A Little Goes a Long Way: Adapting an Ethics Training Program to Work for Smaller Universities

Abstract

The present project modified an existing ethics intervention aimed at graduate students, which had previously been evaluated and determined to be effective. The existing program was modified to shorten it from a 2 full-day training to a 1 full-day training. The effectiveness of the modified training program was evaluated using multiple dependent measures: perceptions of ethical dilemmas, ethical decision making and the using of cognitive strategies for ethical decision making, and reactions to the training. The results of the present study indicated that there were significant differences from pretraining to posttraining on measures of perceptions of ethical problems and markers of the cognitive processes involved in ethical decision making, including a focus on the ethical elements of the problem, and overall decision ethicality. Finally, participants reacted favorably to the program. Implications of these results are discussed.

Keywords

ethical decision making professional ethics training responsible conduct of research training

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Antes

A. L.

Murphy

S. T.

Waples

E. P.

Mumford

M. D.

Brown

R. P.

Connelly

Devenport

L. D.

(2009). A meta-analysis of ethics instruction effectiveness in the sciences. Ethics and Behavior, 19(5), 379-402. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420903035380

Brock

M. E.

Vert

Kligyte

Waples

E. P.

Sevier

S. T.

Mumford

M. D.

(2008). Mental models: An alternative evaluation of sensemaking approach to ethics instruction. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(3), 449-472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-008-9076-3

Caughron

J. J.

Antes

A. L.

Stenmark

C. K.

Thiel

C. E.

Wang

Mumford

M. D.

(2011). Sensemaking strategies for ethical decision-making. Ethics and Behavior, 21(5), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2011.604293

Cohen

D. J.

(1990). What motivates trainees? Training and Development Journal, 44(11), 91-93.

de Vrieze

(2020, November 25). Largest ever research integrity survey flounders as universities refuse to cooperate. Science. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/largest-ever-research-integrity-survey-flounders-universities-refuse-cooperate. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abf8876

Jones

T. M.

(1991). Ethical decision-making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. The Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366-395. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1991.4278958

Kalichman

(2014). Rescuing responsible conduct of research (RCR) education. Accountability in Research, 21(1), 68-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822271

Kirkpatrick

D. L.

(1979). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Training & Development Journal, 33(6), 78–92.

Kligyte

Marcy

R. T.

Waples

E. P.

Sevier

S. T.

Godfrey

H. S.

Mumford

M. D.

Hougen

D. F.

(2008). Application of a sensemaking approach to ethics training in the physical sciences and engineering. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(2), 251–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-007-9048-z

10.

Kreitler

C. M.

Dansereau

D. F.

Barth

T. M.

Ito

(2009). Enhancing the decision-making of extraverted college students. College Student Journal, 43(4), 1171-1181.

11.

Kreitler

C. M.

Dansereau

D. F.

Barth

T. M.

Repasky

G. T.

Miller

(2012a). Evaluation of a cognitive tool for enhanced decision-making and personal change among college students. NACADA Journal, 32(1), 18-29.

12.

Kreitler

C. M.

Stenmark

C. K.

Rodarte

Pinon

R. D.

(2014). ACED IT: A tool for improved ethical and moral decision-making. Journal of Moral Education, 43(4), 447-467. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2014.943166

13.

Kreitler

C. M.

Repasky

G. T.

Travis

Dansereau

D. F.

Barth

T. M.

(2012b). An exploratory study utilizing expressive writing and a novel cognitive tool as strategies for enhanced moral perception. International Journal of Business, Humanities, and Technology, 2(3), 112-118.

14.

MacDougall

A. E.

Harkrider

L. N.

Bagdasarov

Johnson

J. F.

Thiel

C. E.

Peacock

Mumford

M. D.

Devenport

L. D.

Connelly

(2014). Examining the effects of incremental case presentation and forecasting outcomes on case-based ethics instruction. Ethics and Behavior, 24(2), 126-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2013.824819

15.

Martinson

B. C.

Anderson

M. S.

de Vries

(2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435(7043), 737-738. https://doi.org/10.1038/435737a

16.

Mumford

Connelly

Brown

Murphy

Hill

Antes

A. L.

Waples

E. P.

Devenport

L. D.

(2008). A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists: Preliminary evidence of training effectiveness. Ethics and Behavior, 18(4), 315-339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420802487815

17.

Mumford

M. D.

Connely

Murphy

S. T.

Devenport

L. D.

Antes

A. L.

Brown

R. P.

Hill

J. H.

Waples

E. P.

(2009). Field and experience influences on ethical decision making in the sciences. Ethics and Behavior, 19(4), 263-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420903035257

18.

Mumford

M. D.

Devenport

L. D.

Brown

R. P.

Connelly

M. S.

Murphy

S. T.

Hill

J. H.

Antes

A. L.

(2006). Validation of ethical decision-making measures: Evidence for a new set of measures. Ethics and Behavior, 16(4), 319-345. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1604_4

19.

Mumford

M. D.

Steele

Watts

L. L.

(2015). Evaluating ethics education programs: A multilevel approach. Ethics and Behavior, 25(1), 37-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2014.917417

20.

National Institutes of Health. (2009). Update on the requirement for instruction in responsible conduct of research. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10-019.html, Last accessed June 19, 2020

21.

National Science Foundation. (2009). Responsible conduct of research. Federal Register, 74(160), 42126-42128. Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2009-08-20/html/E9-19930.htm

22.

Stenmark

C. K.

(2013). Forecasting and ethical decision-making: What matters? Ethics & Behavior, 23(6), 445-462. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2013.807732

23.

Stenmark

C. K.

Antes

A. L.

Wang

Caughron

J. J.

Thiel

C. E.

Mumford

M. D.

(2010). Strategies in forecasting outcomes in ethical decision-making: Identifying and analyzing the causes of the problem. Ethics & Behavior, 20(2), 110-127. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508421003595935

24.

Stenmark

C. K.

Antes

A. L.

Thiel

C. E.

Caughron

J. J.

Wang

Mumford

M. D.

(2011). Consequences identification in ethical decision-making. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 6, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1525/jer.2011.6.1.25

25.

Stenmark

C. K.

Kreitler

C. M.

(2017). A cognitive tool for ethical decision-making: A case for ACED-IT. Ethics and Behavior, 27(3), 221-239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2016.1176566

26.

Stenmark

C. K.

Redfearn

R. A.

Kreitler

C. K.

(2020). Self-efficacy and ethical decision-making. Ethics & Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2020.1776617

27.

Sacco

D. F.

Brown

(2019). Assessing the efficacy of a training intervention to reduce acceptance of questionable research practices in psychology graduate students. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 14(3), 209-218. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264619840525

28.

Steele

L. M.

Johnson

J. F.

Watts

L. L.

MacDougall

A. E.

Mumford

M. D.

Connelly

Williams

T. H. L.

(2016a). A comparison of the effects of ethics training on international and US students. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(4), 1217-1244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9678-5

29.

Steele

L. M.

Mulhearn

T. J.

Medeiros

K. E.

Watts

L. L.

Connelly

Mumford

M. D.

(2016b). How do we know what works? A review and critique of current practices in ethics training evaluation. Accountability in Research, 23(6), 319-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2016.1186547

30.

Steneck

N. H.

(2004). ORI introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Health and Human Services.

31.

Sweeney

Costello

(2009). Moral intensity and ethical decision-making: An empirical examination of undergraduate accounting and business students. Accounting Education: An International Journal, 18(1), 75-97. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639280802009454

32.

Turner

M. R.

Watts

L. L.

Steele

L. M.

Mulhearn

T. J.

Torrence

B. S.

Todd

Mumford

M. D.

Connelly

(2018). How did you like this course? The advantages and limitations of reaction criteria in ethics education. Ethics & Behavior, 28(6), 483-496. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2017.1308193

33.

Waples

E. P.

Antes

A. L.

Murphy

S. T.

Connelly

M. S.

Mumford

M. D.

(2009). A meta-analytic investigation of business ethics instruction. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 133-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9875-0

34.

Warren

D. E.

Gaspar

J. P.

Laufer

W. S.

(2014). Is formal ethics training merely cosmetic? A study of ethics training and ethical organizational culture. Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(1), 85-177. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq2014233

35.

Watts

L. L.

Medeiros

K. E.

Mulhearn

T. J.

Steele

L. M.

Connelly

Mumford

M. D.

(2017a). Are ethics training programs improving? A meta-analytic review of past and present ethics instruction in the sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 27(5), 351-384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2016.1182025

36.

Watts

L. L.

Todd

E. M.

Mulhearn

T. J.

Medeiros

K. E.

Mumford

M. D.

Connelly

(2017b). Qualitative evaluation methods in ethics education: A systematic review and analysis of best practices. Accountability in Research, 24(4), 225-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2016.1274975

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB