Revision as of 15:34, 23 July 2013

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Open Stories Foundation, “Understanding Mormon Disbelief: Why do some Mormons lose their testimony and what happens to them when they do?,” March 2012, http://WhyMormonsQuestion.org.

Reviews of this work

• Gregory L. Smith, “Dubious Mormon Stories: A Twenty-First Century Construction of Exit Narratives,” 23 February 2013.

Summary

The Open Stories Foundation has released a study to the media which they claim can illuminate the reasons for which some Mormons become disaffected. This review demonstrates that:

•  ^{[needs work]}

== Notes ==

1. [note]  This article has been adapted, with permission, from a larger analysis published elsewhere. Due to the nature of a wiki project, several authors and editors may have been involved in the product here.
2. [note]  Seth R. Payne, “Purposeful Strangers: A Study of the ex-Mormon Narrative,” working paper draft, Yale Divinity School, 15 October 2007, 2, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1959555}}An abbreviated report was also presented at Sunstone Symposium, Salt Lake City, 9 August 2008, http://mormonstudies.net/html/payne/strangers.htm. In this review, we cite the longer working draft paper
3. [note]  When this analysis uses the term “apostasy” or “apostate” in this paper, it intends the neutral, sociological sense. We will, however, prefer the more neutral-sounding term “leavetaker” where possible. It is used in a generic sense to refer to any member who is withdrawing, to whatever degree, from full religious participation. Stylistic or citation reasons may, however, occasionally necessitate the use of the other terms.
4. [note]  Eileen Barker, “Standing at the Cross-Roads: The Politics of Marginality in ‘Subversive Organizations’,” in The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements, edited by David G. Bromley (Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1998), 76–83; David G. Bromley, “Sociological Perspectives on Apostasy: An Overview,” in the same volume, 7); Payne, “Purposeful Strangers,” 3–7).
5. [note]  Barker, “Standing at the Cross-Roads,” 80.
6. [note]  Bromley’s classification only includes the last three categories; Bromley, “Sociological Perspectives,” 5 and David G. Bromley, “The Social Construction of Contested Exit Roles: Defectors, Whistleblowers, and Apostates,” in The Politics of Religious Apostasy, 25–38.
7. [note]  Bromley, “The Social Construction of Contested Exit Roles,” 21.
8. [note]  Payne, “Purposeful Strangers,” 32.
9. [note]  Payne, “Purposeful Strangers,” 27, 31.
10. [note]  For further details, see full review at Gregory L. Smith, “Dubious Mormon Stories: A Twenty-First Century Construction of Exit Narratives,” 23 February 2013.
11. [note]  A podcast is much like a radio program. It is usually an audio-only file (though video podcasts also exist), which the user can download and listen to at leisure.
12. [note]  “About,” Open Stories Foundation, accessed 28 February 2012, http://openstoriesfoundation.org/. The relevant IRS data can be viewed at http://tinyurl.com/87l7rxg.
13. [note]  Original reads: "Mormonische Kultur in Geschichten. Persönlich. Direkt. Unkorreliert," http://mormonstoriesgermany.com/ (23 June 2012).
14. [note]  Dan Wotherspoon, “Blogging and Podcasting Sunstone Style!,” 15 September 2005, http://sunstoneblog.com/. Archived version available at http://web.archive.org/web/20080905111435/http://sunstoneblog.com/2005/09/15/blogging-and-podcasting-sunstone-style/.
15. [note]  Carrie A. Moore, “A New Direction for Sunstone?,” Deseret Morning News, 7 August 2007, http://www.deseretnews.com/article/print/695198451/New-direction-for-Sunstone.html.
16. [note]  “The Mission of StayLDS.com,” 13 July 2009, {{{1}}}.
17. [note]  Brian Johnson and StayLDS.com, “How to Stay in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints after a Major Challenge to Your Faith,” Open Stories Foundation, 2010, accessed 13 March 2012, http://staylds.com/docs/HowToStay.html.
18. [note]  John Dehlin, “298: We Really Need Your Support,” 28 October 2011, {{{1}}}; “355: What Mormon Stories is Trying to Do, and How to Keep it Alive,” 25 June 2012, http://mormonstories.org/355-what-mormon-stories-is-trying-to-do-and-how-to-keep-it-alive/; “Finances,” Open Stories Foundation, accessed 28 February 2012, http://openstoriesfoundation.org/finances/; “About,” Open Stories Foundation, accessed 28 February 2012, http://openstoriesfoundation.org/.
19. [note]  Kevin Opsashi, “Religious obsession studied; USU team develops treatment,” 2 January 2011, http://news.hjnews.com/news/education/article_97ecb808-1636-11e0-9355-001cc4c002e0}}html.
20. [note]  James T. Richardson, “Apostates, Whistleblowers, Law, and Social Control,” in Bromley, The Politics of Religious Apostasy, 173.
21. [note]  See full paper for documentation and examples.
22. [note]  Foster, “Career Apostates,” 54}} Compare with citation of Foster’s later work in Armand L. Mauss, “Apostasy and the Management of Spoiled Identity,” 51.
23. [note]  Wright, 97.
24. [note]  Bromley, “The Social Construction of Contested Exit Roles,” 21.
25. [note]  See Smith, “Dubious Mormon Stories,” especially notes 15, 18, 136, 234, 243, and 254.
26. [note]  Wright, “Exploring Factors That Shape the Apostate Role,” 97.
27. [note]  John Dehlin, posts on Dehlin’s Facebook wall, 9 December 2011 (9:38 PM), https://www.facebook.com/johndehlin/posts/587931659309 See also http://wp.me/p3gtkJ-5G.
28. [note]  See, for example, Mormonstories [John Dehlin], comment on thread “Conversation on FB with a friend, because oh [sic] John Dehlin,” 12 April 2011 (9:48 AM), {{{1}}}.
29. [note]  Wright, “Exploring Factors That Shape the Apostate Role,” 103.
30. [note]  John Dehlin, post on Mormon Stories Facebook wall, 8 October 2012 (1:55 PM), https://www.facebook.com/groups/mormonstories/permalink/484143694930441.
31. [note]  John Dehlin, “The Path of the Uncorrelated Mormon,” PowerPoint presentation from Mormon Stories conference, New York City, 26 March 2011, slide 44}} See also John Dehlin, “254: Exploring the Future for Uncorrelated Mormons with John Dehlin,” 29 April 2011, http://mormonstories.org/?p=1583}} See also http://wp.me/p3gtkJ-5G; Jared Anderson, “Mormon Stories Sunday School,” (27 June 2012), http://www.mormonsundayschool.org; John Dehlin, post on Dehlin’s Facebook wall, 4 July 2012 (6:59 AM), https://www.facebook.com/johndehlinpublic/posts/413521595356262
32. [note]  Dehlin, “Uncorrelated Mormon,” slide 45.
33. [note]  Barbour, Versions of Deconversion, 74.
34. [note]  Wright, “Exploring Factors That Shape the Apostate Role,” 107.
35. [note]  Daniel Carson Johnson, “Apostates Who Never Were: The Social Construction of Absque Facto Apostate Narratives,” in Bromley, The Politics of Religious Apostasy, 124.
36. [note]  When Dehlin heard that this review was in preparation, he wrote to a Seventy and copied Dan Peterson: “Please, please stop the personal public attacks of people who are struggling with legitimate issues” [John Dehlin, e-mail to Elder [Seventy] and Dan Peterson, 26 March 2012 (12:03 PM)]. For more details, see Gregory L. Smith, “Return of the Unread Review: A Mormon Story,” 23 February 2013, notes 43, 52–53, and 55 therein.
37. [note]  Johnson, “Apostates Who Never Were,” 131
38. [note]  Johnson, “Apostates Who Never Were,” 132
39. [note]  Johnson, “Apostates Who Never Were,” 132.
40. [note]  Open Stories Foundation, “Understanding Mormon Disbelief: Why do some Mormons lose their testimony and what happens to them when they do?,” (March 2012): 4, http://WhyMormonsQuestion.org.
41. [note]  Such “convenience sampling” is useful for some purposes, such as the early development of hypotheses for future testing by more appropriate sampling techniques. They are the beginning of research, not the finished product that the release of a report implies: “[C]onvenience sampling can be useful to researchers in a number of ways. For example, responses from a convenience sample might be useful in developing hypotheses early in the course of research, identifying various issues surrounding the research subject, defining response categories for multiple-response questions, or collecting other sorts of noninferential data.” Matthias Schonlau, Ronald D. Fricker, Jr., and Marc N. Elliott, Conducting Research Surveys via E-mail and the Web (Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2002), 8}} See also http://wp.me/p3gtkJ-61.
42. [note]  James R. Lewis, “Adidam, Controversy, and Former Members,” paper presented at 2009 CESNUR Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, 11–13 June 2009, http://www.cesnur.org/2009/slc_lewis.htm. Lewis also notes that “Rather than responding directly to mainstream social science, a handful of anti-cultists with academic credentials have instead conducted research on their own terms, creating alternative periodicals, which feature pseudo-scientific studies supporting the ‘cult’ stereotype.” See also “Return of the Unread Review,” notes 29, 31 therein.
43. [note]  “Understanding Mormon Disbelief,” 4.
44. [note]  “A link to the survey was posted on several sites associated with the “Bloggernacle”, or LDS-themed blogs, as well as through social media.” [“Understanding Mormon Disbelief,” 4}}] We recall Dehlin’s past practice of using the same channels to explicitly recruit supportive testimonials (but not critical ones) to present to his stake president—see Smith, “Dubious Mormon Stories,” notes 144–147.
45. [note]  Conducting Research Surveys via E-mail and the Web, 33.
46. [note]  Michael Ross and Anne E. Wilson, "Constructing and Appraising Past Selves," in Memory, Brain, and Belief, edited by Daniel L. Schacter and Elaine Scarry (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2001), 232, 233; cited in Gardner, Gift and Power, 74. At the time of publication, both authors were members of the Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
47. [note]  Payne, “Purposeful Strangers,” 2.
48. [note]  Seema L. Clifasfi, Maryanne Garry, and Elizabeth Loftus, “Setting the Record (or Video Camera) Straight on Memory and Other Memory Myths,” in Tall Tales about the Mind and Brain: Separating Fact from Fiction, edited by Sergio Della Sala (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 61; cited in Gardner, Gift and Power, 119n1.
49. [note]  Dean R. Gerstein, Duncan Luce, Neil J. Smelser, and Sonja Sperlich, editors, The Behavioral and Social Sciences: Achievements and Opportunities (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1988), 173.
50. [note]  Scott O. Lilienfeld, Steven Jay Lynn, John Ruscio, and Barry L. Beyerstein, 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior (Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons, 2010), 68.
51. [note]  Daniel L. Schacter, The Seven Sins of Memory: How the Mind Forgets and Remembers (New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2001), 138–139.
52. [note]  Schacter, Seven Sins of Memory, 147.
53. [note]  Daniel L. Schacter, Searching For Memory: The Brain, The Mind, and The Past (New York: Basic Books, 1996), 169}} Another aspect of memory which operates on a non-conscious level, termed the “perceptual representation system,” (PRS) also handles simpler types of priming, and normally works in close concert with semantic memory (166–172).
54. [note]  Schacter, Searching For Memory, 167.
55. [note]  This precise scenario has been studied, with predictable but illuminating results; see Schacter, Seven Sins of Memory, 141–142.
56. [note]  Payne, “Purposeful Strangers,” 27.
57. [note]  Payne, “Purposeful Strangers,” 23–24.
58. [note]  Shudson, 351; cited in Gardner, Gift and Power, 119.
59. [note]  See Smith, “Dubious Mormon Stories,” note 212.; Dehlin, “Uncorrelated Mormon,” slide 44.
60. [note]  “Understanding Mormon Disbelief,” 8.
61. [note]  Barbour, Versions of Deconversion, 4.
62. [note]  See anonymous survey respondent #243 who tells the Church, “Please don't treat doubt as a sin,” while #1736 says, “The way that church leaders demonize people like me at conference is so upsetting.” [“Understanding Mormon Disbelief,” 6}}]
63. [note]  Bromley, “Sociological Perspectives,” 9.
64. [note]  “Understanding Mormon Disbelief,” 12.
65. [note]  “Understanding Mormon Disbelief,” 26}} The report renders the name as “Hofmann” (9, 11), “Hoffman” (12, 26), and “Hofman” (17). The first is correct.
66. [note]  “Understanding Mormon Disbelief,” 8.
67. [note]  See Smith, “Dubious Mormon Stories,” notes 94–95, 103.
68. [note]  See Smith, “Dubious Mormon Stories,” notes 48, 91–92.
69. [note]  Bromley, “The Social Construction of Contested Exit Roles,” 37.
70. [note]  Bromley, “The Social Construction of Contested Exit Roles,” 37.

Further reading