Violations of Fairness in Social Science Research: The Case of Same-Sex Marriage and Parenting

Abstract

Progressives and conservatives agree upon the importance of procedural fairness. Accordingly, this article examines the quality of social science research in the area of same-sex parenting. A variety of research principles have been violated on a regular basis, yet research results have often been accepted at face value by both professional social science organizations and judicial authorities. Examples are presented of how basic so-called facts, such as how many children are being raised by same-sex parents, have been extraordinarily incorrect; how nonrandom, convenience samples have been accepted, even though random, national samples have existed for many years; how sample designs have been corrupted; and how erroneous statistical analyses have been conducted. It appears that in many cases the role of politics has overridden scientific common sense and standard methodological protocols, damaging the credibility of social scientists, the field of social science, and the integrity of many social science professional organizations. The acceptance of such inferior research, both in general and in terms of specific journal article results, as long as it appeared to support politically correct objectives, suggests the use of an approach to science whereby the ends justify the means, an approach that may ultimately undermine public trust in social science and in judicial decisions that are based on such faulty research.