A Criminological Understanding of Deviance in Science

From a system entirely driven by truth-seeking incentives and the pursuit of authentic knowledge, science evolved into an environment where great work could lead to high social status and prestige, bringing along commercial and political opportunities. With these fundamental changes came along immense challenges to reconcile traditional norms of science with the relentless pressures that have become emblematic of excellent science. Because of this rapidly changing research system it can be said that deviance in science has taken different shapes and dimensions over the past few decades.
The ever broadening performance indicators are currently overshadowing the house of science but it has not always been that way. The emergence of the notion of integrity is relatively new in science, and stems from a growing body of research practices labelled as inappropriate. Attention to cases of scientific misconduct increased and so did the awareness of deviant behavior in science. On a global scientific level consensus emerged on the acceptance of Fabrication, Falsification and Plagiarism (FFP) as the three most severe forms of fraud. The notion of scientific misconduct became more complex when an extending amount of behaviors were labelled as questionable behavior or misconduct in science.
In this presentation we argue that, from a criminological point of view it is exactly this evolution, comparable to criminalization processes in society that is worth a thorough exploration. Further, an understanding of the expanding ethical mindset in science as a response to the problematization of incorrect behaviors can offer interesting insights from a criminological perspective. In this regard parallels can be drawn with the rise of the integrity conception in other contexts such as for example police departments and the private security sector, resulting in a wide range of institutional measures, codes of conduct and prevention strategies.
The interim findings based on a literature study point to the added value that a criminological understanding, hitherto lacking, offers in broadening the perspective on scientific misconduct. Benefits of this approach will be to understand both the causes and motivations of scientific misconduct on an interdisciplinary level and can be applied for prevention strategies in higher education.