THE RELATIONSHIP OF FEDERAL FUNDING TO CRIMINOLOGY AND POLICING RESEARCH IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES

An increasingly prominent feature of social research in the past two decades has become its sponsorship by Federal agencies. This so-called marriage between researchers and Federal sponsors has been viewed as destructive by some, essential by others. By examining Federal sponsorship of criminal justice research, particularly policing studies, within the context of a sociology of knowledge, two issues are addressed: (1) The ideological configurations underlying knowledge production, and (2) The possible politicization of research by Federal funding.;The second strategy employed a precise coding instrument for a content analysis comparing funded and non-funded policing studies in six sociological and criminal justice journals. Two findings emerged from the content analysis: (1) Federal funding does not seem to generate research results that are more politicized than non-funded research, and (2) There are several ideological biases found in both funded and non-funded research, but these ideological features may be embedded in research activity itself rather than derive from the influence of state sponsorship.;There are several conclusions derived from this study. First, the relationship between the state and the activities it sponsors cannot be understood solely by examining formal rules and procedures or intents of Federal agencies and corresponding authorizing legislation. This is because there exists a variety of factors which mediate between state activity and other features of the social world. Second, the content analysis suggests that the politicization of research occurring in both funded and non-funded policing studies seems to originate in the preconceptual stage of research, suggesting that the prior ideology of the researcher may be a normative feature of research rather than shaped by state sponsorship. Third, a sociology of knowledge requires a theory of both structural and individual ideology as well as a theory of the state in modern industrial society in order to more adequately account for the production of the politicization and ideological figures underlying knowledge production. This project is a first step in this direction.;Two research strategies have been employed. First, drawing the distinction between state power and state apparatus, the organizational processes underlying Funding decisions for one particular agency, the National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice (NILECJ) are examined. By examining the state's organization for the production of knowledge, insights into how state power is translated into research by state apparatus becomes possible, and also helps identify particular features, both structural and interactional, which radiate state power. The organizational study entailed interviewing key NILECJ personnel, Congressional aides and other persons related to Institute activity, and also included attending legislative hearings and other appropriate sessions. It also entailed a documentary analysis of legislation, policy documents and NILECJ correspondence and memorandums. Two findings emerged from the organizational study: (1) State power is mediated by a variety of structural and interactional features such as individual discretion, sub rosa rules, and tacit understandings of particular persons, as well as by conflicting and contradictory goals or strategies between state agencies and the social environment. As a consequence, funded research cannot be understood simply as a direct expression of state power and the corresponding interests such power serves; (2) Although the findings suggest that criminal justice research is politicized, this politicization may reflect features of the research community at least as much as it does any particular ideological perspective of either state power or state apparatus.