Mecca Jensen T, Medeiros Kelsey E, Giorgini Vincent, Gibson Carter, Mumford Michael D, Connelly Shane, Devenport Lynn D
Department of Psychology University of Oklahoma.
Ethics Behav. 2014 Jan;24(1):73-89. doi: 10.1080/10508422.2013.821389.
Ethical decision making is of concern to researchers across all fields. However, researchers typically focus on the biases that may act to undermine ethical decision making. Taking a new approach, this study focused on identifying the most common compensatory strategies that counteract those biases. These strategies were identified using a series of interviews with university researchers in a variety of areas, including biological, physical, social, and health as well as scholarship and the performing arts. Interview transcripts were assessed with two scoring procedures, an expert rating system and computer-assisted qualitative analysis. Although the expert rating system identified Understanding Guidelines, Recognition of Insufficient Information, and Recognizing Boundaries as the most frequently used compensatory strategies across fields, other strategies, Striving for Transparency, Value/Norm Assessment, and Following Appropriate Role Models, were identified as most common by the computer-assisted qualitative analyses. Potential reasons for these findings and implications for training and practice are identified and discussed.
道德决策是所有领域的研究人员都关心的问题。然而，研究人员通常关注的是那些可能会破坏道德决策的偏见。本研究采用了一种新方法，重点是确定抵消这些偏见的最常见补偿策略。这些策略是通过对包括生物、物理、社会、健康以及学术和表演艺术等各个领域的大学研究人员进行一系列访谈而确定的。访谈记录采用两种评分程序进行评估，一种是专家评级系统，另一种是计算机辅助定性分析。虽然专家评级系统确定“理解指南”“认识到信息不足”和“认识界限”是各领域最常用的补偿策略，但计算机辅助定性分析确定“努力实现透明”“价值/规范评估”和“效仿合适的榜样”是最常见的策略。本文还确定并讨论了这些发现的潜在原因以及对培训和实践的启示。
