BUILDING RECONCILIATION BETWEEN TEMPLES AND COMMUNITIES IN DON TUM DISTRICT NAKHON PATHOM PROVINCE

Abstract

This is a mixed-methods study that combines qualitative and quantitative research. As a research framework, use the concept of reconciliation between the temple and the community, as well as the concept of the relationship model between temples and communities. Don Tum District in Nakhon Pathom Province served as the research site. Don Tum District residents comprised the sample group. A stratified selection method was used to select 401 people for Nakhon Pathom Province. (Stratified Proportional Random Sampling). A simple random sampling method was used to collect data, which was then randomized using a systematic random sampling method. In this study, two types of research tools were used to analyze the data: 1) an interview form and 2) a questionnaire. The statistics used to analyze the data in the quantitative research section were percentage values. The qualitative research methods of mean and standard deviation, as well as multiple regression analysis, were used to analyze content and write a descriptive description. The findings of the research were as follows:

Reconciliation in Don Tum District, Nakhon Pathom Province, discovered that overall opinion was favorable. The average was 4.10. When each aspect was considered, it was discovered that the correctness principle has the highest average mean (4.15), while the suitability principle has the lowest average (4.06).

The development of reconciliation between temples and communities in Don Tum District, Nakhon Pathom Province, discovered that overall opinion was high, with an average of 4.11 out of 5. When each aspect was considered, it was discovered that decision-making has the highest average with a mean of 4.15, while operational has the lowest average with a mean of 4.04.

In Don Tum District, Nakhon Pathom Province, it was discovered that the respondents had a general attitude on the temple and the community. The mean reached a maximum of 4.04. The correlation network had the lowest average, while the structural relationship had the highest average when each factor was taken into account (the mean was 4.12). (an average of 3.99).