David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Meagan E. Brock, Andrew Vert, Vykinta Kligyte, Ethan P. Waples, Sydney T. Sevier & Michael D. Mumford
Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):449-472 (2008)
In spite of the wide variety of approaches to ethics training it is still debatable which approach has the highest potential to enhance professionals’ integrity. The current effort assesses a novel curriculum that focuses on metacognitive reasoning strategies researchers use when making sense of day-to-day professional practices that have ethical implications. The evaluated trainings effectiveness was assessed by examining five key sensemaking processes, such as framing, emotion regulation, forecasting, self-reflection, and information integration that experts and novices apply in ethical decision-making. Mental models of trained and untrained graduate students, as well as faculty, working in the field of physical sciences were compared using a think-aloud protocol 6 months following the ethics training. Evaluation and comparison of the mental models of participants provided further validation evidence for sensemaking training. Specifically, it was found that trained students applied metacognitive reasoning strategies learned during training in their ethical decision-making that resulted in complex mental models focused on the objective assessment of the situation. Mental models of faculty and untrained students were externally-driven with a heavy focus on autobiographical processes. The study shows that sensemaking training has a potential to induce shifts in researchers’ mental models by making them more cognitively complex via the use of metacognitive reasoning strategies. Furthermore, field experts may benefit from sensemaking training to improve their ethical decision-making framework in highly complex, novel, and ambiguous situations.
|Keywords||Integrity Ethics Training Evaluation Sensemaking Mental models Think-aloud|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Janet S. Adams, Armen Tashchian & Ted H. Shore (2001). Codes of Ethics as Signals for Ethical Behavior. Journal of Business Ethics 29 (3):199 - 211.
Melissa S. Anderson (2007). Collective Openness and Other Recommendations for the Promotion of Research Integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (4):387-394.
Merry Bullock & Sangeeta Panicker (2003). Ethics for All: Differences Across Scientific Society Codes. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):159-170.
M. T. H. Chi, P. J. Feltovich & R. Glaser (1981). Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices. Cognitive Science 5 (2):121-52.
Michael Davis (2006). Engineering Ethics, Individuals, and Organizations. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (2):223-231.
Citations of this work BETA
Chase E. Thiel, Shane Connelly, Lauren Harkrider, Lynn D. Devenport, Zhanna Bagdasarov, James F. Johnson & Michael D. Mumford (2013). Case-Based Knowledge and Ethics Education: Improving Learning and Transfer Through Emotionally Rich Cases. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):265-286.
Zhanna Bagdasarov, Chase E. Thiel, James F. Johnson, Shane Connelly, Lauren N. Harkrider, Lynn D. Devenport & Michael D. Mumford (2013). Case-Based Ethics Instruction: The Influence of Contextual and Individual Factors in Case Content on Ethical Decision-Making. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3):1305-1322.
Jun Gu & Cristina Neesham (forthcoming). Moral Identity as Leverage Point in Teaching Business Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics.
Juandre Peacock, Lauren N. Harkrider, Zhanna Bagdasarov, Shane Connelly, James F. Johnson, Chase E. Thiel, Alexandra E. MacDougall, Michael D. Mumford & Lynn D. Devenport (2013). Effects of Alternative Outcome Scenarios and Structured Outcome Evaluation on Case-Based Ethics Instruction. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3):1283-1303.
Lauren N. Harkrider, Alexandra E. MacDougall, Zhanna Bagdasarov, James F. Johnson, Chase E. Thiel, Michael D. Mumford, Shane Connelly & Lynn D. Devenport (2012). Structuring Case-Based Ethics Training: How Comparing Cases and Structured Prompts Influence Training Effectiveness. Ethics and Behavior 23 (3):179-198.
Similar books and articles
Ethan P. Waples, Jason H. Hill, Alison L. Antes, Lynn D. Devenport, Stephen T. Murphy, Shane Connelly, Michael D. Mumford & Ryan P. Brown (2009). Field and Experience Influences on Ethical Decision Making in the Sciences. Ethics and Behavior 19 (4):263-289.
Michael D. Mumford, Shane Connelly, Stephen T. Murphy, Lynn D. Devenport, Alison L. Antes, Ryan P. Brown, Jason H. Hill & Ethan P. Waples (2009). Field and Experience Influences on Ethical Decision Making in the Sciences. Ethics and Behavior 19 (4):263 – 289.
Guido Palazzo, Franciska Krings & Ulrich Hoffrage (2012). Ethical Blindness. Journal of Business Ethics 109 (3):323-338.
Jay J. Caughron, Alison L. Antes, Cheryl K. Stenmark, Chase E. Thiel, Xiaoqian Wang & Michael D. Mumford (2011). Sensemaking Strategies for Ethical Decision Making. Ethics and Behavior 21 (5):351 - 366.
Michael D. Mumford, Shane Connelly, Ryan P. Brown, Stephen T. Murphy, Jason H. Hill, Alison L. Antes, Ethan P. Waples & Lynn D. Devenport (2008). A Sensemaking Approach to Ethics Training for Scientists: Preliminary Evidence of Training Effectiveness. Ethics and Behavior 18 (4):315 – 339.
Richard Vykinta Kligyte, Sydney T. Marcy, Elaine T. Sevier, Michael S. Godfrey & D. Mumford (2008). A Qualitative Approach to Responsible Conduct of Research (Rcr) Training Development: Identification of Metacognitive Strategies. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (1).
Vykinta Kligyte, Richard T. Marcy, Sydney T. Sevier, Elaine S. Godfrey & Michael D. Mumford (2008). A Qualitative Approach to Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Training Development: Identification of Metacognitive Strategies. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (1):3-31.
Richard Vykinta Kligyte, Ethan T. Marcy, Sydney P. Waples, Elaine T. Sevier, Michael S. Godfrey, Dean D. Mumford & F. Hougen (2008). Application of a Sensemaking Approach to Ethics Training in the Physical Sciences and Engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (2).
Vykinta Kligyte, Richard T. Marcy, Ethan P. Waples, Sydney T. Sevier, Elaine S. Godfrey, Michael D. Mumford & Dean F. Hougen (2008). Application of a Sensemaking Approach to Ethics Training in the Physical Sciences and Engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (2):251-278.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #160,234 of 1,696,167 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #92,132 of 1,696,167 )
How can I increase my downloads?