David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
E. Brock Meagan, Vykinta Kligyte Andrew Vert, P. Waples Ethan, T. Sevier Sydney & D. Mumford Michael
Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3) (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||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
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.
Chase E. Thiel, Zhanna Bagdasarov, Lauren Harkrider, James F. Johnson & Michael D. Mumford (2012). Leader Ethical Decision-Making in Organizations: Strategies for Sensemaking. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 107 (1):49-64.
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 index2009-05-04
Total downloads7 ( #439,363 of 1,911,315 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #320,535 of 1,911,315 )
How can I increase my downloads?