Skip to contentScholarGate
LibraryBookshelfDeskReview StudioAssistant
Sign in
National Congregations Study Method/Evidence
Method evidence record

National Congregations Study Method

The National Congregations Study (NCS) method solves a hard sampling problem: there is no complete list of all the congregations in a country, so they cannot be sampled directly. Mark Chaves and colleagues addressed this with hypernetwork (multiplicity) sampling - drawing a representative sample of individuals, asking those who attend services to name their congregation, and treating each named congregation as a sampled unit. Because a congregation is named in proportion to the number of people who attend it, this procedure automatically yields a sample of congregations with probability proportional to size, from which leaders are then interviewed. First fielded in 1998 and described in the 1999 Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion article, and repeated in later waves summarized in Chaves and Eagle's 2015 report, the NCS has become the standard way to produce nationally representative data on American congregations.

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Source record

Citations copied verbatim from the method’s source record. No claim-level verification is inferred from them.

National Congregations Study Method (Hypernetwork Sampling of Congregations)
Taxonomic method record · process-pipeline / sociology-of-religion
  • Chaves, M., Konieczny, M. E., Beyerlein, K., & Barman, E. (1999). The National Congregations Study: Background, Methods, and Selected Results. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 38(4), 458-476. · DOI 10.2307/1387606
  • Chaves, M., & Eagle, A. (2015). Religious Congregations in 21st Century America. Durham, NC: Department of Sociology, Duke University (National Congregations Study). · URL
Open full method

Curated claims

Claims persisted in the evidence ledger, each with its own assessment.

No curated claims yet

This view does not invent a claim assessment when the ledger has none.

Related methods

Generated from the method graph and shown as machine-suggested relations — no evidence claim is inferred.

Same method familyCongregational Network Analysismachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyReligious Attendance Measurementmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.Same method familyRELTRAD Affiliation Classificationmachine-suggested · Relational suggestion, not evidence.

Evidence status

Sources recorded, not reviewed

Bibliographic sources are present. Claim-level evidence review has not been performed.

Sources

2 recorded citations, copied from the method source record.

Actions

Open method page
ScholarGate

A content-first reference library for research methods — what each one is, how it works, and where it comes from.

Open data (CC-BY)

Explore

  • Library
  • Search the library…
  • Browse by field
  • Fields
  • Journey
  • Compare
  • Which method?

Reference

  • Subjects
  • Atlas
  • Glossary
  • Methodology
  • Philosophy

Your tools

  • Bookshelf
  • Desk
  • Chat

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Contact
  • Suggest a method

Entries are compiled from published sources for reference. Verifying the accuracy and suitability of any information for your own use remains your responsibility.

© 2026 ScholarGate · A research-method reference library
  • Privacy
  • Cookies
  • Terms
  • Delete account