Research has demonstrated that there is a paucity of qualitative criminological research published in journals. Neoliberal ideology reigns hegemonic in the United Kingdom, promoting competition and quantifiable success. With neoliberal narratives infiltrating the functioning of academia, researchers are required to cater their methodological choices to suit metrics and arbitrary university goals. Consequently, the pressure to publish frequently and in prestigious journals can coerce academics into prioritizing research quantity above quality. As qualitative methodologies often require more time to conduct and inherently convey a more complex ethical process, researchers can favor the quicker, convenient methods to the detriment of quality theoretical research.
AldredR. (2008). Ethical and political issues in contemporary research relationships. Sociology, 42, 887–902.
2.
AllenM. (2017). Qualitative publishing in a neoliberal universe and university. Cultural Studies, Critical Methodologies, 17, 214–220.
3.
AthensL. (1997). Violent criminal acts and actors revisited. University of Illinois Press.
4.
BabbieE. (2002). The basis of social research. Wadsworth.
5.
BederS. (2009). Neoliberalism and the global financial crisis. Social Alternatives, 8, 17–21.
6.
BeerD. (2016). Metric power. Palgrave Macmillan.
7.
BellE. (2011). Criminal justice and neoliberalism. Palgrave Macmillan.
8.
BentonT.CraibI. (2010). Philosophy of social science: The Philosophical foundations of social thought (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.
9.
BergB. L. (1995). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
10.
BergL.HuijbensE. H.LarsenH. G. (2016). Producing anxiety in the neoliberal university. The Canadian Geographer Special Issue on Critical Reflections on Cultivating an Ethic of Wellness in Geography, 60, 168–180.
11.
BernardH. R. (2012). Social research method: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
12.
BestJ. (2001). Damned lies and statistics. University of California Press.
13.
BlackD. (2000). Dreams of pure sociology. Sociological Theory, 18, 343–367.
14.
BlockD.GrayJ.HolborowM. (2012). Neoliberalism and applied linguistics. Routledge.
15.
British Society of Criminology. (2003). Code of ethics for researchers in the field of criminology. Author.
16.
BrymanA. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.
17.
BucklerK. (2008). The quantitative/qualitative divide revisited: A study of published research, doctoral program curricula, and journal editor perceptions. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 19, 383–403.
18.
CairnsG.SliwaM. (2008). A very short, fairly interesting, and reasonably cheap book about international business. Sage.
19.
CareyM. A.SwansonJ. (2003). Funding for qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 852–856.
20.
CaulfieldL.HillJ. (2014). Criminological research for beginners: A student’s guide. Routledge.
21.
CheekJ. (2005). The practice and politics of funded qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 387–410). Sage Publications.
22.
CheekJ. (2007). Qualitative inquiry, ethics, and the politics of evidence: Working within these spaces rather than being worked over by them. In DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. D. (Eds.), Ethical futures in qualitative research: Decolonizing the politics of knowledge (Chapter 4). Left Coast Press.
23.
ChristensenC. M.EyringH. J. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. John Wiley.
24.
CluleyR. (2014). Sexual fetishism in organisations: The case of journal list fetishism. Organization, 21, 314–328.
25.
CohnE.FarringtonD. (2014). Publishing productivity of criminologists. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 25, 275–303.
26.
CollinsR. (1989). Sociology: Pro-science or anti-science?American Sociological Review, 54, 124–139.
27.
CopesH.KheyD. N.TewskburyR. (2012). Criminology and criminal justice hit parade: Measuring academic productivity in the discipline. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 23, 441–461.
28.
CopesH.MillerJ. M. (2015). Routledge handbook of qualitative criminology. Routledge.
29.
CopesH.TewksburyR.SandbergS. (2016). Publishing qualitative research in criminology and criminal justice journals. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 27, 121–139.
30.
CoteJ. E.AllaharA. L. (2011). Lowering higher education: The rise of corporate universities and the fall of liberal education. University of Toronto Press.
31.
CreswellJ. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage Publications.
32.
CromwellP.BirzerM. (2013). In their own words: Criminals on crime (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
33.
CrottyM. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Allen & Unwin.
34.
CrouchC. (2011). The strange non-death of neoliberalism. Polity Press.
35.
DabneyD. A. (2013). Crime types: A text/reader (2nd ed.). Aspen.
36.
DardotP.LavalC. (2013). The new way of the world: On neoliberal society. Verso.
37.
DeanM. (2014). Rethinking neoliberalism. Journal of Sociology, 50, 150–163.
38.
De AngelisM.HarvieD. (2009). “Cognitive Capitalism” and the rat-race: How capital measures immaterial Labour in British universities. Historical Materialism, 17, 3–30.
39.
DenzinN.LincolnY. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In DenzinN.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 1–32). Sage Publications.
40.
DiCristinaB. (1995). Method in criminology. Harrow and Heston.
41.
DiCristinaB. (1997). The quantitative emphasis in criminal justice education. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 8, 181–199.
42.
DingwallR. (2006). Confronting the anti-democrats: The unethical nature of ethical regulation in social science. Medical Sociology Online, 1, 51–58.
43.
Dixon-WoodsM.AngellE.AshcroftR. E. (2007). Written work: The social functions of research ethics committee letters. Social Science and Medicine, 65, 792–802.
44.
DuménilG.LévyD. (2004). Capital resurgent: Roots of the neoliberal revolution. Harvard University Press.
45.
EdwardsR.MauthnerM. (2002). Ethics and feminist research: Theory and practice. In MauthnerM.BirchM.JessopJ.MillerT. (Eds.), Ethics in qualitative research (pp. 14–31). Sage Publications.
46.
FeldmanZ.SandovalM. (2018). Metric power and the academic self: Neoliberalism, knowledge, and resistance in the British university. Communication, Capitalism, and Critique, 16, 214–233.
47.
FerrellJ.HammM. (1998). Ethnography at the edge: Crime, deviance, and field research. North-Eastern University Press.
48.
FineG. A. (2012). Sticky Reputations: The Politics of Collective Memory in Mid-Century America. Routledge.
49.
FlanaganT. J. (1990). Criminal justice doctoral programs in the United States and Canada: Findings from a national survey. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 1, 195–213.
GaldasP. (2017). Revisiting bias in qualitative research: Reflections on its relationship with funding and impact. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 16–17.
53.
GaneN. (2014). Sociology and neoliberalism: A missing history. Sociology, 48, 1092–1106.
54.
GibbsJ. P. (1975). Crime, punishment, and deterrence. Elsevier.
55.
GibbsP. (2001). Higher education as a market: A problem or solution?Studies in Higher Education, 26, 85–94.
56.
GirouxH. (2002). Neoliberalism, corporate culture, and the promise of higher education: The university as a democratic public sphere. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 425–464.
57.
GranekL.NakashO. (2015). The impact of qualitative research on the “Real World”: Knowledge translation as education, policy, clinical training, and clinical practice. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 56, 414–435.
58.
GruberT. (2014). Academic sell-out: How an obsession with metrics and rankings is damaging academia. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 24, 165–177.
59.
HaggertyK. D. (2004). Ethics creep: Governing social science research in the name of ethics. Qualitative Sociology, 27, 391–414.
60.
HallS.WinlowS. (2015). Revitalizing criminological theory: Towards a new ultra-realism. Routledge.
61.
HarveyD. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.
62.
HarveyD. (2010). The enigma of capital and the crisis of capitalism. Profile Books.
63.
HigginsG. E. (2009). Quantitative versus qualitative methods: Understanding why quantitative methods are predominant in criminology and criminal justice. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology, 1, 23–37.
HillyardP.SimJ.TombsS.WhyteD. (2004). Leaving a stain upon the silence: Contemporary criminology and the politics of dissent. British Journal of Criminology, 44, 369–390.
66.
HobsbawmE. (1994). The age of extremes: The short twentieth century 1914-1991. Michael Joseph.
67.
HoffmannC. P. (2015). Success measurement of scientific communication: The contribution of new media to the governance of universities. In WelpeI. M.WollersheimJ.RingelhanS.OsterlohM. (Eds.), Incentives and performance: Governance of research organizations (pp. 291–306). Springer.
68.
HolmesD.MurrayS.PerronS. J.RailG. (2006). Deconstructing the evidence-based discourse in health sciences: Truth, power, and fascism. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 4, 180–186.
69.
JacobsB. A. (2006). The case for dangerous fieldwork. In HobbsD.WrightR. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of fieldwork (pp. 157–167). Sage Publications.
70.
JacquesS. (2014). The quantitative-qualitative divide in criminology: A theory of ideas’ importance, attractiveness, and publication. Theoretical Criminology, 18, 317–334.
71.
JuppV. (1989). Methods of criminological research. Allen & Unwin.
KingD. (1998). The politics of social research: Institutionalizing public funding regimes in the United States and Britain. British Journal of Political Science, 28, 415–444.
74.
KingG.KeohaneR. O.VerbaS. (1994). Designing social inquiry: Scientific inference in qualitative research. Princeton University Press.
75.
KingR. D.WincupE. (2008). Doing research on crime and justice (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
76.
KleckG.TarkJ.BellowsJ. J. (2006). What methods are most frequently used in criminology and criminal justice?Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 147–152.
77.
KomljenovicJ.RobertsonS. L. (2017). Making global education markets and trade. Globalisation, Societies, and Education, 15, 289–295.
LavisJ. (2006). Research, public policy making, and knowledge translation processes: Canadian efforts to build bridges. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 26, 37–45.
80.
LeeR. M. (1993). Doing research on sensitive topics. Sage.
81.
LeeR. M. (1995). Dangerous fieldwork. Sage.
82.
LeysC. (2003). Market-driven politics: Neoliberal democracy and the public interest. Verso.
83.
LipinskiD. (2011). Role of government in social science research funding questioned. Issues in Science and Technology, 28, 29–30.
84.
LongB. (2010). [Review of the book Qualitative inquiry and the politics of evidence, by N. K. Denzin, & M. D. Giardina]. Qualitative Health Research, 20, 432–434.
85.
LSE Public Policy Group. (2011). Maximizing the impacts of your research: A handbook for social scientists (Consultation draft 3). Author.
86.
LutzC.HoffmannC. P. (2018). Making academic social capital visible: Relating SNS based, alternative, and traditional metrics of scientific impact. Social Science Computer Review, 36, 632–643.
87.
LykesM. B.CrosbyA. (2014). Feminist practice of community and participatory and action research. In Hesse-BiberS. (Ed.), Feminist research practice: A primer (2nd ed., Chapter 6). Sage Publications.
88.
LyonsE.CoyleA. (2007). Analysing qualitative data in psychology. Sage.
89.
MacRobertsM. H.MacRobertsB. R. (2010). Problems of citation analysis: A study of uncited and seldom-cited influences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61, 1–12.
90.
MaguireM.KemshallH.NoaksL.WincupE.SharpeK. (2001). Risk management of sexual and violence offenders: The work of public protection panels. (Police research series papers 139). Home Office.
91.
Mangione-SmithR.DeCristofaroA. H.SetodjiC. M.KeeseyJ.KleinD. J.AdamsJ. L.McGlynnE. A. (2007). The quality of ambulatory care delivered to children in the United States. New England Journal of Medication, 357, 1515–1523.
92.
MasseyS. G.BarrerasR. E. (2013). Introducing “Impact Validity.”Journal of Social Issues, 69, 615–632.
93.
MertonR. K. (2002). Science, technology, and society in seventeenth-century England. Howard Fertig. (Original work published 1938)
94.
MillerT. (2012). Reconfiguring research relationships: Regulation, new technologies, and doing ethical research. In MillerT.BirchM.MauthnerM.JessopJ. (Eds.), Ethics in qualitative research (2nd ed, pp. 29–42). Sage Publications.
MolesworthM.NixonE.ScullionR. (2009). Having, being, and higher education: The marketisation of the university and the transformation of the student into consumer. Teaching in Higher Education, 14, 277–287
97.
MorseJ. M.RichardsL. (2002). Read Me First for a User’s Guide to Qualitative Methods. Sage Publications.
98.
NaidooR.JamiesonL. (2005). Empowering participants or corroding learning? Towards a research agenda on the impact of student consumerism in higher education. Journal of Education Policy, 20, 267–281.
99.
NeumanW. L. (2011). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
OrtegaJ. L. (2015). Relationship between altmetric and bibliometric indicators across academic social sites: The case of CSIC’s members. Journal of Infometrics, 9, 39–49.
102.
OvetzR. (2015). Response to Jonna and Smith on LPT 40 years on. European Journal of Education, 23, 275–277.
PetersM. A.BulutE. (2011). Cognitive capitalism, education, and digital labour. Peter Lang.
105.
PobgerinM. R. (2010). On the way to the field: Reflections of one qualitative criminal justice professor’s experiences. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 21, 540–561.
106.
RadiceH. (2013). How we got here: UK higher education under neoliberalism. An International Journal for Critical Geographies, 12, 407–418.
107.
RamcharanP.CutcliffeJ. R. (2001). Judging the ethics of qualitative research: Considering the “Ethics as Process” model. Health and Social Care in the Community, 9, 358–366.
RichardsonS.McMullanM. (2007). Research ethics in the UK: What can sociology learn from health?Sociology, 10, 37–48.
110.
RiesmanD. (2002). Reviewing social research. Change, 1, 9–10.
111.
RoggeroG. (2011). The production of living knowledge: The crisis of the university and the transformation of labor in Europe and North America. Temple University Press.
112.
RossiP. (1994). The war between the quals and quants: Is a lasting peace possible?New Directions for Program Evaluation, 61, 23–36.
113.
RoweM. (2007). Tripping over molehills: Ethics and the ethnography of police work. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 10, 37–48.
114.
Saad-FilhoA.JohnstonD. (2005). Neoliberalism: A critical reader. Pluto Press.
115.
SandelowskiM.LeemanJ. (2012). Writing usable qualitative health research findings. Qualitative Health Research, 22, 1404–1413.
SeglenP. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314, 497.
118.
SeverB. (2001). Research methods for criminal justice graduate students: Comparing textbook coverage and classroom instruction. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 12, 337–353.
119.
SmallM. L. (2009). “How Many Cases Do I Need?” On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography, 10, 5–38.
120.
SmellieP. (1996). Fight to put contract research in public realm: Criminologists risk gag for touching raw nerve of state. The Australian, p. 23.
121.
StanleyL.WiseS. (2010). The ESRC’s 2010 framework for research ethics: Fit for research purpose?Sociological Research Online, 15, 12.
122.
StelmachB. L.Von WolffS. D. (2011). A challenge to metrics as evidence of scholarity. European Educational Research Journal, 10, 64–82.
123.
SullivanC. J.MaxfieldM. G. (2003). Examining paradigmatic development in criminology and criminal justice: A content analysis of research methods syllabi in doctoral programs. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 14, 269–285.
124.
TabernerA. M. (2018). The marketisation of the English higher education sector and its impact on academic staff and the nature of their work. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 26, 129–152.
125.
TewksburyR.DabneyD. D.CopesH. (2010). The prominence of qualitative research in criminology and criminal justice scholarship. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 21, 391–411.
126.
TewksburyR.DeMicheleM. T.MillerM. J. (2005). Methodological orientations of articles appearing in criminal justice’s top journals: Who publishes what and where. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16, 265–279.
127.
ThorneS. (2009). The role of qualitative research within an evidence-based context: Can metasynthesis be the answer?International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 46, 569–575.
128.
ThorntonM. (2013). The mirage of merit. Australian Feminist Studies, 28, 127–143.
129.
ThorsenD. E. (2010). The neoliberal challenge: What is neoliberalism?Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, 2, 188–214.
130.
TierneyJ. (2010). Criminology: Theory and context. Longman.
131.
TomlinsonM. (2017). Student perceptions of themselves as “Consumers” of higher education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38, 450–467.
132.
TorranceH. (2014). Qualitative research in the United Kingdom: Short term problems, long term issues. Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 1110–1118.
133.
Van den HoonaardW. C. (2002). Walking the tightrope: Ethical issues for qualitative research. University of Toronto Press.
134.
WaghidY. (2006). Reclaiming freedom and friendship through postgraduate student supervision. Teaching in Higher Education, 11, 427–439.
135.
WallimanN. (2016). Social research methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
136.
WaltersR. (2003). Deviant knowledge: Criminology, politics, and policy. Willan.
137.
WattsG. (2013). Research Councils UK issues tougher guidelines on research conduct. British Medicinal Journal, 346, 1.
138.
WelchL. (2012). Neoliberalism, economic crisis, and the 2008 financial meltdown in the United States. International Review of Modern Sociology, 38, 221–257.
139.
WhiteheadP.CrawshawP. (2012). Organising neoliberalism: Markets, privatisation, and justice. Anthem Press.
140.
WiggerA.Buch HansenH. (2013). Competition, the global crisis, and alternatives to neoliberal capitalism: A critical engagement with anarchism. New Political Science, 35, 604–626.
141.
WilliamsF. P. (1984). The demise of the criminological imagination: A critique of recent criminology. Justice Quarterly, 1, 91–106.
142.
WilliamsT.DunlapE.JohnsonB. D.HamidA. (1992). Personal safety in dangerous places. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 21, 343–374.
143.
WillmottH. (2011). Journal list fetishism and the perversion of scholarship: Reactivity and the ABS list. Organization, 18, 429–442.
144.
WittgensteinL. (1958). The blue and brown books. Blackwell.
145.
WoolfS. H. (2008). The meaning of translational research and why it matters. Journal of the American Medical Association, 299, 211–213.
146.
WorrallJ. L. (2000). In defence of the “Quantoids”: More on the reasons for the quantitative emphasis in criminal justice education and research. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 16, 265–279.
147.
WrightR.SteinM. (1996). Seeing ourselves: Exploring the social production of criminological knowledge in a qualitative methods course. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 7, 65–77.
148.
ŽižekS. (2006). Interrogating the real. Continuum.
