Introduction. A research on religiosity in Italy has been carried out in 2017, covering 164 subjects appropriately selected, without the pretension ofrepresentativeness. The solution of a com-pletely open interview was tested. For the rest of the 86 subjects, the first part was entirely free and the second part was on some concepts-stimuli: daily and festive life, happiness and pain, life and death, God, prayer, religious institutions and Pope Francis. The results were corroborated with T2K (Text-to-Knowledge), Lexical Correspondences Analysis and VoSpec procedure (Vocabulaire Sp?cifique des Groupes d'individus). An analysis sheet similar to a semi-structured questionnaire was then prepared.
Materials and methods.The subjects to be interviewed were selected through a stratification of three categories related to the degree of study obtained (level of obligation, upper-middle school diploma, degree), the distinction of gender (man, woman), residence (small towns, medium munici-palities, large cities), geographical distribution (north, centre, south and islands) and age (young, adults, elderly).
Results. For almost half of the qualitative sample, i.e. 78 cases, the interviewers tried to ob-tain narratives, reflections, interpretations and evaluations that were not at all solicited through di-rect or indirect questions on the theme of religiosity. On the other hand, for the rest of the 86 subjects interviewed, atwofold method was used within the same interview, that is, a first part that could be freely used by the interviewee in terms of content and a second part to be addressed, based on some concepts-stimuli proposed by the interviewer to solicit answers on daily and festive life, happiness and pain, life and death, God, prayer, religious institutions and pope Francis.
Conclusion. As a result of empirical substantiation and theoretical development of the main categories, five fundamental concepts have emerged that can give rise to a theory:(1)“Pastoral care” (believers who help other people by drawing inspiration from the values of Christianity), (2) “Rhetoric of charitable humanitarianism” (people who perceive other people as different and dan-gerous and, at the same time, tell of the effort to welcome and accept the needy), (3) “Prisoners of despair” (they experience the difficulties of life in a passive and resigned way and takes refuge in God and prayer), (4) “Embracing faith” (practicing believers, guided by Christian precepts and liv-ing the faith as dogma) and (5) “Beyond everything” (individuals, who are discordant on the themes of life, death, and the afterlife, but, beyond ideas, actions, and skepticism, they have faith in God).
Roberto CiprianiProfessor Emeritus of Sociology
Roma Tre University
Rome, Italy
rciprian@uniroma3.it
1. Amaturo, E. and Punziano, G. (2013). Content analysis. Tra comunicazione e politica. Milano: Ledizioni. 328 p.
2. Amaturo, E. and Punziano, G. (2016). I Mixed Methods nella ricerca sociale. Roma: Carocci. 198 p.
3. Benz?cri, J.-P. (1973). L’analyse desdonn?es. Vol 1. La taxonomie. Paris: Dunod. 619 p.
4. Cesareo V., Cipriani R., Garelli F., Lanzetti C., Rovati G. (1995). La religiosit? in Italia. Milano: Mondadori. 369 p.
5. Charmaz, K. (1995). Between positivism and postmodernism: Implication for methods. Studies in Symbolic Interaction. Vol. 17 / ed. by N. K. Denzin. Greenwich:JAI Press, 1995, pp. 43–72.
6. Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded Theory: objectivist and constructivists methods. In: Hand-book of qualitative research/ ed. by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. London: SAGE, pp. 509–535.
7. Charmaz, K. (2003). Grounded Theory. In: Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to re-search methods/ ed. by J. A. Smith. London: SAGE, pp. 81–110.
8. Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded Theory in the 21st century: A qualitative method for ad-vancing social justice research. In: Handbook of qualitative research/ ed. by N. K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE, pp. 507–535.
9. Charmaz, K. (2008). Constructionism and the Grounded Theory method. In: Handbook of Constructionist Research/ James A. Holstein and Jaber F. Gubrium (eds). New York: Guilford Publications,pp. 397–412.
10. Charmaz, K. (2011). Grounded Theory methods in social justice research. In: The SAGEHandbook of qualitative research/ ed. by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. New York: SAGE, pp.359–380.
11. Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: SAGE. 416 p.
12. Charmaz, K. and Bryant, A. (eds) (2007). The SAGEBook of Grounded Theory. London: SAGE.657 p.
13. Cipriani, R. (1993). De la religion diffuse ? la religion des valeurs. Social Compas. Vol. 40. No. 1. pp. 91–100.
14. Cipriani, R. (ed.) (2008). L’analisi qualitativa. Teorie, metodi, applicazioni. Roma: Armando.224 p.
15. Della Ratta-Rinaldi, F. (2007). L’analisi multidimensionale dei testi. Ricerca so-ciale.Dall’analisi esplorativa al data mining. Roma: Carocci, 2007. Vol. III. pp. 133–150.
16. Delli Poggi S.,Bolla F., Fiorentini S., Valletta G. L. (2020). Italiani: scomunicati o liberi pensatori? Eresia, apostasia, scisma o libert? di credere. Profili di cattolici in Italia. –Indipendent publication. URL: https://www.amazon.com/Italiani-scomunicati-pensatori-Apostasia-cattolici/dp/1693714280
17. Dell’Orletta F., Venturi G., Cimino A., Montemagni S. (2014). T2K2: a system for auto-matically extracting and organizing knowledge from texts. In: Proceedings of 9th International con-ference on language resources and evaluation(LREC 2014).Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association (ELRA), pp. 2062–2070.
18. Faggiano, M. P. (2016). L’analisi del contenuto di oggi e di ieri. Testi e contesti on e of-fline. Milano: FrancoAngeli. 116 p.
ФилософиярелигииирелигиоведениеPhilosophy of religion and religious studies207
19. Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. and Turner L. A. (2007).Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research. Vol. 1. No.2. pp. 112–133.
20. Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content Analysis. An introduction to its methodology. New York: SAGE. 188 p. [Analisi del contenuto. Introduzione metodologica. Torino: ERI, 1983. (In Italian)].
21. Losito, (2002). G.L’analisi del contenuto nella ricerca sociale. 4th ed. Milano: Franco Angeli.176 p.
22. Maranda, P.(1990). DiscAn: Users Manual. Qu?bec: Nadeau Caron Informatique.
23. Maranda, P. (1995). DiscAn: un programma di analisi reticolare per la costruzione di mappe semantiche. In: Ricerca qualitativa e computer. Teorie, metodi e applicazioni/ ed. by R.Cipriani and S. Bolasco. Milano: Franco Angeli,pp. 171–183.
24. Mauceri, S. (2017). L’avvento dell’era dei mixed methods. Nuovo paradigma o deadline di un dibattito? Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale. No. 113. pp. 39-61.
25. Mauceri, S. (2018). Mixed survey research. Le funzioni delle tecniche qualitative nella ri-cerca standard. Sociologia e ricerca sociale. No. 116. pp. 90–102.
26. Statera, G. (1997). La ricerca sociale. Logica, strategie, tecniche. Roma: Seam. 397 p