Search

No one would disagree that scientific research has been unethical—even criminal—at times. Institutional review boards (IRBs) play a fundamental role in protecting people from unethical criminological research. At the same time, IRBs, as social entities, are subject to a wide range of influences that may affect their decisions regarding the ethicality of research. This research note draws on the paradigm of pure sociology and the logic underpinning Black's theory of law to propose a preliminary theory of IRBs' (dis)approval of research. Specifically, it suggests that IRBs apply less social control to criminological research involving higher status researchers and lower status research participants and, therefore, those persons are more often involved in research. The paper concludes with theoretically situated, practical advice for how (1) IRBs can reduce their discrimination, and (2) criminological researchers can reduce IRBs' disapproval of their projects and thereby increase their research output. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines changes in the representation of criminology, as an area of specialization, in the discipline of sociology between 1992 and 2002. Utilizing the ASA Guide to Graduate Programs in Sociology, we note faculty areas of specialization. We expect that criminology will appear more often as a specialty area in 1992 than 2002. All full‐time faculty in U.S. graduate programs in sociology are included in the analyses. We found no significant change in listing criminal justice as a specialty between 1992 and 2002. Our findings suggest that faculty with terminal degrees from less prestigious institutions and those who teach in less prestigious institutions are more likely to list criminology as a specialty area. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]