Neotribal Zombies

I was recently asked to present at lecture on the changing nature of society in the wake of a society-ending event.

Yup, that's right, I was asked to present at the Zombie Education Defense meeting on campus.

Click here for the power point file that I'll be using for the discussion.

Survey Versions

Sacred Profane Surveys:

Version 1 (click here) (Sacred, Revered, Mundane, Profane, Taboo)

Version 2 (click here) (Sacred, Profane)

Version 3 (click here) (Sacred, Mundane, Profane)

Images

Mask Theory

Theory Brief

The 'Mask' is the combined fascet of the Status and Role(s) that one possesses as an element of their personal identity. Masks 'fit' on the exterior of one's sense of Self. The identity of an individual is, then, the combination of the Self and the multitude of Masks that a person wears. Depending on what type of interaction we engage in, we will switch between various masks to best accomodate the nature of the interaction.

Definitions:

• Status: The honor or prestige attached to one's position in society (one's social position). It may also refer to a rank or position that one holds in a group, for example son or daughter, playmate, pupil, etc.
• Role: A set of connected behaviours, rights and obligations as conceptualised by actors in a social situation.
• Identity:  The portion of an individual's self-concept derived from perceived membership in a relevant social group.
• Self:  A multi-dimensional construct that refers to an individual's perception of "self" in relation to any number of characteristics, such as academics (and nonacademics), gender roles and sexuality, racial identity, and many others.

Sacred & Profane (CUP)

More information on the Sacred and Profane Research

So in survey version 2 (using only Sacred and Profane as options), I began to tear into the 'Cup' variable.

Of the 87 respondents:

Profane: 70
Sacred: 17

So I looked into what demographic factors may have influenced their response.

Of the 17 Sacred responses the demographics that had statistically relevent clusters were:

Age:
Female: 9/61 (15%)
Male: 8/26 (31%)

Attend:
Never: 2/17 (12%)
Rarely: 6/17 (35%)
Occasionally: 2/17 (12%)
Sometimes: 1/17 (6%)
Routinely: 4/17 (24%)
Constantly: 2/17  (12%)

So why would more men than women consider a cup to be a "Sacred" item?

Sacred & Profane Analysis

Well, I've started to tear into the data on my Sacred & Profane research and have discovered that I need to collapse some of the variables.

For example: Age.

I should have left this field open rather than creating artificial categories (18-20) for each respondent. That way if there were any noted patterns I could create them after they had responded as opposed to creating the category before hand.

It's not a real problem as I was mostly looking for any difference in the 'Traditional' versus 'Non-Traditional' age of the respondents. So, in collaboration with a colleague I've collapsed the ages into those two categories based on 18-20 and 21-22 (for Traditional) and 23+ (for Non-Traditional)

Age Ranges:

Traditional (52)
18-20: 24
21-22: 28

Non-Traditional (35)
23-24: 9
25-26: 10
27-28: 1
29-30: 2
31-32: 1
33-34: 4
41-45: 3
46-50: 5

I still want to discover if there are some basic correlations between my respondent's demographics and the elements that they were asked to define as either sacred or profane.

I'm also curious if Religious Observance (or attendance) has any impact on how often a subject reported a given element was either sacred or profane. I'm not sure if the respondent's religious affiliation (denomination, etc.) would have any impact.  Though a respondent may identify themselves as 'Christian'...I think they would be more 'spiritual' (and thus define more things as sacred) if they attend religious services more often.

I'll have to wait and see.

-Tom.

Statement of Purpose

Here's the link for my 'Statement of Purpose' for my application to the OSU Graduate program for my Doctorate in Cultural Anthropology.

Click here.