If you were a member of a Greek organization and saw one of your peers hazing pledges, would you blow the whistle against this activity? Three members of the Communication Studies department researched this situation in their study entitled, " Blowing the whistle on Greek hazing." The manuscript was recently accepted for publication in the journal Communication Studies.
The study was initiated as part of graduate student Camille Hall's Master's Fellowship program. Camille, a 2010 M.A. graduate, teamed up with faculty members Dr. Brian Richardson and Dr. Zuoming Wang for this project, which addressed factors influencing whistle-blowing intentions against Greek hazing situations.
"Camille worked very hard on this project," said Dr. Richardson, who served as Camille's MDF mentor. "She was instrumental in the study's design, the data collection process, and took a lead role in writing portions of the manuscript."
The researchers found that the more severe the hazing, the more likely the subject is to blow the whistle; regardless of the severity of the situation, prospective whistle-blowers were influenced by their perceptions of what respected others would have them do if they witnessed hazing, and whether they thought whistle-blowing in this particular case would have productive outcomes.
A previous version of this manuscript was selected as Top Paper of the Communication Theory division at the Southern States Communication Association. Camille is now in the doctoral program at the University of Texas at Austin. The complete title of the study is: "Blowing the whistle on Greek hazing: An investigation of the Theory of Reasoned Action for predicting reporting intentions."