. The researcher attempted to allow each individual’s narrative ‘speak for itself’ and simultaneously attempted to avoid skepticism and hetero- interpretation of and imposition upon the data. Each subject’s self-reporting narrative, although drawn out through directed inquiry, was taken at face value for recording and analysis. Possible lapses in accurate recall of detail, if present in the data, are minimized in pattern identification due to the comprehensive pool of information gathered among fifty (50) subjects. Further detailed analysis of twenty-three (23) subjects demonstrated the

transformational nature of conversion as shown through biographical reconstruction. The number and diversity of subjects allows for variance within the scope of religious conversion patterns, but also supports general trends. Unusual narratives demonstrated contrast and invited further inquiry and analysis as to the nature of deviation.