More Potential Academic Fraud: Sociology Edition
Alice Goffman published a widely praised study of life among young men with criminal histories in American Inner-Cities. The book was called On The Run: Fugitive Life in An American City:
Now a Northwestern University School of Law Professor is challenging some of her stories of being implausible and showing unethical research standards. He also accuses her of being an accessory/participant to a serious crime.
Alice Goffman denies all allegations. The problem is that she has made it next to impossible to check her work because the names in the book are pseudonyms, she shredded her notes, and sequestered her thesis.
Needless to say that if the allegations against Goffman are true, she likely hurt the cause and plight of those that she wanted to help very much and for very good reason. It is impossible to tell how much these fabrications and obsfucations come from a desire to help or a desire for fame and glory.
Please, please don’t tell me if there are any similar questions about Sudhir Venkatesh!Report
Goffman was accused of making it up from the start. I saw her pop up in the news last week or the week before, and was surprised, because I thought most people had decided it probably was fake. Then, I didn’t pay that much attention then.
She’s also really tone deaf on racial issues in a way that suggests less exposure than she claims, but what are ya gonna do.Report
“It is impossible to tell how much these fabrications and obsfucations come from a desire to help or a desire for fame and glory.”
I would say the two are bound together like egos and politicians.Report
They aren’t exactly mutually inconclusive desires. A lot of politicians really do want to good for various definitions of good. They also like the acclaim and praise that you get as a politician. A lot of sociologists, ethnographers, and activists also want to do good but love the glory of being a pioneer and crusader.Report
Exactly.Report
There are two golden rules for academics. The first one is don’t commit plagiarism. The second one is don’t make sh*t up.
If a prosecutor decides to charge Goffman with conspiracy to commit murder, her only real defense is that part of the book is completed fabricated or maybe even the entire book is fake.Report
There are two golden rules for academics. The first one is don’t commit plagiarism. The second one is don’t make sh*t up.
That second rule’s gonna be a problem for the creative writing faculty, I think.Report
Interestingly I heard that it is fairly common for people to try and disguise their autobiographical memoirs as fiction in creative writing classes especially at the MFA level. This is a big taboo and no no. Fiction class is for fiction but memoirs are big right now (God knows why) and nothing can stop the writing crowd from getting critiques for their memoirs.Report
Actually, her main defense would be that you can’t be convicted of a crime based solely on your own statements without SOME other evidence that a crime ever occurred. The only way to convict her would be to find a witness who could testify that something like what she describes in the book actually happened.Report
A statement in a book you wrote about driving a car while looking to murder a particular person would constitute an admission to a crime. Admissions are treated as exceptions to the rules against hearsay.Report
Her statement would be admissible but it wouldn’t be sufficient to convict her in the absence of some corroborative evidence that a crime actually occurred. This is the common law rule and as far as I know it applies in PA.Report
In the interest of being properly skeptical of her skeptic, almost all of the refutals he gives are based on questioning local law enforcement. Not saying it’s either correct or incorrect; but it sorta creeped me out.Report
He also talked to public defenders.Report
I know.
I also know I had a lot of people on the street talking to me about cops and the system.
I understand confidentially from a journalist perspective; I often had to look for ways to tell peoples’ stories that protected their confidence. I also needed people, with names, to tell stories. There were a lot of incidences that I didn’t write about, but illuminated patterns of behavior to observe.
How does that work in this academic study; how do you do this kind of research, write honestly, and protect those sources at the same time?
She became part of the story, I mistrust that.
But I still got that icky, this isn’t right, feeling about his reliance on the legal system, including public defenders. Just because he got some to say these things couldn’t happen doesn’t mean they don’t happen. A lot of people get shit for representation. I think it’s a persistent violation of their constitutional rights.
I am not saying defending her, I am skeptical of his critique for these reasons.Report