Research Misconduct and Social Control Douglas Adams, Ph.D. University of Arkansas Kenneth D. Pimple, Ph.D. Poynter Center Indiana University

Research Misconductand Social Control

Douglas Adams, Ph.D.University of Arkansas

Kenneth D. Pimple, Ph.D.Poynter Center

Indiana University

I. Introduction

Goal

To apply theories, concepts, methodologies, and empirical data from the discipline of Criminology and Criminal Justice to the phenomena of Research Misconduct.

Objectives 1. ESTABLISH Equivalence of the Dependent Variable2. APPLY Social Control Concepts to Research Misconduct3. EXPLORE Policy and Pedagogical Implications

THE DISCIPLINE OF CRIMINOLOGY

- CRIMINOLOGY

- DEVIANCE

- CRIMINAL JUSTICE

CRIMINOLOGY

- NATURE (ESSENCE OF)

- EXTENT (DISTRIBUTION, PREVALENCE AND MAGNITUDE)

- CAUSE (THEORIES)

- CONTROL (DETERRENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY)

- INFORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL EMPHASIS

DEVIANCE

- VIOLATION OF SOCIAL NORMS

- QUANTITATIVE DEVIATION FROM SOCIAL MEAN (UNCOMMON BEHAVIOR)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE( Police Science)

- STUDY OF FORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL

- FOCUS ON COPS, COURTS, AND CORRECTIONS

- EMPHASIS ON FORMAL CONTROL MECHANISMS

CRIMINOLOGY APPLIED TO RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

- NATURE (“ESSENCE” OF, AND DEFINITIONS OF RM)

- CAUSE (OPPORTUNITY, NEED, GREED, CULTURE)

- CONTROL (DETER, DETECT and SANCTION)

II. Equivalence of the Dependent Variable

- Research Misconduct is...

- Crime is...

- Research Misconduct - is Crime

- is White Collar Crime

RESEARCH MISCONDUCT IS DEFINED AS...

FABRICATION, FALSIFICATION, OR PLAGIARISM IN PROPOSING, PERFORMING, OR REVIEWING RESEARCH, OR IN REPORTING RESULTS

CRIME IS …

- A VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL LAW

- THE USE OF FORCE OR FRAUD IN THE PURSUIT OF SELF-INTEREST

CRIME IS A VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL LAW

From a legalistic view, crime is defined as

“...behavior in violation of the criminal law...”

(Sutherland and Cressey,1960:8)

CRIME IS THE USE OF FORCE OR FRAUD IN PURSUIT OF SELF INTEREST

From a generalist view, crime is defined as

“...acts of force or fraud undertaken in pursuit of self-interest.”

(Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990; 15)

“Force” is both actual, as well as implied.

Using "force" is the use of an individual's "power" in order to compel another to do something they are resistant or unwilling to do otherwise.

In a dominant-subordinate relationship, "force" is used when the dominant individual uses power

to compel a subordinate to comply.

“Fraud” is deception, both overt and covert

RESEARCH MISCONDUCT (AS A FORM OF CRIME)

- IS A VIOLATION OF ESTABLISHED POLICIES AND PRINCIPLES (LAWS)

- POLICIES / PRINCIPLES ARE DEFINED BY A LEGITIMATED ENTITY (i.e.. org.; edu; gov)

RESEARCH MISCONDUCT (AS A FORM OF CRIME)

- INCLUDES THE USE OF FORCE (THREATS, EXPLOITATION OF RELATIONSHIPS)

“Force” (real or implicit) used to induct silence of subordinates

- INCLUDES FRAUD (DECEPTION)

“Fraud” could be perceived as FFP

WHITE COLLAR CRIME (“STANDARD” DEFINTION)

- ILLEGAL OR UNETHICAL ACTS

- VIOLATION OF PUBLIC TRUST

- A PART OF LEGITIMATE JOB ACTIVITY

- BY PERSONS OF RESPECTABLE STATUS

- FOR PERSONAL OR ORGANIZATIONAL GAIN

WHITE COLLAR CRIME and RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

“Crime of specialized access: a criminal act committed by abusing one’s job or profession to gain specific access to a crime target.” (Felson, 2002)

- BEHAVIOR OCCURS IN AUTHORIZED SETTING

- BEHAVIOR (SKILL SET) IS SIMILAR FOR BOTH MISCONDUCT AND LEGITIMATE ACTIVITY

III. Social Control and Research Misconduct

SOCIAL CONTROL...

IS A SYSTEMATIC SET OF BELIEFS AND PRACTICES, CARRIED OUT WITHIN SOCIAL GROUPS, IN ORDER TO ENCOURAGE CONFORMITY AND REDUCE DEVIANCE OF INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS, AS WELL AS THE GROUP.

“CONTROL” IS ACCOMPLISHED THROUGHDETERRANCE, DETECTION and SANCTIONS

SOCIAL CONTROL

INTERNAL – PROPENSITY

EXTERNAL – OPPORTUNITY

PROPENSITY – INTERNAL SOCIAL CONTROL

Propensity represents any and all internal psychological conditions that influence individual choices, including but not limited to self-control, processes of logic and/or rational calculation, and values, beliefs or preferences

PROPENSITY – INTERNAL SOCIAL CONTROL

Propensity represents any and all internal psychological conditions that influence individual choices, including but not limited to self-control, processes of logic and/or rational calculation, and values, beliefs or preferences

* Discussion of propensity will be limited to how it influences opportunity and/or social control processes

OPPORTUNITY – EXTERNAL SOCIAL CONTROL

Opportunity includes any and all external conditions that stimulate motivation and/or facilitate or inhibit the enactment of individual choices

OPPORTUNITY – EXTERNAL SOCIAL CONTROL

Opportunity includes any and all external conditions that stimulate motivation and/or facilitate or inhibit the enactment of individual choices

* Adams and Pimple (2005) conceptualize opportunity for specific acts of research misconduct using Felson’s (2002) Routine Activity Theory

OPPORTUNITY – EXTERNAL SOCIAL CONTROL

Opportunity includes any and all external conditions that stimulate motivation and/or facilitate the enactment of individual choices

* Adams and Pimple (2005) conceptualize opportunity for research misconduct using Felson’s (2002) Routine Activity Theory

** Today, we will explore, in general, how mechanisms of formal and informal social control affect opportunity

EXTERNAL SOCIAL CONTROL CARRIED OUT THROUGH

FORMAL - RULES, AND THEIR ENFORCEMENT

INFORMAL – INTERACTION FREQUENCY, EMERGENT NORMS AND GROUP PRESSURE TO CONFORM

FORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL

- Police, Courts, Correction Institutions, and / or any other authoritative entity (i.e. research organization).

- Research Settings: Formal “agents” of control include: ORI - Research Integrity Officers – IRB members

- Very low interaction ratio (formal agents : population)

- Infrequent contact between formal agents and others (usually related to reporting / enactment of misconduct)

FORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL

- Overall, only about 40% (more or less) of all misconduct “known” to agents of social control

- Serious = more awareness; Trivial = less awareness

- Reluctance to report misconduct:- by peers / associates = less reports;- by strangers = more reports

- Due Process; carried out by formal agents / organizations

- Sanctions: carried out by formal agents / organizations

INFORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL

- Family, Friends, Co-workers, Associative relationships

- Research Settings: Informal “agents” of control include: Faculty – Researchers – Post Docs – Grad Students

- High interaction ratio (informal agents : population)

- Frequent (ubiquitous) contact between informal agents

INFORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL

- Much more than 40% of violations are probably “known,” but not reported to formal agents

- Due process (if any) would be informal; by peers

- Sanctions (if any) would be informal; by peers

FOR BOTH FORMAL AND INFORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL BEHAVIORAL COMPLIANCE IS THE RESULT OF

DETERRANCE - Formal - Fear- Informal - Conformity Pressure

DETECTION - Formal - Increased Surveillance- Informal - Increased Social Interaction

SANCTIONS - Formal- Severity of, Public Awareness- Informal - Shamed by group

“CAUSES” OF MISCONDUCT (WHITE COLLAR CRIME),RESEARCH MISCONDUCT, AND DETERRANCE THROUGH SOCIAL CONTROL PROCESSSES

- NEEDY

- GREEDY

- ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

NEEDY

- “NON-SHAREABLE” PROBLEM

- IN GENERAL, FINANCIAL / OTHER “PRESSURE”

- EXAMPLE - NEED Ph.D. FOR JOB, OR A PEER-REVIEWED PUBLICATON FOR TENURE

NEEDY

- “NON-SHAREABLE” PROBLEM

- FORMAL - REMIND RESEARCHER OF SANCTION SEVERITY IN ORDER TO AFFECT RATIONAL- CALCULATION DECISION PROCESS

- INFORMAL – PROBLEM IS “SHARED” BY RESEARCH GROUP MEMBERS, CO-AUTHORS I.E. COLLABORATIVE PROCESSES ENCOURAGED

GREEDY

- ”EXCESSIVE” DRIVE TO IMPROVE CAREER STATUS, SATISFY EGO, FINANCIAL GAIN

- EXAMPLE – AMBITIOUS RESEARCHER SUBMITS FRADULENT FUNDING GRANT APPLICANT

GREEDY

- ”EXCESSIVE” DRIVE TO IMPROVE CAREER STATUS, SATISFY EGO, FINANCIAL GAIN

- FORMAL - REMIND RESEARCHER OF SANCTION SEVERITY IN ORDER TO AFFECT RATIONAL- CALCULATION DECISION PROCESS

- INFORMAL – FREQUENT SOCIAL INTERACTION CREATES “CONFORMITY PRESSURE” THAT MAY CURTAIL / INHIBIT “EXCESSIVE” AMBITION

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

A BLEND OF “EXCESSIVE” CAREER PRESSURES AND AN ORGANIZATIONAL ENVIRONMENT THAT IS “TOLERANCE” OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

- EXAMPLE – RESEARCHER EMBEDDED IN SETTING THAT APPERS TO BE TOLERANT OF MISCONDUCT

ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

A BLEND OF “EXCESSIVE” CAREER PRESSURES AND AN ORGANIZATIONAL ENVIRONMENT THAT IS “TOLERANCE” OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT - FORMAL - REMIND RESEARCHER OF SANCTION SEVERITY TO AFFECT RATIONAL-CALCULATION DECISION PROCESS. ZERO-TOLERANCE.

- INFORMAL – RCR VALUES AND NORMS ARE COMMUNICATED AND REENFORCED THROUGH FREQUENT GROUP INTERACTION

IV. Policy and Pedagogical Implications

a. 1960 -1970 “Research Revolution in policing

- Shift from Zero-Tolerance, Problem-oriented policing to Community Policing (integrates formal / informal)

- Zero Tolerance - Re-establish lawful environment - Aggressive response to ALL misconduct - Creates hostility from the “lawful”

- Problem-oriented - Specific misconduct events addressed - Formal Agents are viewed as

“outsiders” by the research community

- Community Policing - Build / Maintain partnership between Formal and Informal agents of control

- Shift in emphasis from enforcement to deterrence

- Results in reduction of fear of police (formal agents)

- Police / Citizens are Co-Producers of Deterrence

IV. Policy and Pedagogical Implications

b. Research Environment will continue to grow larger, more diverse, more transient, more decentralized.

- “Diverse” environment reduces Informal Social Control without intervention to rebuild / maintain social bonds.

Formal Social Control

- To improve: increase rules / surveillance / sanctions

Informal Social Control

- To improve: increase social interaction between research community members

- Management Practices may reduce misconduct

- Training with Interaction emphasis may deter / detect

FORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL OPTIONS

- MORE RULES and their STRICT ENFORCEMENT

- ENHANCE REPORTING: REDUCE BARRIERS

- RANDOM AUDITS OF RESEARCH

- MANDATORY REPORTING OF MISCONDUCT

- INCREASED MONITORING OF RESEARCHER BEHAVIOR USING SURVILLANCE TECHNOLOGY

INFORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL OPTIONS

- PAIRED RESEARCH OF MENTOR/SUBORDINATES

- REGULAR MEETINGS OF RESERCH GROUP IN ORDER TO DISCUSS DATA / ANALYSIS - SPAN OF CONTROL RATIO OF 1:8 OR LOWER BETWEEN P.I AND SUBORDINATES

- INFORMAL, EARLY INTEVENTION BY MENTOR (could be supplemented with EI system)

INFORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL OPTIONS

- RCR TRAINING WITH INTERACTION EMPHASIS (in contrast to CPU-based instruction. i.e. CITI)

- TRAINING SHOULD OCCUR IN SMALL GROUPS WITH OTHERS FROM SIMILAR DISCIPLINES

- TRAINING SHOULD BE AS “SOCIAL” AND AS “INTERACTIVE” AS POSSIBLE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN SOCIAL LINKS BETWEEN COMMUNITY MEMBERS.

CLOSING COMMENTS

“It’s good to teach right from wrong, but you cannot really expect other people to do what you tell them when you aren’t watching. On the other hand, morals do play a role in society. Each of us knows the rules and the fact that someone might punish us or turn us in for violating them. Morals give Joe a license to watch Peter and Peter a license to watch Joe.”

(Felson, 2002:15)