The controversy over self-regulation has been a central topic of inquiry in sociological research on occupational misconduct and crime. However, few studies have examined the process by which organizational members decide whether to respond to the misconduct of peers, and none have examined the use of neutralization techniques by rule enforcers in organizational settings. The research presented here is based on a case study of the U.S. Naval Academy. Three data sources are analyzed: Survey data collected from Academy midshipmen, semistructured interviews with graduates, and official statistics on occupational misconduct. Findings reveal that Academy members employ a number of neutralization techniques depending on whether they counsel peers, report peers, or choose not to respond to misconduct. Midshipmen who counsel are appealing to peer loyalty, while those who report wrongdoing find themselves neutralizing the effects of violating informal norms about peer loyalty. In contrast, those who ignore misconduct must neutralize the potential effects of betraying loyalty to the institution. In addition to calling for the expansion of neutralization techniques research to include rule enforcers, the implications of this study suggest that the concept be refined to examine the impact of conflicting loyalties on the types of neutralization techniques employed in systems of self-regulation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdlerPatricia A.AdlerPeter. 1999. “Resort Workers: Adaptations in the Leisure-Work Nexus.”Sociological Perspectives42:369–402.
2.
AkerstromMalin. 1991. Betrayal and Betrayers: The Sociology of Treachery. New Brunswick: Transaction.
3.
BanduraAlbert. 1990. “Selective Activation and Disengagement of Moral Control.”Journal of Social Issues46:27–46.
4.
BarkerTomCarterDavid. 1990. “Fluffing Up the Evidence and Covering Your Ass: Some Conceptual Notes on Police Lying.”Deviant Behavior11:61–73.
5.
BeckerHoward. 1986. Doing Things Together. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
6.
BensonMichael L.1985. “Denying the Guilty Mind: Accounting for Involvement in a White-Collar Crime.”Criminology23:589–99.
7.
ChamblissWilliam J.1988. On the Take: From Petty Crooks to Presidents. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
8.
CoserLewis A.1974. Greedy Institutions: Patterns of Undivided Commitment. New York: Free Press.
9.
CostelloBarbara J.2000. “Techniques of Neutralization and Self-Esteem: A Critical Test of Social Control and Neutralization Theory.”Deviant Behavior21:307–29.
10.
CresseyDonald. 1953. Other People's Money. New York: Free Press.
11.
DavisJoseph E.2000. “Accounts of False Memory Syndrome: Parents, “Retractors,” and the Role of Institutions in Account Making.”Qualitative Sociology23:29–56.
12.
DeFleurLois B.1985. “Organizational and Ideological Barriers to Sex Integration in Military Groups.”Work & Occupations12:206–28.
13.
DenzinNorman K.1977. “Notes on the Criminogenic Hypothesis: A Case Study of the American Liquor Industry.”American Sociological Review42:905–20.
14.
EliasonStephen L.DodderRichard A., 1999. “Techniques of Neutralization Used by Deer Poachers in the Western United States: A Research Note.”Deviant Behavior20:233–52.
15.
FoxKathryn J.1999. “Reproducing Criminal Types: Cognitive Treatment for Violent Offenders in Prison.”Sociological Quarterly40:435–53.
16.
FriedrichsDavid O.1996. Trusted Criminals: White Collar Crime in Contemporary Society. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
17.
GlaserBarney G.StraussAnselm L., 1973. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Chicago: Aldine.
18.
GlazerMyron P.2002. “Ten Whistleblowers: What They Did and How They Fared.” Pp. 229–49 in Corporate and Governmental Deviance: Problems of Organizational Behavior in Contemporary Society, edited by ErmannM. D.LundmanR. J., New York: Oxford University Press.
19.
GlazerMyron P.GlazerPenina M., 1989. The Whistleblower. New York: Basic Books.
20.
GoffmanErving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday LifeGarden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor.
21.
GoffmanErving. 1961. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other Inmates. Garden City, NY: Anchor.
22.
GoffmanErving. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-Face Behavior. New York: Pantheon.
23.
GoffmanErving. 1971. Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Basic Books.
24.
GummerBurton. 1985–86. “Committing the Truth: Whistle-Blowing, Organizational Dissent, and the Honorable Bureaucrat.”Administration in Social Work9:89–102.
25.
HeckWilliam P.1992. “Police Who Snitch: Deviant Actors in a Secret Society.”Deviant Behavior: An Interdisciplinary Journal13:253–70.
26.
HindelangMichael J.1974. “Moral Evaluations of Illegal Behaviors.”Social Problems21:370–85.
27.
HunekePatricia D.1980–81. “Hawaii State Prison: Interactions within a Closed and Hostile Environment.”Social Process in Hawaii28:5–32.
28.
JesilowPaulPontellHenry N.GeisGilbert. 1992. Prescriptions for Profit: How Doctors Defraud Medicaid. Berkeley: University of California Press.
29.
LaBeffEmily E.ClarkRobert E.HainesValerie J.DiekhoffGeorge M., 1990. “Situational Ethics and College Student Cheating.”Sociological Inquiry60:190–98.
30.
MacNamaraDonald E. J.1991. “The Victimization of Whistle-Blowers in the Public and Private Sectors.” Pp. 121–33 in Perspectives on Deviance: Domination, Degradation and Denigration, edited by KellyR. J.MacNamaraD. E. J., Cincinnati: Anderson.
31.
MalloryStephen L.1999. Informants: Development and Management. Incline Village, NV: Copperhouse.
32.
ManningPeter K.1978. “Lying, Secrecy and Social Control.” Pp. 238–55 in Policing: A View from the Street, edited by ManningP. K.Van MaanenJ., Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing.
33.
MarxGary. 1988. Undercover: Police Surveillance in America. Berkeley: University of California Press.
34.
MiceliMarciaNearJanet P., 1991. “Whistle-Blowing as an Organizational Process.”Research in the Sociology of Organizations9:139–200.
35.
MiceliMarciaNearJanet P., 1992. Blowing the Whistle: The Organizational and Legal Implications for Companies and Employees. New York: Lexington Books.
36.
MiceliMarcia P.NearJanet P.SchwenkCharles R., 1991. “Who Blows the Whistle and Why?”Industrial and Labor Relations Review45:113–30.
MietheTerrance D.1999. Whistleblowing at Work: Tough Choices in Exposing Fraud, Waste, and Abuse on the Job. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
39.
MietheTerrance D.RothschildJoyce. 1994. “Whistle-Blowing and the Control of Organizational Misconduct.”Sociological Inquiry64:322–47.
40.
MillsC. Wright. 1940. “Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive.”American Sociological Review5:904–13.
41.
MinorW. William. 1981. “Techniques of Neutralization: A Reconceptualization and Empirical Examination.”Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency18:295–318.
42.
NorusisMarija J.1990. The SPSS Guide to Data Analysis for Release 4. Chicago: SPSS, Inc.
43.
OrbuchTerri L.1997. “People's Accounts Count: The Sociology of Accounts.”Annual Review of Sociology23:455–78.
44.
OrdovenskyPat. 1988. “Competition Is Stiff for a Coveted Spot.”USA Today, December 12, 4D.
45.
PerrucciRobertAndersonRobert M.SchendelDan E.TrachtmanLeon E., 1980. “Whistle-Blowing: The Professionals' Resistance to Organizational Authority.”Social Problems28:149–64.
46.
PershingJana L.2001. “Gender Disparities in Enforcing the Honor Concept at the U.S. Naval Academy.”Armed Forces & Society27:419–42.
47.
PershingJana L.2002. “Whom to Betray? Self-Regulation of Occupational Misconduct at the United States Naval Academy.”Deviant Behavior23:149–75.
48.
RoseMichael T.1973. A Prayer for Relief: The Constitutional Infirmities of the Service Academy Honor, Conduct, and Ethics Systems. New York: New York University Law School.
49.
RothschildJoyceMietheTerrance D., 1999. “Whistle-Blower Disclosures and Management Retaliation. The Battle to Control Information about Organization Corruption.”Work and Occupations26:107–28.
SutherlandEdwin H.1949. White-Collar Crime. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
56.
SutherlandEdwin H.1983. White-Collar Crime: The Uncut Version. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
57.
SykesGreshamMatzaDavid. 1957. “Techniques of Neutralization: A Theory of Delinquency.”American Sociological Review6:664–70.
58.
SztompkaPiotr. 1999. Trust: A Sociological Theory. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
59.
U.S. General Accounting Office. 1990. U.S. General Accounting Office Survey of U.S. Naval Academy Midshipmen. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
60.
U.S. General Accounting Office. 1993. Naval Academy: Gender and Racial Disparities. Document GAO/NSIAD-93-54. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
61.
U.S. General Accounting Office. 1995. DOD Service Academies: Comparison of Honor and Conduct Adjudicatory Processes. Document GAO/NSIAD-95-49. Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
62.
U.S. Naval Academy. 1987. United States Naval Academy, 1845. Annapolis, MD: U.S. Naval Academy.
63.
U.S. Naval Academy. 1989. Reef Points 1989–90: The Annual Handbook of the Brigade of Midshipmen. Annapolis, MD: U.S. Naval Academy.
64.
U.S. Naval Academy. 1990. Honor Concept of the Brigade of Midshipmen. Annapolis, MD: U.S. Naval Academy.
65.
VaughanDiane. 1983. Controlling Unlawful Organizational Behavior: Social Structure and Corporate Misconduct. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
66.
WeinbergMartin S.WilliamsColin J., 1972. “Fieldwork among Deviants: Social Relations with Subjects and Others.” Pp. 165–86 in Research on Deviance, edited by DouglasJ. D., New York: Random House.
67.
YoderJanice D.AdamsJeromePrinceHoward T., 1983. “The Price of a Token.”Journal of Political and Military Sociology11:325–37.
