Textbook Notes (290,000)
CA (170,000)
U of A (2,000)
SOC (200)
SOC241 (7)
Chapter 7-9

SOC 241 Chapter 7-9: soc notes.docx

Course Code
Steve Kent

This preview shows page 1. to view the full 5 pages of the document.
TUE march 10th 2015
Deviance in science and academia
1. research fraud
2. credentials- fraud is not common but happens, increase the responsibility of the
institution to check on its applicants..etc
3. plagiarism- taking someone elses ideas. Being too busy, don’t have commitment,
can’t do the research…
4. salaries
5. exploitation (of students, not tenure system(means that after 6-7 years, university
is giving a secure jobs, it’s set up so that the teachers will protect against
politicians) teachers…however, decreased number of tenure teaching…phD
who can’t find jobs, teach contract to contract. Politicians trying to destroy this
system financially with budget cuts.
Sometimes professors steals students ideas. Instead of working on it and getting
it published, professor steals it. Because of power differential between students
and professors, the professors gets the power to do this.
6. Gatekeeping – people who decide which ideas gets into the institution and which
ones get out. They end up rejecting ideas that challenge their own. Regardless
which prominate journal you go, you still get it thrown out because it challenges
something they believe.
7. journals and publishing – academia is suppose to be involved in sharing of ideas.
Fake journals or journals that are ego journals – opportunity for people to support
their own papers, but they aren’t science…
People get rewards for publishings. THEY FEEL DRIVEN TO FAKE THEIR DATA.
Fraud is a way for groups to get out of competitions
In universities- no one is trained for administrations.
reputable errors – honest mistakes
disreputable errors- not following the right methodologies, omitting important
elements of he experimental design – problem with you and your research
Grey area – sloppy note-taking, poor citations, unidentified research bias…etc. –
if you have a particular agenda and you read something that contradict your own
view, can you really objectify what the writer is trying to say? Sociologist tries to
figure out how widespread is it?
Theories of deviance
Ice berg theory – what we see is only a small amount of what is going on
“bad apples” theory – small number of deviants
labeling theory – gatekeeping assign negative labels; does not work here because
deviance is secret and commited by members of the dominant power elite.
differential association – no one wants to work with a deviant scientists.
Drift theory works (1/3)
How someone detaches from a social group or moral code and moves to another
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Only page 1 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

1. neutralize one’s actions
a. denial of responsibility – I was pressure, not my fault
b. denial of injury – no one was hurt, I know I did wrong, but no one was hurt
c. Denial of victim – she or he deserved it for having exploited others
d. Condemn the condemners – they do similar things so they cannot judge
2. Subterranean convergence (David Matza):
- involved the mixing of conventional morality and culture in a manner that ives
support ro deviant morality – not using legitimate means to legitimate ends
- Example: sexism in society “leads” some researcher to over-emphasize female
intelligence advantages. You get the argument that people druft into these
issues slowly
3. Scientist must have a motivating element
4. Scientist must be prepared to deviate
5. Scientist must be desperate – you take such a chance of getting caught in
academia for deviating. Because so many experts read your material, and in the
hard science, they replicate what you’ve done. In case of hard sciences, they
spend more time on grant money than researching.
Social control in science
1. Internalization of norms and values; ethics instructions, stigmatizing cheating
2. External mechanisms of control
March 12th 2015
Social control in science (2of 2)
a. universalism- not merely individually applicable
b. community- findings shared with others
c. disinterestedness- personal issues do not matter
d. organized skepticism
e. Rationality-research and arguments must be logical, precise and systematic
f. Emotional neutrality- committed to the facts, not to a preconceived ideology.
Unethical science:
- example, the tea room trade.
- Research we can’t replicate but quote from
- Study done about government interfering with research.
Post modernism - Assumption that all voices are equal, all people have equal knowledge,
science is completely relative, no hard facts.
Allan Sokal- wrote a non-sense piece. Sent to a journal that held this ideology. He made
up fact, he made up scienticific study…the critics loved it, and they published it, and then
was criticized for not checking the facts.
VIDEO: Concern over cheating and research
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version