Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute Collaboration Report

18
March 6, 2013 Rev 1 Mark Regnerus & Witherspoon Institute Collaboration Report Freedom of Information Act Requests have revealed that Mark Regnerus collaborated with his Funders in his research the New Family Structures Study (NFSS). This report will document that collaboration. The New Family Structures Study research was published free to the public on the website of the Journal Social Science Research on June 11, 2012. As new documents are released from the Texas Attorney General or the Courts, this file will be updated.

description

Mark Regnerus and the Witherspoon Instute collaborated on the New Family Structures Study

Transcript of Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute Collaboration Report

Page 1: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

March 6, 2013 Rev 1 Mark Regnerus & Witherspoon Institute Collaboration Report Freedom of Information Act Requests have revealed that Mark Regnerus collaborated with his Funders in his research the New Family Structures Study (NFSS). This report will document that collaboration. The New Family Structures Study research was published free to the public on the website of the Journal Social Science Research on June 11, 2012. As new documents are released from the Texas Attorney General or the Courts, this file will be updated.

Page 2: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Regnerus states in his Original Report and in his Rebuttal Report that he did NOT work with his Funders on the Project Below: Original report Rebuttal Report:

Page 3: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

The applicable quote from the original report:

“the funding sources played no roll at all in the design or conduct of the study, the analysis, the interpretation of the data, or in the preparation of this manuscript.

The applicable quote from the Rebuttal Report: “I have always operated without strings from either organization. No funding agency representatives were consulted about research design, survey contents, analysis or conclusions. Any allegations that the funders might have improperly influenced me are simply false.”

One by one, what does the evidence show? Who are the Funders and their representatives? W Bradford Wilcox (Brad Wilcox) was the Director of the Program on Marriage, Family, and Democracy for the Witherspoon Institute. This Witherspoon Program is the one that ran the New Family Structures Study.

Page 4: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Luis Tellez is president of the Witherspoon Institute. Sean Fieler is a Board Member of the Witherspoon Institute Robert George is a Fellow of the Witherspoon Institute Helen Alvaré is a Fellow of the Witherspoon Institute

Page 5: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Brad Wilcox was working with Regnerus from start to finish. He claims that his position with Witherspoon was “Honorific” and that he never had budget authority. So at the same time he had this “Honorific” position at Witherspoon he was also a “Paid Consultant”

Page 6: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

The evidence does not seem to support that Brad Wilcox played a merely “Honorific” role at Witherspoon on the Regnerus Research. The Evidence shows that Luis Tellez depended on Wilcox to represent and speak for Witherspoon both with Regnerus (he approved funding) and, including Donors, and to help Luis manage the project. Notice How many time “Brad” is mentioned.

2010

Page 7: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Clearly Regnerus is writing to a package, that being Luis + Brad, his funders at the Witherspoon Institute, and he is thanking both of them about the funds.

Page 8: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Wilcox writing on behalf of the Witherspoon Institute is approving the budget, the budget at this point in time. Brad’s response is in CAPITAL Letters. Of note in the second pic #3 he references the DC meeting. There will be more on that later.

Page 9: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

At the end of e-mail Regnerus says he + Brad have decided to pay somebody. Brad is right in there making money decisions.

Page 10: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Luis Tellez approached the Bradley Foundation for donors. He wants Brad Wilcox with Regnerus on the call, see 2nd paragraph

Page 11: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Wilcox and Regnerus fly out to Focus on the Family in Colorado. “We feel like we have a decent plan moving forward”

Continued on next page

Page 12: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

The above establishes that Brad Wilcox did function as a representative of Witherspoon and that Luis Tellez interacted him and others, in that capacity related to the NFSS project. Regnerus stated in his report that no one from his funders helped him in the following areas. Below we will examine each area From his initial report- the funding sources played no roll at all in the design or conduct of the study, the analysis, the interpretation of the data, or in the preparation of this manuscript From his rebuttal report- No funding agency representatives were consulted about research design, survey contents, analysis or conclusions I will combine these statements to be

• Research Design • Content of the Survey and Implementation of the

Survey • Analysis of the data • Conclusions and preparation of the manuscript

Continued on Next Page

Page 13: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Research Design- Wilcox tells us himself that he assisted with the Research Design. *Note this statement by Wilcox was made after the University of Texas sent Scott Rose a letter saying that they would not release some documents because Wilcox participated in data collection and design.

Continued on next page

Page 14: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Content of the Survey and Implementation of the Survey- The University of Texas wrote a letter to Scott Rose saying they would not release some data because Wilcox participated in data collection.

Page 15: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Analysis of the data See statement of Wilcox above as well as the letter above from the University stating that Wilcox participated in data analysis.

Continued on next page

Page 16: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Conclusions and preparation of the manuscript The below e-mails appear to be inputs as to other research that could be used in the output manuscript/report. Obviously they didn’t use the first one because of the final sentence.

Page 17: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

Cynthia referred to below is most likely Cynthia Osborn of Univ of Texas. Likely she is the one in the earlier e-mail where Regnerus wrote that he and BRAD decided to pay her $15,000 to co-author the report. She must have declined that offer. (h/t Cynthia) Keep in mind that the University of Texas in a letter to Scott Rose said they are holding back communications between Wilcox and Regnerus claiming they reveal more or less “trade secrets” on data analysis and design. In addition to what has been disclosed there are other communications not being disclosed, this non disclosure of records of course is subject to

Page 18: Mark Regners and Witherspoon Institute  Collaboration Report

legal challenge as Dr. Regnerus has provided the dataset and design documents for subscribers to the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research at the University of Michigan. Surely there are a lot more documents to come as the Attorney General’s Office of Texas is reviewing each document blocking out information and releasing the rest of the document. This is a slow process the documents are being released in batches. Conclusion: It strains credibility that Regnerus was unaware of Brad Wilcox’s position as the Director of the Marriage, Family, and Democracy Program for the Witherspoon Institute. Or that Regnerus considered that position only “honorific” as Wilcox describes it. The evidence shows that he sought direction from Wilcox on a variety of aspects of the project including the budget and that he participated in at least one “drum up donors” phone call with Luis Tellez and Brad. If the Editor of Social Science Research Dr. James D. Wright University of Central Florida does not retract the published New Family Structures study because of collaboration with the Funder by the Principal Investigator after reviewing this evidence, the Advisory Editors of the Journal Social Science Research have a responsibility to science and the public who rely on ethical publishing standards to inform us on issues of science, the Advisory Editors have an obligation to effect retraction. They are obligated to their colleagues in the Academy and to the public to insure that “their” Journal the one “they” are associated with, meets ethical standards of scientific publishing.