From a national U.S. sample of senior academic biochemists, ninety-four indicated that
they personally knew of an incident of scientific wrongdoing. Among these individuals,
less formal actions against an offending individual were endorsed when either (1) actions
were believed to have the potential to publicly embarrass the offending individual, or (2)
the actions might adversely affect the professional career of the whistleblower. These
relationships remain significant after controlling for professional status, career age, and
current level of formal departmental administrative responsibility. Study limitations and
implications are discussed
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abbott, Andrew.1983. Professional ethics. American Journal of Sociology88:855-85.
2.
—. 1988. The system of professions. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
3.
American Chemical Society.1991. Directory of graduate programs. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
4.
Black, Donald.1976. The behavior of law. New York : Academic Press.
5.
Braxton, John M.1986. The normative structure of science: Social control in the academic profession. In Higher education: Handbook of theory and research, vol. 2, edited by John C. Smart, 309-57. New York: Agathon.
6.
—. 1991. The influence of graduate department quality on the sanctioning of scientific misconduct. Journal of Higher Education62:87-108.
7.
Braxton, John M., and Alan E. Bayer.1994. Perceptions of research misconduct and an analysis of their correlates. Journal of Higher Education65:351-72.
8.
Braxton, John M., and Lowell L Hargens . Forthcoming. Variation among academic disciplines: Analytical frameworks and research. InHigher education: Handbook of theory and research, edited by John C. Smart.New York: Agathon.
9.
Carlin, Jerome E.1966. Lawyers'ethics. New York: Russell Sage.
10.
Chubin, Daryl E.1983. Misconduct in research: An issue of science policy and practice. Minerva23:175-202.
11.
Cole, Stephen, and Jonathan R Cole .1967. Scientific output and recognition: A study in the operation of the reward system in science. American Sociological Review32:377-90.
12.
—. 1973. Social stratification in science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Dibble, Vernon K.1973. What is and what ought to be: A comparison of certain characteristics of the ideological and legal styles of thought. American Journal of Sociology79:511-49.
14.
Elliston, Frederick, J. Keenan, Paula K. Lockhart, and Jane Van Schaick .1985. Whistleblowing research: Methodological and moral issues. New York: Praeger.
15.
Fox, Mary Frank, and John M. Braxton.1994. Misconduct and social control in science: Issues, problems, solutions. Journal of Higher Education65:373-83.
16.
Freidson, Eliot.1970. Profession of medicine. New York: Dodd Mead.
17.
—. 1975. Doctoring together: A study of professional social control . New York: Elsevier.
18.
Goode, William J.1969. The theoretical limits of professionalization. In The semi-professions and their organization, edited by A. Etzioni, 266-313. New York: Free Press.
19.
Goode, William J., and Paul K. Hatt.1952. Methods in social research. New York : McGraw-Hill.
20.
Hackett, Edward J.1994. A social control perspective on scientific misconduct . Journal of Higher Education65:242-60.
21.
Handler, Joel R1967. The lawyer and his community. Madison : University of Wisconsin Press.
22.
LaFollette, Marcel.1994. The politics of research misconduct: Congressional oversight, universities and science. Journal of Higher Education65:261-85.
23.
Leslie, Larry L.1972. Are response rates essential to valid surveys?Social Science Research1:323-34.
24.
O'Rand, Angela M.1977. Professional standing and peer consultation status among biological scientists at a summer research laboratory. Social Forces55:921-37.
25.
Rubington, Earl, and Martin S. Weinberg.1968. Deviance: The interactionist perspective: Text and readings in the sociology of deviance. New York: Macmillan.
26.
Steneck, Nicholas.1994. Research universities and scientific misconduct: History, policies, and the future. Journal of Higher Education65:310-30.
27.
Tangney, June P.1987. Fraud will out—Or will it?New Scientist115:62-63.
28.
Tucker, Allan.1981. Chairing the academic department. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
29.
Zuckerman, Harriet E.1977. Deviant behavior and social control in science . In Deviance and social change, edited by E. Sagarin, 87-138. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
30.
—. 1988. The sociology of science. In Handbook of sociology, edited by N. J. Smelser, 511-74. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
