Zoekresultaat: 4 artikelen

x
Jaar 2015 x
Artikel

Academische cultuur en wetenschappelijk wangedrag – en wat de relatie daartussen is

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden Academic culture, Scientific misconduct, Output-driven research
Auteurs Prof. dr. Kristel Beyens en Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article, the questions why scientific misconduct has become a subject of criminological research and how scientific misconduct relates to a production-oriented academic culture are examined. It is argued that the current academic career path produces an anomic academic culture. The authors further examine the slippery notion of the term ‘scientific misconduct’ and conclude that questions about the prevalence or increase of scientific misconduct are hardly answerable. They also point at a number of undesirable side-effects of the emerging culture of distrust and control in academia, amongst which socially disengaged, highly predictable and little innovative research. They end with a plea to recapture a truly academic culture.


Prof. dr. Kristel Beyens
Prof. dr. Kristel Beyens is hoogleraar penologie en criminologie aan de Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen
Prof. dr. René van Swaaningen is hoogleraar internationale en comparatieve criminologie aan de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam en voorzitter van de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Criminologie.
Boekbespreking

‘Ik was echt zorgvuldig’

De carrière van een wetenschappelijke fraudeur

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden Scientific misconduct, Diederik Stapel, culture of competition, questionable research procedures, ‘indifferent tolerance’
Auteurs dr. Thaddeus Müller
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    In this article I focus on the academic environment in which social psychologist Diederik Stapel worked and developed his career as a con academic. He published over 50 articles with fabricated data in top tier journals. This article is based on interviews with Stapel himself and document analysis. Especially, I pay attention to his socialization as an academic in his years at the University of Amsterdam, where he did his PhD (1986-2000). In my description of how social psychology developed in the nineties in Amsterdam it becomes clear that there was a strong emphasis on competition and publishing articles in top tier journals. Stapel conformed to this culture of competition and published almost as much as the two leading full professors of his department during the period 1995-2000. In the early nineties Stapel discovered that the use of questionable research procedures (QRPs) was common in social psychology. He realized that without using these procedures it was hardly possible to get good results and publish frequently in top tier journals. Though Stapel resented this partly and was disenchanted by this experience, he did integrate QRPs in his daily academic practice. He actually raised the issue of QRPs in a lecture in Oxford when he received the Jos Jaspars Early Career Award of the EAESP, but there was hardly any substantive response to his presentation. The academic culture in which Stapel developed his career can be described as ‘indifferent tolerant’. Though Stapel does refer to the circumstances which influenced his academic fraud, he does state that he himself is responsible for his massive scientific misconduct.


dr. Thaddeus Müller
Dr. Thaddeus Müller is verbonden aan de sectie criminologie van de Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Artikel

Ethische dilemma’s bij criminologisch onderzoek

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2015
Trefwoorden Ethical issues, Scientific integrity, Confidentiality, Informed consent, Fabrication and falsification, Ethical commissions
Auteurs Prof. dr. Henk van de Bunt
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Recent years have seen a growing interest in scientific malpractice. In the Netherlands, for example, several major cases of plagiarism, fabrication of data and falsification of findings have come to light. The scandal surrounding the Dutch social psychologist Diederik Stapel, who simply made up the results of empirical research, prompted worldwide attention. As a result of these scandals, universities have, in the past few years, increased their efforts to better ensure the integrity of scientific research. In this process it is sometimes overlooked that scientific integrity is not a clear-cut concept. By examining three ethical issues relevant to criminological research, this article aims to illustrate that the assessment of integrity is a complicated matter. The first dilemma relates to maintaining confidentiality: how to ensure that the privacy of respondents is protected and the research will not harm their interests? The second dilemma has to do with the degree of openness and transparency required from the viewpoint of scientific accountability. How transparent can one be when it comes to conducting scientific research based on secret information and closed sources that are only accessible to the researchers? Finally, the third dilemma concerns the independent position of criminological research. What are the possibilities and limitations of free and independent research in the field of criminology?


Prof. dr. Henk van de Bunt
Prof. dr. H.G. (Henk) van de Bunt is hoogleraar criminologie aan de Erasmus School of Law, Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment drie verschillende filters: tijdschrift, rubriek en jaar.