Habitus Formation Through Contemporary Worship Music in Two Church Cases: Implications for Intergenerational Worship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article draws upon doctoral case study data from two Protestant Christian churches to examine how contemporary worship music-making practices can reinforce and solidify the musical tastes, dispositions, and tendencies of particular demographics. Drawing upon sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of the habitus, this article examines the religious musical habitus of musicians in relation to contemporary music repertoire. For some churches, contemporary worship music-making practices may “disrupt” the habitus of a particular subset of a demographic due to their musical preferences and positioning, while contemporary repertoire may affirm the habitus of other, often “young” worshippers due to their musical preferences. Further, the research analyzes each church’s positioning within the overarching musical and theological fields in place. Case study data affirm the notion that Contemporary Worship Music is generationally based in the way it engages with the habitus, which provides implications for worship leaders and those making musical decisions within Christian church contexts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".