The talk, which I’ll post later, uses data I collected from criminologists and shows the rather dramatic and striking ways in which political ideology and partisanship influence scholars' views on science and their support for CJ policies. Let’s just say that ideology is strongly predictive.........like, really strongly predictive.
I did, however, read of a recent effort to expose some of the BS that academics engage in. In this instance, the professor sought to expose many of the intellectually bereft conferences that are, by the way, held in really nice vacation spots. He did this by submitting fake and clearly problematic papers to the conferences......papers that got accepted.
As you might imagine, conference organizers didn’t find it funny. They threatened to sue the good professor and his university in Little Rock. His university launched an investigation of HIM and found that he didn’t get university IRB approval for his “study.” Instead, he went to an outside IRB where approval was eventually obtained.
In reading about the background of this guy, I found that he has written a good deal on IRB’s. If you know anything about IRB’s, you know they are God (insert curse word) Awful. My experiences with IRB’s have been uniformly bad. While faculty don’t have a problem with the idea or concept behind the IRB, almost everyone I’ve ever talked to believes IRB’s have devolved into something of a joke. No, make that everyone I’ve ever talked to.
We should scrape IRB’s for the social sciences and start over.
Read Here: http://chronicle.com/article/A-Scholar-s-Sting-of/235650/?key=1Ja0uypYsRA97doxjHCtncWgJ408aaF2ZYSv1c2pMNxaRDBubHlkaXRPb0RkZGJQM3lxNWtkQTdXZ1dBUnFnMjFIVndhc1lqVElr
Read his paper here: