↓ Skip to main content

The Effectiveness of Ethics Education: A Quasi-Experimental Field Study

Overview of attention for article published in Science and Engineering Ethics, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
Title
The Effectiveness of Ethics Education: A Quasi-Experimental Field Study
Published in
Science and Engineering Ethics, January 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11948-011-9349-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Douglas R. May, Matthew T. Luth

Abstract

Ethical conduct is the hallmark of excellence in engineering and scientific research, design, and practice. While undergraduate and graduate programs in these areas routinely emphasize ethical conduct, few receive formal ethics training as part of their curricula. The first purpose of this research study was to assess the relative effectiveness of ethics education in enhancing individuals' general knowledge of the responsible conduct of research practices and their level of moral reasoning. Secondly, we examined the effects of ethics education on the positive psychological outcomes of perspective-taking, moral efficacy, moral courage, and moral meaningfulness. To examine our research hypotheses, we utilized a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design consisting of three ethics education groups (control, embedded modules, and stand-alone courses). Findings revealed that both embedded and stand alone courses were effective in enhancing participants' perspective-taking, moral efficacy, and moral courage. Moral meaningfulness was marginally enhanced for the embedded module condition. Moral judgment and knowledge of responsible conduct of research practices were not influenced by either ethics education condition. Contrary to expectations, stand alone courses were not superior to embedded modules in influencing the positive psychological outcomes investigated. Implications of these findings for future research and practice are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 118 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 27%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Master 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 5%
Other 26 21%
Unknown 20 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 18 15%
Social Sciences 17 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 12 10%
Philosophy 11 9%
Psychology 8 7%
Other 28 23%
Unknown 29 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 December 2018.
All research outputs
#13,682,250
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#603
of 947 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#149,464
of 250,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 947 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 250,226 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.