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.
AntesA. L.MurphyS. T.WaplesE. P.MumfordM. D.BrownR. P.ConnellyS.DevenportL. 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
2.
BrockM. E.VertA.KligyteV.WaplesE. P.SevierS. T.MumfordM. 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
3.
CaughronJ. J.AntesA. L.StenmarkC. K.ThielC. E.WangX.MumfordM. D. (2011). Sensemaking strategies for ethical decision-making. Ethics and Behavior, 21(5), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2011.604293
4.
CohenD. J. (1990). What motivates trainees?Training and Development Journal, 44(11), 91-93.
JonesT. 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
KirkpatrickD. L. (1979). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Training & Development Journal, 33(6), 78–92.
9.
KligyteV.MarcyR. T.WaplesE. P.SevierS. T.GodfreyH. S.MumfordM. D.HougenD. 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.
KreitlerC. M.DansereauD. F.BarthT. M.ItoS. (2009). Enhancing the decision-making of extraverted college students. College Student Journal, 43(4), 1171-1181.
11.
KreitlerC. M.DansereauD. F.BarthT. M.RepaskyG. T.MillerJ. (2012a). Evaluation of a cognitive tool for enhanced decision-making and personal change among college students. NACADA Journal, 32(1), 18-29.
12.
KreitlerC. M.StenmarkC. K.RodarteA.PinonR. 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.
KreitlerC. M.RepaskyG. T.TravisK.DansereauD. F.BarthT. 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.
MacDougallA. E.HarkriderL. N.BagdasarovZ.JohnsonJ. F.ThielC. E.PeacockJ.MumfordM. D.DevenportL. D.ConnellyS. (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
MumfordM.ConnellyS.BrownR.MurphyS.HillJ.AntesA. L.WaplesE. P.DevenportL. 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.
MumfordM. D.ConnelyM.MurphyS. T.DevenportL. D.AntesA. L.BrownR. P.HillJ. H.WaplesE. 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.
MumfordM. D.DevenportL. D.BrownR. P.ConnellyM. S.MurphyS. T.HillJ. H.AntesA. 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.
MumfordM. D.SteeleL.WattsL. L. (2015). Evaluating ethics education programs: A multilevel approach. Ethics and Behavior, 25(1), 37-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2014.917417
StenmarkC. K.AntesA. L.WangX.CaughronJ. J.ThielC. E.MumfordM. 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.
StenmarkC. K.AntesA. L.ThielC. E.CaughronJ. J.WangX.MumfordM. 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.
StenmarkC. K.KreitlerC. 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
SaccoD. F.BrownM. (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.
SteeleL. M.JohnsonJ. F.WattsL. L.MacDougallA. E.MumfordM. D.ConnellyS.WilliamsT. 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.
SteeleL. M.MulhearnT. J.MedeirosK. E.WattsL. L.ConnellyS.MumfordM. 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.
SteneckN. H. (2004). ORI introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Health and Human Services.
31.
SweeneyB.CostelloF. (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.
TurnerM. R.WattsL. L.SteeleL. M.MulhearnT. J.TorrenceB. S.ToddM.MumfordM. D.ConnellyS. (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.
WaplesE. P.AntesA. L.MurphyS. T.ConnellyM. S.MumfordM. 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.
WarrenD. E.GasparJ. P.LauferW. 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.
WattsL. L.MedeirosK. E.MulhearnT. J.SteeleL. M.ConnellyS.MumfordM. 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.
WattsL. L.ToddE. M.MulhearnT. J.MedeirosK. E.MumfordM. D.ConnellyS. (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.
