Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches

WRITING THE RESEARCH REPORT AND THE POLITICS OF SOCIAL RESEARCH

spoke out said that the ability of a small minority
with an extreme political ideology to kill important
research was “a scandalous act” and “frightening.”
One researcher noted that the project was not can-
celed because of questions about its scientific qual-
ity or importance but because of an ideologically
based decision that “we don’t need to know this.”^24
Attacks on social research, even noncontro-
versial but misunderstood research, hurts all re-
searchers. Politicians may try to stop research that
the scientific community recognizes as legitimate,
or they promote pet projects that have little scien-
tific value. Researchers who apply for government
funds will sometimes restate their project in terms
that do not attract attention. The public ridicule of
researchers or the denial of research funds also
encourages self-censorship and fosters a negative
public opinion about social research (see Example
Box 2, Political Attacks Had “Chilling Effect” on
Research).

National Security and Limits on Social Research.
Military secrecy and national security became
major issues in the United States during World War
I and World War II. Most of the concern involved
technology to create weapons, but some researchers
have been limited in their study of foreign nations,
issues of military interest, and research into gov-
ernment itself. U.S. security agencies such as the
National Security Administration and the Central
Intelligence Agency (CIA) influenced social and
natural science research into the cold war period of
the 1950s.
Government control over U.S. social science re-
search about non-Western societies was strict dur-
ing the cold war era, especially from the late 1940s
to the mid-1960s. Intelligence and security agencies
worked closely and clandestinely with most research
centers and scholarly associations. During that pe-
riod, security and military government agencies and
a few politicized foundations provided most funds
for social research about other societies, and officials

monitored researchers’ writings and statements for

conformity with government policy. Scholars who

secretly worked for or cooperated with the govern-

ment agencies rapidly received research funding and

see their careers advance. Independent researchers or

those who asked questions about official policy

rarely saw research funds and faced career limita-

tions. Conducting research that contradicted official

policy was almost impossible.^25

One government research project in the 1960s

created a great controversy. The U.S. Army funded

Project Camelot, which involved respected social

researchers who went to Chile to study political in-

surgency and mobilization. Several aspects of the

project created controversy. First, the project’s goal

was to determine how to prevent peasants and dis-

advantaged groups in Third World countries from

taking independent political action to oppose a dic-

tator. The CIA usually conducted such counterin-

surgency research. The researchers were accused of

using their skills and knowledge to advance mili-

tary interests against disadvantaged Third World

people. Second, some researchers were unaware of

the source of funds. Third, officials did not inform

EXAMPLE BOX 2

Political Attacks Had “Chilling Effect”

on Research

During the early years of the twenty-first century, U.S.

Congressional representatives known as the Tradi-

tional Values Coalition targeted social and medical

researchers who were to receive National Institutes of

Health (NIH)-funded grants on a range of topics. As

a result, the researchers report that they now engage

in self-censorship. Kempner (2008) conducted two

surveys in 2005 and 2006. One involved interviews

with a random sample of thirty principal investiga-

tors (PIs) named in these controversies, and the other

survey was a questionnaire sent to all PIs involved in

these controversies (eighty-six responded). She

found that a majority changed their research prac-

tices as a result of the political controversy. After the

political attacks, the researchers avoided using cer-

tain terms in their research proposals or changed the

focus of their research investigations to less politically

sensitive topics.

Project Camelot A controversial social research

project in Chile funded by the U.S. Army in the 1960s

that violated ethical principles and raised major polit-

ical concerns.