Glen Moriarty
Assistant Professor, School of Psychology and Counseling
Regent University

Abstract

This paper discusses the formation of a transdenominational and transnational online Christian social network. First, it explores online Christian community. Next, the main components and functions of an online social network are discussed. It then describes the development of 5loaves.net. Finally, the paper closes by discussing some basic statistics and survey results that flesh out user demographics and Christian background, reported effect 5loaves has on sense of social connectedness, and reported influence 5loaves has on spiritual growth.

Definitions

[1] Online Christian community is an emerging phenomenon. This section will briefly explore select definitions of online community and online Christian community. Additionally, societal trends will be discussed with particular attention focused on how these trends influence the online and offline Christian church. Finally, research on Christian social networks will be reviewed.

[2] Howard Rheingold’s (1993) classic Virtual Community was one of the first significant contributions to report on online community. It described his experience of an early virtual community known as the WELL (Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link). Rheingold (1993) defines online community as “social aggregations that emerge from the Net when enough people carry on … public discussion long enough, with sufficient human feeling, to form webs of personal relationships in cyberspace” (5).

[3] Douglas Cowan (2004) has explored online community in a variety of contexts. He concludes that “a set of communications by computer warrants being considered evidence of the existence of a virtual community to the degree that it displays six elements: (1) interactivity; (2) stability of membership; (3) stability of identity; (4) netizenship and social control; (5) personal concern; (6) occurrence in a public space” (83).

[4] Ken Bedell (1999) viewed online Christian community through the lens of Internet congregations. He reviewed several online Christian, and other religious, communities and found that there were two distinct approaches to online religious community. Bedell (1999) states, “The first assumes that information is the essential ingredient for development. The second assumes that communication is essential for community development. Cutting across both of these assumptions are three strategies: support for current institutions, bridge to current institution, create new forms of institution” (4).

[5] Online community in Christian circles is much the same as it is in non-Christian circles. People usually gravitate towards others who have shared interests, so Christians gather online around issues that they feel are connected to their faith. This online coming together is interesting because it is influenced by larger societal trends that affect Christian community online and offline. 

Societal Trends

[6] People used to live in and strongly identify with their local community. They did not move much so they put in deep roots and grew to intimately know and depend upon their neighbours. Gradually, as society became more dynamic and communication technology ubiquitous, people moved to increase their standard of living. In doing so, they left communities that gave them strength, but also made demands on them. This trend has continued, so people now identify with several loose networks rather than one sole community. The result is that they have a greater ability to get their needs met and have more opportunities, but the tradeoff is less security and fewer demands (Campbell 2005;Gergen 2000).

[7] This pattern is mirrored in the Christian church. People switch, disaffiliate, and leave traditional denominations more often than they used to (Loveland 2003). In addition, people may participate in multiple churches throughout the week. They give and receive in all circles, but overall have less personal security and less commitment to any one institution.

[8] A related trend is the emerging preference for spirituality over religion (Hill et al. 2000). Many Westerners prefer the openness they encounter in non-religious based spirituality. The dramatic increase in spiritual media is one indication of this shift. It seems that almost daily there are popular press books that address spiritual issues without having an explicit base in an established world religion. Similarly, movies are now saturated with mystical content and Web communities are sprouting up all over with spiritual themes, but no fundamental tie-in to an existing religion.

[9] This same theme can be observed in Christian contexts in the drift from institutionalized Christianity to more open forms of Christian spirituality. Some see this as a brief fad, whereas others see it as a trend that is here to stay. The emerging church in particular is one movement that embraces a postmodern, non-hierarchical, self-directed form of church (Crouch 2004). The popularity of these worship styles in the west suggests that they have staying power. The fact that they parallel larger societal trends shows that they will likely continue to be a thriving alternative to traditional congregations.

[10] Another trend is the difference between old media and new media (Campbell 2005). Old media are one-way, top-down and static. New media are two-way, bottom-up, and fluid. One only has to turn on the news to hear how bloggers are shaping the way the larger public sees the war in Iraq, elections,\ and local issues.

[11] This shift is also influencing Christianity. Congregants feel less inclined to be passive recipients of their church’s message (Bednar 2004). Instead, they are taking a more active role and emerging into the participating church. They are less likely unquestioningly to swallow church policies and beliefs; instead, they want to dialog about issues and shape church practices.

[12] All three of these trends have also influenced the rise of the cyber-church. The Internet facilitates networked individualism, so religious organizations that use the web tend to add members, particularly individuals in Generation X and the Nintendo Generation (Campbell 2000; Campbell 2004). Barna (1998) has shown that one in six teens plan to substitute the Internet for church-based activities. In addition, Barna (2001) found that 8% of adults and 12% of teens use the Internet for spiritual purposes. He predicts that the emergence of the cyber-church will dramatically reshape the landscape of physical congregations. The non-hierarchical nature of the Web also supports the move from religion to spirituality. Internet religious organizations tend to be more open, grassroots, flat and fluid than traditional religious institutions. The medium of the Internet allows these organizations to be more flexible than physical congregations. Finally, the shift in form old to new media has facilitated the use of the Internet for Christian purposes. Participants interact online around theological issues more often than they would in a traditional church. They share and modify religious media (video, mp3s, podcasts) and engage Christianity in a way that is not often encouraged by traditional congregations. That is, they actively control what they want to share and how they want to serve, whereas in traditional congregations there are typically pre-formatted ways of sharing, and usually only certain roles (e.g., pastor, Sunday school teacher) that are encouraged to serve. Additionally, the Internet allows people to interact with people all over the world and from a variety of cultural, racial, and socioeconomic backgrounds. This ability to interact with a variety of others is simply not possible with a geographically bound church community.

[13] These trends are important. In order fully to understand them, researchers need to move past anecdotal understandings and incorporate research-informed perspectives. 

Research

[14] This is an up and coming field of study, so there has not been much research conducted on online Christian community. However, Heidi Campbell (2003) has done some groundbreaking work in this area. She outlines three basic ways of doing research on online community. The first is observational analysis, which combines the process of analyzing the website, observing people using the Website, and interviewing key users and the Webmaster. The second is theoretical development, which integrates semiotics–the study of meaning making–and sociological ways of studying online community. The last is social ethnography, which Campbell describes as online observation, researcher participation, and comparison with other studies.

[15] Social ethnography is what Campbell used in her dissertation to study three online/email Christian communities. She chose three groups that represented diverse aspects of Christianity (i.e., Evangelical, Anglican and Charismatic). She came up with three main findings. The first is, “Online involvement is not causing people to leave their local church or shy away from real world participation” (Campbell 2003, 223). Campbell’s (2003) second finding is, “People join online communities primarily for relationships, not information; relationships are often noted as lacking in the offline church” (224). The third is, “Descriptions given by members of online communities, stating their reasons for online involvement and benefits they receive, provide critiques of the real-world church. The characteristics of online communities highlighted offer a picture of what individuals envision and hope a church of Christian community would be like” (Campbell 2003, 225). Campbell drew these conclusions based primarily on her research on email-based communities; however, there are other forms of virtual community–one type is known as a social network.

Social Network Overview

[16] Stanley Milgram (1967) conducted a “small world experiment” in which he mailed 60 individuals in Wichita, KS a letter that asked them to forward it to the wife of a divinity student in Cambridge, MA. The enclosed instructions were for the people to forward it to a person they knew that was as close to this individual as possible. The person they mailed it to could live closer to Cambridge than they did or potentially be in the same field as the woman or her husband. Once that next person received the package, they were instructed to the same thing. His research showed that on average it took six mailings to get the package to the particular individual in Cambridge. This is where the statement “six degrees of separation” comes from. It is the idea that any one random individual is only six acquaintances from another random individual.

[17] Milgram was participating in one of the first attempts at mapping social relationships, which is known as a social network. Each person in the network is known as a “node” and each connection between people is known as a “tie.” Relational maps are used to study how wealth is distributed, information is disseminated, and how disease spreads, among many other things. Figure 1.1 illustrates the basic design of a social network.

Figure 1.1

[18] In 2002, computer programmers coded software that used online programming to connect people online. This code is known as social networking software. The first program was called Friendster. It rapidly grew by linking friends to their friends to their friends, etc. The goal was to help people connect with other peer groups to find new friends and potential partners. Orkut, the social network launched by Google, took it a step further by adding forums. Forums, or groups, are places where individuals congregate on a social network to focus on a shared interest (e.g., sports, cooking, pets). Tribe birthed the next generation of social network. Tribe included the basic network and forums, but also added other features like blogs and real simple syndication (RSS). In addition to these programs, there are applications like Xanga and LiveJournal that emphasize blogging over the social networking. These programs emphasize keeping a public journal, sharing thoughts, and expressing feelings. These activities are done on communal blogs and personal blogs.

[19] There are now over 200 social networks. Many have peaked and are now in decline (e.g., Friendster), whereas others are exploding in popularity (e.g., MySpace.com). The successful networks cater to a particular market and offer innovative features. One social network that offers a variety of functions and focuses on a defined population (i.e., Christians) is 5loaves.net.

Development of 5loaves.net

[20] The idea for 5loaves came about through a conversation the writer had with a colleague about social networks. He was surprised to learn that there was no Christian social network. After some further discussion, he decided to start one. The author drew up a plan, chose a name, drafted the value statement, and selected the faith statement. The name would be 5loaves.net to call to mind the story of Christ feeding the thousands with two fish and five loaves and to represent the idea that when we share our relationships and resources we exponentially multiply them.

[21] During this time, he approached several peers in the computer business and inquired if they knew of an open-source or relatively inexpensive social networking software. Each of them indicated that they did not and recommended he commission someone to create the software. This proved to be fairly expensive and would require approximately a month to two months of work. The author continued to look for options and decided to post his quandary in social software intellectuals, a forum on Orkut, to see if he might find a better alternative. Four hours later a group of young programmers from UC Berkeley responded to the post and indicated that he could pilot their software for them for a small monthly fee that would cover service costs and maintenance expenses.

[22] Their software was particularly fitting to the idea behind 5loaves. It had the standard features found on most social networks, but also offered blogging, chat, instant messaging, and file-sharing. File-sharing was crucial to fulfilling the goal of sharing resources. Each user and organization was given 25 mb of free storage space, so that they could upload video, powerpoints, mp3s, music, templates and other documents. The idea was that resources could be stored in one central location so that people do not have to waste time and money recreating items that already exist.

[23] The site was beta-launched in April 2005. The first month was spent fixing bugs and solving other problems. The site continues to have minor bugs that coders are trying to overcome. The second month focused on building awareness of the site by sending out press releases and press kits to different media companies. In addition, 5loaves was presented at two Christian technology conferences. 

[24] Staff at 5loves have faced, and continue to face, a number of obstacles since launching 5loaves. One challenge is the process of getting the word out about 5loaves. The initial strategy was to tap into existing networks and provide them with tools that they could use to further develop their community. For example, one goal was to provide clergy with their own communal pages in which they could upload sermons, video, Sunday school materials etc. However, they found that many pastors were not technologically informed and struggled to understand how the tools might benefit their ministry.

[25] Two other main problems that staff are currently focusing on are retention and encouraging members to invite others to join. They have found that many people join, look around at their personal site, and then leave. They seldom search or explore the communities. They have also found that some members invite others more readily than others. The designer has recently created a new skin that we hope resolves both of these issues.

Research on 5loaves.net

[26] 5loaves continues to grow and change. This section discusses research undertaken to better describe the makeup of 5loaves.net. Basic information was compiled through reviewing the database. More nuanced data was gathered through a survey that was designed to assess four areas: user demographics and Christian background, overall satisfaction and use of 5loaves, user sense of social connectedness on 5loaves, and user sense of how 5loaves has affected their spiritual growth.

Database Information

[27] There are now over 1000 members on 5loaves.net. 208 of those individuals are active, which means that they have logged on within the last seven days. On average, we have 22 blog posts per day and 97 comments per day. People have joined from over 30 different countries around the world; however, the vast majority are from the US and UK. In addition, there are members from a variety of denominations. Users span the spectrum from liberal to conservative religious beliefs and political ideologies.

[28] There are 107 communities on 5loaves. They fall into the following broad categories: popular culture, ministries, cultural commentary, church commentary, unique interests, and family communities. The most popular communities are: Introductions, Movie Club, Music Notes, Psychology and Christianity, Bookworm, Politics, Sexuality, and 5loaves Ideas. The less popular communities include areas that are unique, specific, or targeted to a particular group. For example, the Healing Prayer and Dance communities appeal to fewer people because they are more focused. Similarly, church and family communities tend to have low numbers because they appeal to specific groups.

Survey Information

Participants and Procedure

[29] Participants consist of members of 5loaves.net. 113 of the 1000 members decided to complete the survey. It is likely that some of these members are active and others are not. Members were contacted to complete the survey through one email and through posts on 5loaves community sites and the writer’s 5loaves personal blog site. After clicking on the link to the survey, there was a brief consent form that indicated it was anonymous, engendered minimal stress, and was therefore of little risk. Once completing the survey, participants were told that it was finished and were automatically redirected to the surveymonkey.com home page. The survey was opened on 9/9/05 and closed on 9/21/05.

Instrumentation

[30] The survey consisted of 40 items: 32 multiple choice and eight open-ended. It did not identify users, so it was anonymous, and hosted on a third-party site–surveymonkey.com. There were five broad constructs that the survey was designed to assess. The first was demographics. The second was Christian background, which consisted of questions like denominational affiliation, number of years self-identified as a Christian, etc. Another construct was level of use and overall satisfaction with 5loaves. The next construct was sense of comfort and connectedness felt on 5loaves. Questions focused on level of safety and comfort, advice and prayer seeking behaviours, and sense of loneliness. The last area addressed the affect of 5loaves on spiritual growth and included questions on the practice of spiritual disciplines, sense of caring for others, growth as a Christian, and tolerance for other beliefs.

Demographics and Christian Background

[31] 5loaves has a unique user base. 55% are male and 45% are female. The easy majority are married (63%), 35% are single, 1% divorced, and 1% widowed. Unlike most social networks where the average age is mid-teens to early twenties, 40% of members are between the ages of 25-34, 22% are between the ages of 35-44, and only 19% are between the ages of 19-24. 94% of users speak English as their primary language; 3% speak Spanish, and Chinese, Portuguese, and Filipino are each less than 1% of the user base. 27% of users make between $25,000-49,000 a year; an additional 27% make under $15,000 a year; 21% make between $50,000-74,999; 14% make over $75,000 a year; and 12% make between $15,000-24,999 a year.

[32] 5loaves, unfortunately, is pretty homogeneous. This is unfortunate because one of the main goals of 5loaves was to deliberately create a diverse atmosphere–racially and otherwise. 82% of users are Caucasian, 6% are Asian/Pacific Islander, 4% are Hispanic, 3% are African American, 2% are Latino, 1% is multiracial, and 3% identify as other (one individual is Indian and the other two people did not give specifics). 89% of users are not disabled or impaired and 11% have visual, cognitive, or motor impairment. 90% of members reside in the United States, 3% live in Europe, 3% make their home in Central America, 2% dwell in Asia and an additional 2% live in Canada. There is also evidence of the digital divide as well. More than 89% connect through DSL or Cable, 10% through 56k modem, and 1% through 33.6 dial-up.

[33] The Christian make-up of 5loaves is also fairly homogenous. 69% of users have been a Christian for over 15 years, 14% have been a Christian for 10-15 years, an additional 14% identify being Christian for 3-10 years, 3% have been a Christian for 1-3 years. 72% classify themselves as Evangelical, 15% as Mainline, 7% as Liberal, and 5% as Fundamentalist. Most individuals identify themselves as non-denominational (18%); 12% are Baptist, 8% are Presbyterian, 8% are Assemblies of God, 6% identify as Pentecostal, 5% are Vineyard, 5% are Anglican or Episcopalian, 3% are Roman Catholic, 3% are Evangelical Lutheran, 2% are Church of God, and 2% are United Church of Christ. There are 14 other denominations represented, but they each represent less than 1% of the overall user base.   

Member Satisfaction and Use

[34] 63% of the 5loaves members are satisfied, 25% are unsatisfied. 8% are very satisfied, and 4% are very unsatisfied. The biggest complaints about 5loaves, in descending order, are: technological complications (i.e., difficulty logging in, slow page loading), design problems (i.e., clumsy navigation, confusing layout), low number of members, difficulty connecting with others, and privacy concerns. Approximately 76% of people have been using 5loaves for 1-5 months and 89% use it for 0-2 hours a week. People continue to use 5loaves, in descending order, for the following reasons: use of communities; connecting with friends; fellowshipping with other Christians; meeting new people; reading, blogging, and posting.

[35] Most people discovered the site through a friend’s invitation (52%), 15% found it through a search engine, 10% learned of it by following a link, 9% were invited by a family member, 7% saw it on a bulletin board, and 8% either hear it on the radio or read it in a press release. 70% of people will either “probably recommend” or “definitely recommend” the site by inviting others to join; 30% will “probably not recommend.” People use the site for a variety of reasons. 58% use it primarily to “share and learn new ideas,” 20% use it to meet new people, 15% use it to stay in touch with friends,  4% to keep up with family, and 3% to debate with others. 

Sense of Connectedness

[36] Most members feel comfortable, safe, and connected on 5loaves. In regards to comfort level with blogging and posting, 47% are comfortable, 29% are very comfortable, 13% are uncomfortable, and 11% are very uncomfortable. Similarly, 68% of individuals feel safe on 5loaves, 22% feel very safe, 8% report feeling not safe, and 2% indicate feeling not very safe. 5loaves also affects how lonely or how connected one feels. 80% indicate that it causes them to feel connected, 16% suggest that it makes them feel lonely, and 4% report that it influences them to feel very connected.

[37] These results translate in expected ways in advice and prayer seeking behaviors. 66% report feeling comfortable asking for advice, 20% state that they are uncomfortable, 11% suggest that they are very comfortable, and 2% indicate feeling very uncomfortable. Similarly, 63% are comfortable asking for prayer, 26% are uncomfortable, 6% are very comfortable, and 5% are very uncomfortable.

Sense of Spiritual Growth

[38] Members of 5loaves suggest that it has also influenced their felt sense of spiritual growth. 54% indicate that it has helped them somewhat to grow as a Christian, 43% report that it does not affect their growth, and 3% suggest it really helps them grow spiritually. It seems 5loaves may have also influenced users’ appreciation of Christian perspectives that are different from their own. 44% say that it slightly affected increased their appreciation, 43% say it had no effect, 11% state that it really increased their appreciation, and 1% say it caused them to have less appreciation.

[39] 5loaves had less influence on clarifying beliefs, increasing spiritual disciplines, and increasing care for others. 57% said it did not affect what they believe, 40% say it helped clarify their beliefs, and 3% say it really helped them clarify their beliefs. 83% stated that it did not affect their practice of spiritual disciplines, 16% say it slightly increased their practice, and 1% say it greatly increased their practice. 53% indicate that it did not influence them to care more for others; whereas 40% say it slightly increased and 7% say it greatly increased their desire to care for others.

Discussion

[40] The purpose of this study was to explore 4 basic components of 5loaves.net: user demographics and Christian background, member satisfaction and use, user sense of connectedness, and user sense of affect 5loaves had on spiritual growth. Findings suggest that the typical user is white, male, married, between the ages of 25-34, evangelical, makes between $25,000-49,000, has two people in his household, speaks English, has a Master’s degree, lives in the United States, and uses cable Internet access. Another finding is that most people are satisfied with 5loaves. The main reason they use it are to interact in communities, stay in touch with friends and family, and to share and learn ideas. The main complaints involve technology problems (e.g., inability to log-in) and design issues (e.g., “clumsy” or “confusing” layout). A third finding is that people seem to feel comfortable, safe, and connected on 5loaves. For the most part, they are at ease posting and commenting on personal blogs and group blogs. In addition, the majority report that 5loaves helps them feel connected to others. Not surprisingly, they feel comfortable seeking advice and asking other members to pray for them. A final finding is that it seems to influence their spiritual lives in different ways. A majority of members report that it helped them grow as Christians and also increased their appreciation of different Christian perspectives. On the contrary, however, a majority report that it did not affect their practice of spiritual disciplines, influence their desire to care for others, or help them clarify what they believe. In all three of these situations, however, a strong minority indicated that 5loaves either slightly or greatly increased their growth in these areas.

Strengths

[41] This study has a couple of strengths. The primary strength is that it is one of the first, if not the first, study on Christians using social networking software. Research has been done on online communities and email groups, but nothing that the author knows of has utilized this level or intensity of online interaction supported by the 5loaves social networking software. For example, most studies have been done on email groups, which primarily use text-based communication and are restricted to what the individual finds in their inbox. This study focused on software that is more dimensional. People on 5loaves used blogs, instant messenger, chat with emoticons, messaging (internal email system), file-sharing, and group blogs.

[42] Another strength is that it lays the groundwork for future research in this area. The results of this exploratory study show that this is a fertile area. The basic information compiled on demographics, sense of connectedness, and sense of spiritual growth suggest that more formal research in these areas would yield fruitful results.

Weaknesses

[43] This study also had several weaknesses. Perhaps the greatest weakness limitation is that a random sample was not used. All users were contacted to participate. Only those who self-selected into the study impacted the results. It is likely that a number of participants felt either overly positive or overly negative about 5loaves. The lack of randomization and the self-selection bias calls into question the generalizability of the results. Another weakness has to do with instrumentation. The writer consulted with colleagues prior to designing the instrument, but he did not do any pre-testing or pre-standardization of the instrument. In addition, there was no item analysis done to control for internal validity. A third weakness involves the relatively low number of participants. Out of a potential pool of 969 members, only 113 participated.

[44] The Internet is quickly becoming an integral part of the global Christian church. As broadband becomes more common, web-conferencing affordable, and WiMax ubiquitous, it is likely that online Christian community will become a stronger part of the worldwide Christian church. This new medium will likely affect and transform the expression of Christianity. For this reason, among others, it is important for researchers to understand how online Christian community is formed and what kinds of psychological, social, and spiritual effects it has on members.

[45] Future research could build on this study in a number of ways. One avenue would be to conduct intensive interviews to unearth the particulars of how Christians use social networking software to create community. Constant comparative analysis could be used to find the main themes that emerge in their experience of feeling connected and spiritually growing in that context. Another avenue could use a pre- and post-test design to assess what effect joining and participating in a Christian social network has on psycho-social-spiritual experience.

Conclusions

[46] The author believes that online Christian community is here to stay. It will likely play less of a peripheral role and more of a central role as technological developments become a more integrated part of world culture and global Christianity. Indeed, it seems that young western cohorts already anticipate substituting virtual spiritual behaviors for offline spiritual behaviors (Barna 1998). Despite this tendency amongst some adolescents, the research suggests that online Christian community works best when it supports offline Christian community (Campbell 2003; Cowan 2004).

[47] 5loaves.net is one form of virtual Christian community that utilizes blogging, chat, file-sharing, and instant messaging. It was launched in April 2005 and now has over 1,000 members and over 170 communities. The majority of users live in the United States or the UK, but over 28 other countries are represented. The population of 5loaves is relatively homogeneous, but does have some pockets of diversity. Overall, however, the typical user is a Caucasian, evangelical male, who speaks English, has a Master’s degree, and lives in the United States.

[48] Exploratory survey research on 5loaves suggests that members feel it has some influence on their sense of connectedness and felt sense of spiritual growth. Most members feel connected and use the service to share and learn new ideas. Additionally, users report that 5loaves influenced them to grow as Christians and that it increased their ability to appreciate different Christian perspectives. 5loaves had less reported influence on clarifying Christian beliefs, the practice of spiritual disciplines, or caring more for others.

[49] These initial results bode well for 5loaves.net. However, there are still a number of obstacles the service has to overcome. Staff are currently updating the system to address technological and design issues. The hope is that these adjustments will help the community to attract new members and continue to grow. The goal is for it to continue to develop, but it is still to early to tell if it will be different from other social networks that initially grow, but eventually fizzle out and stagnate.   

References

Barna Research Group. 1998. “The cyberchurch is coming. National survey of teenagers shows expectation of substituting Internet for corner church.” Retrieved 10/1/04 from www.barna.org/presscyberchurch.htm.

______ 2001. “More Americans are seeking net-based faith experiences.” Retrieved 10/1/04 from www.barna.org/cgibin/pagep…asp?pressreleaseID=90&Reference=A.

Bedell, K. 1999. “Internet Congregations in 1999.” Paper presented at Religious Research Association in Boston, Massachusetts.

Bednar, T. 2004. “We know more than our pastors.” Retrieved 10/1/04 from www.e-church.com/Downloads/ We%20Know%20More%20Than%20Our%20Pastors.pdf.

Brasher, B. 2001. Give Me that Online Religion. New York: John Wiley & Sons.   

Campbell, H. 2000. “Community.dot.com: A look at networked community and generation X.” Paper presented at Connecting with Absent Friends Conference at St. Johns College, Durham.

______ 2003. “Approaches to Religious Research in Computer-mediated Communication. In  Mediating Religion: Conversations in Media, Religion and Culture. Edited by Jolyon P. Mitchell and Sophia Marriage. London: T &T Clark, 2003.

______ 2004. “Challenges Created by Online Religious Networks.” Journal of Media and Religion 3,2: 81-99.

Campbell, H. 2005. Exploring Religious Community Online: We are One in the Network. New York: Peter Lang.  

Cowan, D. 2004. “Religion and the Quest for Virtual Community.” In Religion Online: Finding Faith on the Internet. Edited by Lorne L. Dawson and Douglas Cowan. London: Routledge.

Crouch, Andy. 2004. “The Emergent Mystique.” Christianity Today 48,11: 36.

Gergen, K. 2001. The Saturated Self. New York: Basic Books.

Hill P.C., K.I. Pargament, R.W. Hood, J.M.E. McCullough, J.P. Swyers, D.B. Larson,Loveland, M.T. 2003. “Religious Switching, Preference Development, Maintenance and Change.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42,1: 147.

Milgram, S. 1967. “The small world problem.” Psychology Today (May), 60-67.

Zinnbauer B.J. 2000. “Conceptualizing Religion and Spirituality: Points of Commonality, Points of Departure.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 30,1: 51-77.

 

Appendix A