Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Todd, Andrew John
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects: BR, BS, BV
This thesis maps a qualitative empirical investigation of the talk, dynamics and theological practice of Bible-study groups. Chapter 2 locates this in the field of practical theology, demonstrating only a rather tenuous link between practical theological reflection on biblical interpretation and the practice of churches. This clarifies the aim of the thesis: to investigate the practice of Bible-study groups, as a contribution to the practical theology of biblical interpretation. Chapters 3 and 4 consider the methodology of the investigation (including in operation), bringing together interests from ethnography and discourse analysis, in relation to a wider frame of action research. Chapters 5 to 7 of the thesis account for the field work of the research, carried out through meetings with the three Bible-study groups, recording of data, transcription, coding and further analysis. Analytical concerns include the speech-exchange patterns of group meetings and the linguistic resources employed, in order to investigate how interpretative activity is achieved in the interaction between group participants. A particular interest is in the way different voices interrupt each other, and re-contextualise the conversation but also contribute to dialogue, especially between authoritative interpretations and critical questions from participants' experience. Comparisons are drawn with discourse in medical contexts and of scientists. Chapters 8 and 9 offer a comparative study of the three groups: of group dynamics and of the dynamics of interpretative dialogue. They also provide a rich picture of the practice of Bible-study, which includes sensual, ritual, relational and theological dimensions, key to which is the critical recruitment of texts and other voices, in order to interpret the relationship between God, group participants and others. God is experienced as incarnate in this interaction but also transcends the dialogue. Chapter 10 concludes the thesis, identifying questions for further research and offering suggestions designed to enhance Bible-study practice.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Ainsworth-Vaughn, N. (1995). Claiming power in the medical encounter: The whirlpool discourse. Qualtitative Health Research, 5(3), 270-291.
    • Aldridge, A. (1992). Discourse on women in the clerical profession: the diaconate and language games in the Church o f England. Sociology, 26(1), 45-57.
    • Alldred, P. (1998). Ethnography and discourse analysis: dilemmas in representing the voices o f children. In J. Ribbens & R. Edwards (Eds.), Feminist Dilemmas in Qualitative Research: Public knowledge and private lives. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage, 147-170.
    • Alvesson, M., & Skoldberg, K. (2000). Reflexive Methodology: New vistas fo r qualitative research. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Ammerman, N. T. (1987). Bible Believers: Fundamentalists in the modern world. New Brunswick/London: Rutgers University Press.
    • Ammerman, N. T., Carroll, J. W., Dudley, C. S., & McKinney, W. (Eds.). (1998). Studying Congregations: A new handbook. Nashville: Abingdon Press.
    • Anderson, H. (2005). The Bible and pastoral care. In P. Ballard & S. R. Holmes (Eds.), The Bible in Pastoral Practice. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 195-211.
    • Anderson, H., & Foley, E. (1998). Mighty Stories, Dangerous Rituals: weaving together the human and divine. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    • Antaki, C. (Ed.). (1988a). Analysing Everyday Explanation: A casebook o f methods. London/Newbury Park/Beverly Hills/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Antaki, C. (2004). Analysing talk and text. http://wwwstaff.lboro.ac.uk/~sscal/notation.htm [accessed, 14th May 2004].
    • Antaki, C. (1994). Explaining and Arguing: The social organization o f accounts. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Antaki, C. (1988b). Structures o f belief and justification. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analysing Everyday Explanation: A casebook o f methods. London/Newbury Park/Beverly Hills/New Delhi: Sage, 60-73.
    • Antaki, C., & Widdicombe, S. (1998). Identities in Talk. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Arminen, I. (2000). On the context sensitivity o f institutional interaction. Discourse and Society, 77(4), 435-458.
    • Arminen, I. (2004). Second stories: the salience o f interpersonal communication for mutual help in Alcoholics Anonymous. Journal o f Pragmatics, 36, 319-347.
    • Atkinson, P. (1985). Talk and identity: some convergences in micro-sociological theory. In H. J. Helle & S. N. Eisenstadt (Eds.), Micro-Sociological Theory: Perspectives on sociological theory. Vol. 2. London/Beverley Hills/New Delhi: Sage, 117-132.
    • Atkinson, P. (1992). The ethnography o f a medical setting: reading, writing and rhetoric. Qualitative Health Research, 2(4), 451 -474.
    • Atkinson, P. (1995). M edical Talk and Medical Work: The liturgy o f the clinic. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Atkinson, P. (1999). Medical discourse, evidentiality and the construction of professional responsibility. In S. Sarangi & C. Roberts (Eds.), Talk, Work and Institutional Order: Discourse in medical, mediation and management settings. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 75-107.
    • Ballard, P., & Holmes, S. R. (Eds.). (2005). The Bible in Pastoral Practice. London: Darton, Longman & Todd.
    • Ballard, P., & Pritchard, J. (1996). Practical Theology in Action: Christian thinking in service o f church and society. London: SPCK.
    • Baquedano-Lopez, P. (2001). Creating social identities through doctrina narratives. In A. Duranti (Ed.), Linguistic Anthropology: A reader. Malden, MA/Oxford: Blackwell, 343-358.
    • Baquedano-Lopez, P. (2008). The pragmatics o f reading prayers: learning the Act of Contrition in Spanish-based religious education classes {doctrina). Text & Talk, 28(5), 581-602.
    • Bames, L. (2000). The social production o f an enterprise clinic: nurses, clinical pathway guidelines and contemporary healthcare practices. Nursing Inquiry, 7, 200-208.
    • Bartholomew, C. (2005). In front o f the text: the quest o f hermeneutics. In P. Ballard & S. R. Holmes (Eds.), The Bible in Pastoral Practice. London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 135-152.
    • Barton, J. (1998). The Cambridge Companion to Biblical Interpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Billig, M. (1988). M ethodology and scholarship in understanding ideological explanation. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analysing Everyday Explanation: A casebook o f methods. London/Newbury Park/Beverly Hills/New Delhi: Sage, 199-215.
    • Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and Thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. (New ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Billig, M., Condor, S., Edwards, D., Gane, M., Middleton, D., & Radley, A. (Eds.). (1988). Ideological Dilemmas: A social psychology o f everyday thinking. London/Newbury Park/Beverly Hills/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Blaikie, N. (2000). Designing Social Research: The logic o f anticipation. Cambridge/Malden MA: Polity Press.
    • Bloor, M. (1978). On the analysis o f observational data: a discussion o f the worth and uses o f inductive techniques and respondent validation. Sociology, 12, 545- 552.
    • Bloor, M. (1997). Techniques o f validation in qualitative research: a critical commentary. In G. Miller & R. Dingwall (Eds.), Context & M ethod in Qualitative Research. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage, 37-50.
    • Bons-Storm, R. (1996). The Incredible Woman: Listening to women's silences in pastoral care and counselling. Nashville TN: Abingdon.
    • Braaten, C. E., & Jenson, R. W. (Eds.). (1996). Reclaiming the Bible fo r the Church. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
    • Brooke, J. H. (2001). O f Scientists and their gods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    • Brooke, J. H., & Cantor, G. (1998). Reconstructing Nature: The engagement o f science and religion. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
    • Brown, T., & Jones, L. (2001). Action Research and Postmodernism: congruence and critique. Buckingham: Open University Press.
    • Davies, B., & Harre, R. (2001). Positioning: the discursive production o f selves. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse Theory and Practice: A reader. London/Thousand Oaks/New delhi: Sage, 261-271.
    • Dickson, J. N. I. (2003). The Use o f the Bible in Pastoral Practice (Research Project 2002-3): Report. Cardiff: Cardiff University/The Bible Society.
    • Dingwall, R. (1980). Orchestrated Encounters: an essay in the comparative analysis of speech-exchange systems. Sociology o f Health and Illness, 2(2), 151-173.
    • Dokecki, P. R., Newbrough, J. R., & O'Gorman, R. T. (2001). Toward a communityoriented action research framework for spirituality: Community psychological and theological perspectives. Journal o f Community Psychology, 29(5), 497- 518.
    • Drew, P. (2003). Comparative analysis o f talk-in-interaction in different institutional settings: a sketch. In P. Glenn, C. D. L. Baron & J. Mandelbaum (Eds.), Studies in Language and Social Interaction: In honor o f Robert Hopper. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 293-308.
    • Drew, P., & Heritage, J. C. (Eds.). (1992). Talk at Work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Duneier, M., & Molotch, H. L. (1999). Talking city trouble: interactional vandalism, social inequality and the 'urban interaction problem'. American Journal o f Sociology, 104(5), 1263-1295.
    • Ebbutt, D. (1985). Educational action research: some general concerns and specific quibbles. In R. Burgess (Ed.), Educational Research. London: Falmer, 152- 174.
    • Ebbutt, D., & Elliott, J. (Eds.). (1985). Issues in Teachingfo r Understanding. London: Longman/Schools Curriculum Development Committee.
    • Edley, N. (2001). Analysing masculinity: interpretative repertoires, ideological dilemmas and subject positions. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse as Data: A guide fo r analysis. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage/Open University, 189-228.
    • Edley, N., & Wetherell, M. (1997). Jockeying for position: the construction of masculine identities. Discourse and Society, 8(2), 203-217.
    • Edwards, D. (1994). Script Formulations: an analysis o f event descriptions in conversation. Journal o f Language and Social Psychology, 13(3), 211 -247.
    • Elliott, J. (1983). Self evaluation, professional development and accountability. In M. Galton & R. Moon (Eds.), Changing Schools... Changing Curriculum. London: Harper & Row, 224-247.
    • Elliott, J. (1985). Educational action-research. In J. Nisbet (Ed.), World Yearbook o f Education, 1985. London/New York: Kogan Page/Nichols, 231-250.
    • Elliott, J. (1987). Educational theory, practical philosophy and action research. British Journal o f Educational Studies, 35(2), 149-169.
    • Emerson, R. M., & Pollner, M. (1988). On the uses o f members' responses to researchers' accounts. Human Organisation, 47(3), 189-198.
    • Eva, M. (2004). Soft systems methodology. Student Accountant, http://www.acca.co.uk/publications/studentaccountant/1073 53 5. [Accessed 10th April 2006].
    • Gergen, M. (1988). Narrative structures in social explanation. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Analysing Everyday Explanation: A casebook o f methods. London/Newbury Park/Beverly Hills/New Delhi: Sage, 94-112.
    • Gerkin, C. V. (1984). The Living Human Document: re-visioning pastoral counselling in a hermeneutical mode. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press.
    • Gerkin, C. V. (1986). Widening the Horizons: pastoral responses to a fragmented society. Philadelphia: W estminster Press.
    • Gilbert, G. N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's Box: A sociological analysis o f scientists' discourse. Cambridge/London/New York/New Rochelle/Melboume/Sydney: Cambridge University press.
    • Gillingham, S. E. (1998). One Bible, M any Voices: Different approaches to biblical studies. London: SPCK.
    • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery o f Grounded Theory: Strategies fo r qualitative research. Hawthorne NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
    • Gofffnan, E. (1961). Encounters: Two studies in the sociology o f interaction. London: Allen Lane.
    • Goffman, E. (1975). Frame Analysis: An essay on the organisation o f experience. Harmondsworth, Middlesex/Ringwood, Victoria/Auckland: Penguin.
    • Guest, M. J., Tusting, K. P., & Woodhead, L. (Eds.). (2004). Congregational Studies in the UK: Christianity in a post-Christian context. Aldershot/Burlington VT: Ashgate.
    • Heritage, J. C., & Watson, D. R. (1979). Formulations as conversational objects. In G. Psatha (Ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington, 123-162.
    • Hester, S., & Francis, D. (2000b). Analyzing "institutional talk": a reply to Watson. Text, 20(3), 373-375.
    • Hester, S., & Francis, D. (2000a). Ethnomethodology, conversation analysis and "institutional talk". Text, 20(3), 391-413.
    • Hester, S., & Francis, D. (2001). Is institutional talk a phenomenon? Reflections on ethnomethodology and applied conversation analysis. In A. McHoul & M. Rapley (Eds.), How to Analyse Talk in Institutional Settings: A casebook o f methods. London/New York: Continuum, 206-217.
    • Hiltner, S. (2000). The meaning and importance o f pastoral theology. In J. Woodward & S. Pattison (Eds.), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology. Oxford/Malden MA: Blackwell, 27-48.
    • Hollenweger, W. (1975). Efficiency and human values: a theological action-researchreport on co-decision in industry. The Expository Times, 86(H), 228-232.
    • Horlick-Jones, T. (1998). Meaning and contextualisation in risk assessment. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 59, 79-89.
    • Horlick-Jones, T. (2003). Managing risk and contingency. Health, Risk & Society, 5(2), 221-228.
    • Horlick-Jones, T. (2005). Informal logics of risk: contingency and modes of practical reasoning. Journal o f Risk Research, 8(3), 253-272.
    • Horlick-Jones, T., & Rosenhead, J. (2002). Investigating risk, organisations and decision support through action research. Risk Management:An international journal, 45-63.
    • Horlick-Jones, T., Rosenhead, J., Georgiou, I., Ravetz, J., & Lofstedt, R. (2001). Decision support for organisational risk management by problem structuring. Health, Risk & Society, 3(2), 141-165.
    • House of Bishops. (1991). Issues in Human Sexuality. London: CHP.
    • How, A. (1995). The Habermas-Gadamer Debate and the Nature o f the Social: Back to bedrock. Aldershot/Brookfield, Vermont: Avebury.
    • Hunt, M. (1991). Being friendly and informal: reflected in nurses', terminally ill patients' and relatives' conversations at home. Journal o f Advanced Nursing, 16, 929-938.
    • Hutchby, I. (1996). Power in discourse: the case o f arguments on a British talk radio show. Discourse and Society, 7(4), 481-497.
    • Hutchby, I., & Wooffitt, R. (1998). Conversation Analysis: Principles, practices and applications. Cambridge/Malden MA: Polity Press/Blackwell.
    • Idel, M. (2001). Torah: between presence and representation of the divine in Jewish mysticism. In J. Assman & A. I. Baumgarten (Eds.), Representation in Religion: Studies in honour o f Moshe Barasch (Vol. 89). Leiden/Boston MA/Koln, 197-235.
    • Jefferson, G., Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. (1987). Notes on laughter in the pursuit of intimacy. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and Social Organisation. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters, 152-205.
    • Lovat, T. J. (1988). Action research and the praxis model of religious education: a critique. British Journal o f Religious Education, 77(1), 30-37.
    • Mehan, H. (1983). The role o f language and the language o f role in institutional decision making. Language in Society, 12(2), 187-211.
    • Mehan, H. (1992). Understanding inequality in schools: the contribution of interpretive studies. Sociology o f Education, 65, 1-20.
    • Mehan, H. (1997). Students' interactional compewtence in the classroom. In M. Cole, Y. Engestrom & O. Vasquez (Eds.), Mind, Culture and Activity. Cambridge/New York/Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 235-240.
    • Mendelson, J. (1979). The Habermas-Gadamer debate. New German Critique, 18, 44- 73.
    • Meyer, B. (2006). Religious Sensations: Why media, aesthetics and power matter in the study o f contemporary religion. Inaugural lecture. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit. http://dspace.ubvu.vu.nl/bitstream/1871 /10311 /I /oratie%20B%20Meii er%206 %20okt%2006.pdf. [Accessed 26th November 2008].
    • Miller, G. (1994). Towards ethnographies o f institutional discourse: proposals and suggestions. Journal o f Contemporary Ethnography, 23(3), 280-306.
    • Miller, G., & Dingwall, R. (Eds.). (1997). Context & M ethod in Qualitative Research. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Misgeld, D. (1977). Critical theory and hermeneutics: the debate between Habermas and Gadamer. In J. O'Neill (Ed.), On Critical Theory. London: Heinemann, 164-183.
    • Mishler, E. G. (1984). The Discourse o f Medicine: Dialectics o f medical interviews. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    • Olson, D. V. A. (1994). Making disciples in a liberal protestant church. In R. Wuthnow (Ed.), 7 come Away Stronger': How small groups are shaping American religion. Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans, 125-147.
    • Ormiston, G. L., & Schnft, A. D. (Eds.). (1990). The Hermeneutic Tradition: From Ast to Ricoeur. Albany NY: State University o f New York Press.
    • Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook o f Action Research: The concise paperback edition. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage.
    • Reason, P., & Rowan, J. (Eds.). (1981). Human Inquiry: A sourcebook o f new paradigm research. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
    • Roberts, C., & Sarangi, S. (2005). Theme-oriented Discourse Analysis of medical encounters. Medical Education, 39 (6), 632-640.
    • Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research: A resource fo r social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Oxford/Malden MA: Blackwell.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article