The incidence of wrongdoing, whistle-blowing, and retaliation: Results of a naturally occurring field experiment

Miceli, Marcia P.; Near, Janet P.

doi:10.1007/bf01384940

Cited by 69 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[2][3][4][5][6][7]38,39 Understandably so, because an ORI study found that more than two-thirds of whistleblowers did indeed suffer adverse consequences as a result of their actions, 40 despite current Public Health Service regulations prohibiting retaliation. 41 Therefore, institutional leaders must acknowledge the whistleblowers' courage and their gratitude for the significant contributions that whistleblowers have made to the scientific community and to their institutions' integrity.…”

Section: Acknowledging and Protecting Whistleblowersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspective

Kornfeld

2012

Academic Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research misconduct-fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism-is an insidious problem in the scientific community today with the capacity to harm science, scientists, and the public. Federal agencies require that research trainees complete a course designed to deter such behavior, but the author could find no evidence to suggest that this effort has been effective. In fact, research shows that most cases of misconduct continue to go unreported.The author conducted a detailed examination of 146 individual Office of Research Integrity reports from 1992 to 2003 and determined that these acts of misconduct were the results of individual psychological traits and the circumstances in which the researchers found themselves. Therefore, a course in research misconduct, such as is now federally mandated, should not be expected to have a significant effect. However, a course developed specifically for support staff, who currently do not receive such training, might prove effective.Improving the quality of mentoring is essential to meaningfully deal with this issue. Therefore, the quality of mentorship should be a factor in the evaluation of training grants for funding. In addition, mentors should share responsibility for their trainees' published work. The whistleblower can also play a significant role in this effort. However, the potential whistleblower is deterred by a realistic fear of retaliation. Therefore, institutions must establish policies that acknowledge the whistleblower's contribution to the integrity of science and provide truly effective protection from retaliation. An increase in whistleblowing activity would provide greater, earlier exposure of misconduct and serve as a deterrent.

show abstract

Section: Acknowledging and Protecting Whistleblowersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspective

Kornfeld

2012

Academic Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…21 A second stream of research has focused on the consequences of whistle-blowing. Research has indicated that the seriousness of the reported wrongdoing affects the likelihood and level of retaliation 22 as does management support for whistle-blowers 23 and public support for whistle-blowers. 24 The Case for Research on the Characteristics of Wrongdoing An examination of evolution of models of whistle-blowing (and thus, of the whistleblowing process) indicates ongoing refinements and extensions based on both conceptual development and empirical testing.…”

Section: Whistle-blowing Researchmentioning

confidence: 98%

Type of Wrongdoing and Whistle-Blowing: Further Evidence That Type of Wrongdoing Affects the Whistle-Blowing Process

Somers¹,

Casal²

2011

Public Personnel Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preliminary evidence suggests that the type of wrongdoing observed in organizations affects the whistle-blowing process; that is, the likelihood that wrongdoing will be reported and the consequences of so doing. Using as sample of management accountants and focusing on financial fraud, this study provides additional evidence that type of wrongdoing affects the likelihood of whistleblowing. However, contrary to previous research findings, there was no relationship between type of wrongdoing and experienced retaliation for whistleblowing. Type of wrongdoing was related to perceived issue seriousness providing additional evidence that wrongdoing is not monolithic in nature. These findings suggest that type of wrongdoing should be included in future research on the topic of whistle-blowing. R ecent scandals in a variety of firms and industries have increased the salience of ethical conduct in business. Indeed, public perceptions of the extent of corporate malfeasance have raised questions about the ethical reasoning and the conduct of senior managers as well as the values taught to them in business schools. 1 Although acting ethically has clear benefits to employees, other important stakeholders, and to the firm pressures for performance and/or the desire for personal gain have led individuals in both public and private sector organizations astray. 2 While there has been renewed interest in fostering ethical behavior in organizations through codes of conduct and/or employee training 3,4 there has also been increased interest in what happens to employees when they discover and report unethical or illegal activity; that is, whistle-blowing. 5 Perhaps one of the most vexing issues in recent scandals in large firms such as WorldCom, Enron, and Tyco is the nagging question of how this highly unethical conduct was allowed to continue. Why wasn't it was discovered and reported much sooner? Why weren't external oversight agencies more vigilant?As whistle-blowers can be viewed as a "last defense" against wrongdoing in organizations, it is important to understand the process and the consequences of whistle-blowing from both an academic and a practitioner's perspective. With regard to

show abstract

“…This period also included books and movies based on experiences from whole organizations and actual cases (for instance, see Anderson et al 1980;Maas 1973). Later, theoretical papers and empirical research of the act of reporting wrongdoing at work became more common (Miceli and Near 1989;Parmerlee et al 1982). While the first compiled versions of whistleblowing cases were important for getting attention to the topic, theoretical and empirical research was and is crucial to gaining systematic knowledge about whistleblowing at work.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%