The Scientific Community Sanctions Sexual Misconduct: A Peer-Enforced Penalty
Widmann, Rose & Chugunova: "Sexual Misconduct, Accused Scientists, and Their Research" The Review of Economics and Statistics
A study by Rainer Widmann (Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition), Michael E. Rose (MPI for Innovation and Competition), and Marina Chugunova (MPI for Innovation and Competition), now published in The Review of Economics and Statistics, examines the question of whether the scientific community not only sanctions “bad science” but also “bad citizenship”—misconduct unrelated to research integrity but harmful to the community. The authors focus on sexual misconduct, which is prevalent in academia as in other fields. The study is the first to provide systematic and causal evidence on the consequences of sexual misconduct for perpetrators.
The researchers constructed a dataset of 210 scientists at research-intensive universities in the United States across all disciplines, against whom allegations of sexual misconduct were made public between 1998 and 2019. In their analysis, they track citations to articles by the accused that were published prior to the allegations and compare them to citations received by other articles in the same journal issue.
They found that the scientific community cites the prior work of the accused less after allegations of sexual misconduct surface. Co-authorship networks play a role in spreading information about the misconduct and mediating the response of other researchers: those who are very close to the accused in the co-authorship network react the most strongly and reduce their citations the most. The effect is particularly strong for the closest male peers. This disparity aligns with theories of “guilt by association,” wherein close male peers may be actively attempting to dispel suspicions of complicity or tolerance. The effect is muted in more male-dominated fields, suggesting that field culture shapes responses to misconduct.
By matching the accused to a set of observationally similar scientists, the researchers establish that the accused face palpable career consequences: they publish and collaborate less following the allegations, and they are more likely to quit academic research altogether.
The findings show that the scientific community responds to sexual misconduct even though such misconduct does not cast doubt on the validity of the scientific findings of the accused. The results are particularly important given the increasingly collaborative and social nature of modern research. The study provides evidence relevant for professional organisations seeking to strengthen scientific and social norms.
Link: Sexual Misconduct, Accused Scientists, and Their Research
