QUESTION 23

wealthprocess1

RES-861-OnlineEthicsTrainingGenderandLevelsofEthicalDecision-Making.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >QUESTION 23

Online Ethics Training, Gender, and Levels of Ethical Decision-Making

by Workers in the Workplace

Submitted by

Carol J. Johns

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctorate of Education

Grand Canyon University

Phoenix, Arizona

February 28, 2018

ProQuest Number:

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

ProQuest

Published by ProQuest LLC ( ). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

10619213

2018

Abstract

Despite a wealth of information about what does and does not work when dealing with

ethical risks in the workplace, businesses continue to fall victim to scandals that affect their

corporate image, their financial health, and the well-being of their employees. Ethics-

training programs are one way to inform workers about ethical principles but whether cost-

saving online ethics training programs are effective is debatable (Weber, 2015). By

measuring ethical decision-making abilities of men and women in the workplace,

businesses will be better able to judge the effectiveness of online ethics-training programs

and justify the decision to rely on such training. The purpose of this quantitative

correlational and causal-comparative study was to determine the relationship between

online ethics training and ethical decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus

of a private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees, and to examine

whether there are statistically significant differences in ethical decision-making based on

gender. The study employed Rest’s (1979) Defining Issues Test to measure ethical

decision-making. Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient showed a weak correlation

between online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making in this sample (N =

58, rho = 0.03, p = .825). Independent-samples t-test showed no statistically significant

difference between males (M = 31, SD = 11.2) or females (M = 25, SD = 15.6) and levels

of ethical decision-making in this sample. Repeating this study with a larger sample is

recommended for future research.

Keywords: ethical decision-making, online ethics training, workplace, Defining

Issues Test

Acknowledgments

It is with sincere appreciation that I acknowledge my chairperson, Dr. Sandy

Darling, who encouraged me every step of the way. Whenever I wavered in my

commitment, you were there to support and advise and inspire me. I cannot thank you

enough. I would also like to recognize my content expert, Dr. Marianne Jennings, whose

lively and engaging videos about ethics were the catalyst for this study. You are truly an

inspiration for me, and I am so grateful for your advice and encouragement from the very

beginning of this work.

vii

Table of Contents

List of Tables .......................................................................................................................x

List of Figures .................................................................................................................... xi

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study ....................................................................................1

Introduction ....................................................................................................................1

Background of the Study ...............................................................................................2

Problem Statement .........................................................................................................5

Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................................7

Research Question(s) and Hypotheses ...........................................................................8

Advancing Scientific Knowledge ..................................................................................9

Significance of the Study .............................................................................................12

Rationale for Methodology ..........................................................................................13

Nature of the Research Design for the Study ...............................................................15

Definition of Terms......................................................................................................18

Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations ....................................................................21

Summary and Organization of the Remainder of the Study ........................................21

Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................24

Introduction to the Chapter and Background to the Problem ......................................24

Theoretical Foundations and/or Conceptual Framework .............................................26

Review of the Literature ..............................................................................................33

Ethical business culture. ......................................................................................34

Teaching ethics ...................................................................................................41

Summary ......................................................................................................................77

Chapter 3: Methodology ....................................................................................................79

viii

Introduction ..................................................................................................................79

Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................80

Research Questions and Hypotheses ...........................................................................81

Research Methodology ................................................................................................83

Research Design...........................................................................................................85

Population and Sample Selection.................................................................................88

Instrumentation ............................................................................................................90

Validity ........................................................................................................................95

Reliability .....................................................................................................................99

Data Collection and Management ..............................................................................100

Data Analysis Procedures ..........................................................................................104

Ethical Considerations ...............................................................................................108

Limitations and Delimitations ....................................................................................110

Summary ....................................................................................................................111

Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results ..............................................................................113

Introduction ................................................................................................................113

Descriptive Data.........................................................................................................115

Data Analysis Procedures ..........................................................................................120

Results ........................................................................................................................127

Summary ....................................................................................................................131

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations ............................................133

Introduction ................................................................................................................133

Summary of the Study ...............................................................................................134

Summary of Findings and Conclusion .......................................................................137

Implications................................................................................................................139

Theoretical implications. ...................................................................................139

Practical implications ........................................................................................141

Future implications ...........................................................................................141

Recommendations ......................................................................................................143

Recommendations for future research ..............................................................143

Recommendations for future practice. ..............................................................145

References ........................................................................................................................147

Appendix A Preliminary Survey Question ......................................................................163

Appendix B Recruitment Letter .......................................................................................164

Appendix C Informed Consent ........................................................................................165

Appendix D Permission Letter to Use the D. I. T.-2 Tool ...............................................166

Appendix E Copy of the D. I. T.-2 Tool ..........................................................................167

Appendix F IRB Approval Letter from Grand Canyon University .................................177

Appendix G IRB Approval Letter from Target Organization .........................................178

Appendix H Permission from the Target Organization to Conduct Study ......................179

Appendix I A priori Power Analysis, Spearman’s rho Correlation .................................180

Appendix J Post-Hoc Power Analysis, Spearman’s rho Correlation ...............................181

Appendix L Post-Hoc Power Analysis, Independent-Samples t-Test .............................183

List of Tables

Table 1. Codes for Education Levels in the D. I. T. -2 Test ........................................... 93

Table 2. Variables by Name, Type, Description, and Measurement Tool..................... 107

Table 3. Descriptive Characteristics of the Sample ....................................................... 117

Table 4. Descriptive Statistics for N2 Scores by Gender ............................................... 118

Table 5. Descriptive Statistics for N2 Scores by Number of Times Completed Ethics Training .............................................................................................................. 119

List of Figures

Figure 1. Histogram showing gaps in educational levels ............................................... 120

Figure 2. Scatterplot of N2 scores .................................................................................. 122

Figure 3. Boxplot of N2 scores....................................................................................... 123

Figure 4. Shapiro-Wilk test of normality ....................................................................... 123

Figure 5. Q-Q plot of N2 scores ..................................................................................... 124

Figure 6. Descriptive statistics showing skewness and kurtosis values. ........................ 125

Figure 7. Levene’s test for equality of variances ........................................................... 126

Figure 8. Post hoc Correlation Bivariate power analysis ............................................... 126

Figure 9: Determining the statistical power available to support t-test post-hoc comparisons using G*Power software ............................................................... 127

Figure 10: Results of Spearman’s correlational analysis ............................................... 129

Figure 11. Independent-samples t-test for equality of means......................................... 130

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study

Introduction

Workplace dishonesty is a major problem in business and industry (Nonis &

Swift, 2001). Although Federal Sentencing Guidelines were enacted in 1984 and revised

in 1991 (Ethics Resource Center, 2013), and again following the passage of Sarbanes-

Oxley and Dodd-Frank legislation (Canary & Jennings, 2008), and again in 2016 (U.S.

Sentencing Commission, 2016), ethics scandals continue to erode the public’s sense of

trust in powerful organizations such as Wells Fargo, BP, and many companies in the

health-care industry. As a result, many organizations began investing in mandatory

ethics-training programs because of the belief that ethics can be taught and that ethics

training improves decision-making (Wickham & O’Donohue, 2012; Verschoor, 2014).

Ethics-training programs attempt to inform participants about ethical principles.

Studies supporting research in this area have been conducted largely in universities not in

the workplace (Lau, 2010; Ritter, 2006; Wang & Calvano, 2015). Few studies have

distinguished between face-to-face ethics training and computer-based (online) ethics

training (Weber, 2015). Research into differences in ethical decision-making based on

gender have had mixed findings, but many studies have shown that women tend to make

more ethical decisions than men (Davis, Read, & Powell, 2014; Lehnert, Park, & Singh,

2015).

The current study proposed to fill the gap in knowledge about ethical decision-

making by focusing on ethical decision-making by workers who had completed online

ethics training and taking another look at the influence of gender. By measuring ethical

decision-making abilities of men and women in the workplace, businesses will be better

able to judge the effectiveness of online ethics-training programs and justify the decision

to rely on such training.

Chapter One describes the background of the study and formulation of the

problem statement. The purpose of the study is explained as well as how this research

advances scientific knowledge. The research questions, hypotheses, methodology, and

research design are introduced, and terms are defined to establish a baseline for

discussion of the data. Finally, assumptions and limitations are described to establish the

basis for generalizability of the findings.

Background of the Study

Craft, who has a special interest in organizational ethics training, examined the

body of research on ethical decision-making conducted between 2004 and 2011 and

found that Rest’s (1986) model for ethical decision-making is the most common

theoretical basis upon which to conduct research in this area (Craft, 2013). Craft also

observed that research in this area looks at the intersection of Rest’s four dependent

variables (awareness, judgment, intent, and behavior) with individual and/or

organizational factors. Individual factors include age, gender, maturity level, education

level, and cognitive moral development, while organizational factors are ones such as

codes of conduct, policies and procedures, competitiveness, and training (Craft, 2013).

Craft found no studies published between 2004 and 2011 specifically looking at

awareness (ethical sensitivity) and ethics training (Craft, 2013).

Since 2011, many studies have investigated the impact of ethics training on

ethical awareness and ethical decision-making (Christensen, Cote, & Latham, 2016;

Dzuranin, Shortridge, & Smith, 2013; Wang & Thompson, 2013). These were conducted

using convenience samples of undergraduate or graduate students in business fields or

science and engineering fields, not workers in the workplace. Weber (2015) and Weber

and Wasieleski (2013) analyzed the effects of ethics training on ethical awareness and

ethical decision-making in 10 representative industry groups by surveying their ethics

and compliance officers (Weber, 2015; Weber & Wasieleski, 2013). A small percentage

(3%) of the industry groups in their studies was involved in health care. The types of

health care industries represented were not revealed. The ethics and compliance officers

surveyed claimed that the main point of ethics training involved making employees more

aware of ethical issues and how to address them while minimizing the companies’ risk

exposure (Weber, 2015; Weber & Wasieleski, 2013). These authors relied on self-reports

by ethics and compliance officers about their ethics programs; they did not survey

employees to measure ethical decision-making. In addition, Weber and Wasieleski found

that many educational approaches were used to provide ethics training to workers in

those industries, the most frequent being computer-aided training (online). They

concluded that ethics training during orientation of new employees is commendable but

that repeated ethics training in short sessions seems to improve the effectiveness of ethics

training (Weber & Wasieleski, 2013). Weber (2015) recognized that the costlier face-to-

face training has better results when the desired outcome is to improve ethical decision-

making (Weber, 2015).

Several demographic variables have been studied in relation to ethical decision-

making. Age and education level have been positively associated with ethical decision-

making, which corresponds with Kohlberg’s and Rest’s models of moral development

(Kohlberg, 1969; Rest, 1986). Research investigating differences in ethical decision-

making based on gender has resulted in inconsistent findings, but the preponderance of

literature points to women responding more ethically than men (Davis et al., 2014;

Lehnert et al., 2015).

Leuter, Petrucci, Mattei, Tabassi, and Lancia (2013) recognized the importance of

ethics training on ethical awareness in healthcare professionals (specifically registered

nurses) and the willingness of those healthcare professionals to seek the guidance of

ethics consultants. Self-reports of perceived ethical awareness indicated the majority

were knowledgeable about ethical issues in their work (70%) but only 28% admitted to

having received any ethics training. The authors did not explore the kinds of ethics

training (online, face-to-face, reading material, or other) the rest had received and did not

attempt to measure ethical decision-making (Leuter et al., 2013). Glasa, Krcmeryova,

Glasova, and Glasova (2013) found no ethics training offered to doctors, nurses, or other

healthcare workers in the workplaces they sampled except for one hospital (Glasa et al.,

2013). Furthermore, the authors did not describe the type of ethics training offered at that

one institution, nor did they measure the effectiveness of the training offered at that

facility.

Noel and Hathorn (2014) sought to determine if ethics training conducted in

school or the workplace could predict ethical awareness, judgment, and intent. They

accepted that measuring intent was sufficient for measuring behavior. Their participants

were students enrolled in business courses at two colleges in the Midwest and

professionals in accounting and business. The authors did not distinguish between the

different educational approaches by students or professionals in their study, so it is not

clear whether online ethics training was involved (Noel & Hathorn, 2014). Given the

increased emphasis on ethics training in the workplace and cost considerations involved

in traditional face-to-face training, there is a need for more research investigating the

relationship, if any, between online ethics training and ethical decision-making by

workers in the workplace (Noel & Hathorn, 2014).

Problem Statement

Hultman (2002) wrote, “All decisions are based on values, and the effectiveness

of those decisions depends greatly on the particular values chosen” (Hultman, 2002, p.

61). When considering how individuals make ethical decisions, one is looking at the way

individuals apply their set of values to the circumstances. The decisions they make, that

is, their ethical behavior, reflects their awareness of the issues and how they arrive at an

action. One would expect that ethics training might increase ethical awareness and

provide tools by which individuals can make sound decisions. One would also expect that

repeated exposure to ethics training would result in higher levels of ethical decision-

making.

It is not known if and to what extent there is a relationship between the number of

online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers in the

workplace, and if there are statistically significant differences in ethical decision-making

based on gender. In order to address this problem, one should consider that the goals of

ethics training are to enhance awareness of ethical situations and provide directions on

how to arrive at ethical solutions (Hergenrader, 2010). Most such research has been

conducted with convenience samples of students enrolled in undergraduate or graduate

programs (Buck, 2015; Dzuranin et al., 2013; Gunia, Wang, Huang, Wang, &

Murnighan, 2012; Swisher, van Kessel, Jones, Beckstead, & Edwards, 2012). Looking at

online ethics training in the workplace will provide a better look whether workers in the

workplace become more aware of ethical situations due to completing online ethics

training. Can businesses expect online ethics training during orientation to produce a

satisfactory level of ethical decision-making by workers? Will repeated exposures to

online ethics training sustain or even improve the level of ethical decision-making by

workers? Is there a relationship between gender and level of ethical decision-making?

There is a need to address these questions for businesses to justify the cost of online

ethics-training programs.

Cost is not the only consideration. The global financial crisis that occurred in

2008 shone a spotlight on the magnitude of the problem of unethical practices in

businesses (van Hoorn, 2015). Organizations like General Motors, Volkswagen, and the

Internal Revenue Service had cultures that rewarded unethical decision-making (Steinzor,

2015; Romious, Thompson, & Thompson, 2016; and Davies, Lavin, & Moen, 2015).

Corporate leaders ended up in jail, and many innocent employees lost their pensions and

life savings. There are wide-reaching effects with the collapse of major companies that

employ hundreds of workers and have hundreds of stakeholders.

In the current study, then, the researcher sought to enhance the understanding of

the relationships between online ethics training and ethical decision-making by workers

of both genders and in various age levels with different levels of education. The

population was not limited to a certain job description or level of training but rather

provided a picture of overall responsiveness to ethics training. Gender is a variable that

was compared to research findings in prior studies (Davis et al., 2014; Wang & Calvano,

2015).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this quantitative correlational and causative-comparative study

was to determine the relationship between online ethics training and ethical decision-

making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that

specializes in healthcare degrees, and to examine whether there are statistically

significant differences in ethical decision-making based on gender. In this study, data for

one independent variable (gender) was obtained as part of the D. I. T.-2 survey. The

responses were coded so they could be statistically analyzed. A second independent

variable, online ethics training, was measured by asking participants to indicate how

many times they had completed online training offered at this campus or elsewhere

(Never, 1 time, 2 times, 3 times, or More than 3 times). These responses were coded from

one (had never completed online ethics training) to five (had completed ethics training

more than 3 times).

Data to study the dependent variable (level of ethical decision-making) was

collected and measured using the Defining Issues Test (D. I. T.-2) as defined by Rest

(1979) and which has been extensively validated. The D. I. T.-2 survey was purchased

from the Center for the Study of Ethical Development. The Center analyzed and scored

the responses.

The aim of the research study was to contribute to the field by providing

businesses with data to support investment in online workplace ethics training. Rather

than measuring ethical decision-making by undergraduate and graduate students, this

research looked specifically at workers in the workplace who had completed online ethics

training. The intent was to provide data to assess the relationship, if any, between number

of completions of online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making by workers

in the workplace, and to examine whether there are statistically significant differences in

levels of ethical decision-making based on gender.

Research Question(s) and Hypotheses

The following research questions and hypotheses guided this research study:

RQ1: To what extent, if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between

number of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical

decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit

university that specializes in healthcare degrees?

Independent variable = number of times a worker completed online ethics training

Dependent variable = level of ethical decision-making

H10(null hypothesis): There is no statistically significant relationship between number

of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-

making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit

university that specializes in healthcare degrees.

H1a: There is a statistically significant relationship between number of completions of

online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at

the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees.

RQ2: Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making between

male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores?

Independent variable = gender

Dependent variable = ethical decision-making

H20: There is no statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers, as represented by mean N2 scores.

H2a: There is a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers, as represented by mean N2 scores.

The first research question was designed to look at whether there are relationships

between online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers in the

workplace, whether such relationships, if any, are significant, and if so, to what strength

and in what direction. The second research question was designed to compare the mean

ethical decision-making scores of male workers and female workers to see if there are

statistically significant differences between the two groups. Data were collected to

measure the dependent variable, level of ethical decision-making, using Rest’s D. I. T. -2

test. Data for the independent variable, online ethics training, were measured by asking

participants at the beginning of the survey to indicate the number of times they had

completed the online ethics training at this campus or elsewhere (Never, 1 time, 2 times,

3 times, More than 3 times). Data for the independent variable, gender, was obtained as

part of the demographic information included in the D. I. T. -2 test.

Advancing Scientific Knowledge

The present research study adds to current learning about online ethics training

and ethical decision-making in the workplace by looking directly at workers in the

workplace rather than extrapolating from studies of university students. In particular, this

study considers that there is a relationship between the number of times a person takes

online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making of employees on the North

Texas campus of a private, for-profit university specializing in healthcare degrees. The

National Business Ethics Survey® has looked at employees’ experiences of ethical

situations in the workplace, but the surveys have not provided data about the types of

ethics training and how often it is offered (Ethics Resource Center, 2013). Recent studies

have looked at the ethical training in the sales and business industry and in the financial

services industry, but the reports do not specify whether the ethics training contained any

online component (Valentine, Godkin, & Vitton, 2012; Valentine, Nam, Hollingworth, &

Hall, 2014; van Hoorn, 2015). Ethics training in the banking industry has also recently

been studied, but the ethics training was conducted in face-to-face sessions as opposed to

online (Warren, Gaspar, & Laufer, 2014). Doyle, Hughes, and Summers (2013)

investigated ethical awareness and ethical decision-making by tax professionals in

Ireland, but they did not look at ethics training (Doyle et al., 2013). Wright-St. Clair and

Newcombe (2014) recently studied ethical awareness and ethical decision-making by

occupational therapists in New Zealand, but they did not look at ethics training as an

independent variable (Wright-St. Clair & Newcombe, 2014).

Members of the Ethics and Compliance Officer Association (ECOA) have been

surveyed about the ethics-training programs in their organizations and about their

measurements of employee ethical behavior (Weber & Wasieleski, 2013; Weber, 2015).

ECOA members of 10 industry groups were represented in those studies, primarily

financial services (23%) and utilities/energy industry (20%). There were a variety of

educational approaches reported by the participating ECOA members, with computer-

aided training programs the most prevalent (74%) (Weber & Wasieleski, 2013).

However, the researchers did not attempt to correlate the level of ethical decision-making

by workers in those industries with the type of ethics training provided.

Swisher (2010) studied the moral reasoning of practicing physical therapists using

Rest’s tool (D. I. T.) and concluded that the quality of educational offerings for

professionals should be evaluated to determine why post-conventional moral reasoning

scores for physical therapists were lower than the scores for comparable professional

groups (Swisher, 2010). The lead author’s follow-up study of physical therapy students

who received extensive ethics education saw significant improvement in post-

conventional moral reasoning scores (Swisher et al., 2012). The extensive ethics

education program in the 2012 study consisted of dilemma discussions using

transformational learning techniques not online modules (Swisher et al., 2012). There is a

need for additional research measuring the effects of online ethics training on the level of

ethical decision-making of workers in the workplace.

Rest’s (1979) four component model of moral development describes the

dependent variables to consider when measuring ethical decision-making. The variables

are awareness, judgment, intent, and behavior. Rest, in fact, believed that ethical

deliberation and resolution would be improved with some kind of education (1979). Rest

reasoned that education or instruction helped to make students aware of ethical issues.

Rest’s own research showed that people who have achieved higher maturation or have

more awareness of ethical situations make better decisions when faced with ethically

difficult decisions. They do so by going through more steps in the decision-making

process. Before 2012, no empirical research studies looked for a relationship between

ethics training and ethical awareness (Craft, 2013). Since 2012, awareness has been

studied in order to determine the effectiveness of ethics training (Doyle et al., 2013;

Wright-St. Clair & Newcombe, 2014; Weber & Wasieleski, 2013; and Weber, 2015).

This research study adds to the expanding body of knowledge regarding the relationship

between the number of times a participant had completed online ethics training as a

vehicle for increasing awareness, thereby resulting in increased levels of ethical decision-

making.

Significance of the Study

The current study is significant in that it sought to answer questions that will

allow businesses to make decisions about the value of online ethics-training programs.

Prior researchers have looked at the utility of ethics-training programs by sampling

undergraduate and graduate students (Buck, 2015; Dzuranin et al., 2013; Gunia et al.,

2012). Research has shown that unethical behavior in college is associated with unethical

behavior in the workplace (Teixeira, 2013), but there is little research showing that ethics

education in college results in better ethical decision-making in the workplace. Few

studies of ethical decision-making in the workplace have looked specifically at what

relationships, if any, exist between online ethics training and ethical awareness or ethical

decision-making.

In the current study, the researcher looked specifically at full-time and adjunct

employees in a private, for-profit university who had completed online ethics training.

The practical implication of the study is that it provided data to consider regarding a

relationship between online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by

workers in the workplace. Looking at the relationship between the number of times a

worker had completed online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making,

companies can consider the value of their financial investments in such programs. This

study adds to previous research on differences in ethical decision-making by males and

females by comparing mean differences in ethical decision-making by males and females

in the workplace, rather than looking at students in university settings. This will be

explained more fully in Chapter 4.

This study also looked at whether the number of times a person has completed

online ethics training is related to the level of ethical decision-making as measured by a

standard tool. Jennings (2012) noted the importance of exposure to real-life ethical

situations to increase awareness of ethical issues. The D. I. T. -2 survey tool provided

participants with the opportunity to consider such real-life ethical issues and struggle to

find the most ethical solution. The D. I. T. -2 survey tool measures the decisions based on

stages of moral development. This process is explained fully in Chapter 3. The results of

this study add to present knowledge about the relationship between online ethics training

and stages of moral development.

Rationale for Methodology

Quantitative research seeks primarily to explain phenomena while qualitative

research explores meaning (Babbie, 2013). A type of quantitative research, correlational,

implores statistical methods to explain relationships between variables (Johnson &

Christensen, 2012) and the extent or degree of the relationships between those variables

(Landrum & Garza, 2015). The current study used a quantitative correlational approach

to investigate whether there is a statistically significant relationship between the number

of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by

workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees? A Spearman’s correlational analysis was conducted to test that first

research question.

Demographic information added another layer to the current understanding of

ethical decision-making by reinforcing prior research into differences in ethical decision-

making based on gender. A causal-comparative approach allows a researcher to look at

the means of independent groups when the dependent variable is continuous (Laerd,

2015). Considering this approach, an independent-samples t-test was conducted to answer

the second research question: Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical

decision-making between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores?

Independent variables in this study were number of completions of online ethics training

and gender. The dependent variable was the level of ethical decision-making.

A quantitative approach was appropriate for this study because it was possible to

assign numbers to each independent variable so that statistical analysis could be

performed. Gender was nominally coded as one for male and two for female. Online

training was coded according to the number of times each participant indicated he/she

had completed online ethics training at the target facility or elsewhere (one meaning

never, two meaning one time, three meaning two times, four meaning three times, and

five meaning more than three times). It was possible to measure and quantify the

dependent variable, level of ethical decision-making, using the N2 score from Rest’s D. I.

T. -2 test.

Exploring why ethical awareness may be enhanced with online ethics training was

not the purpose of this study, nor was the purpose to discover new information about the

nature of ethical decision-making. If those were the purposes of the study, the design

would necessarily be one in which individuals or small groups of workers would be

interviewed about their ethical awareness and ethical decision-making or a case study

would be planned. One would analyze responses to identify themes or look for trends.

Since the research questions guide the selection of methodology and design of empirical

research (Babbie, 2013), the current study used a quantitative approach.

Sample size also dictates the method of research. It would be unwieldy to try to

explore and analyze trends and themes for a large number of participants (Babbie, 2013).

In the current study, the research questions were formulated to look at the level of ethical

decision-making of all full-time and adjunct employees at the target facility. There were

80 associates/employees at the target facility. Student workers were excluded from the

study. A priori power analysis using G*Power 3.1.9.2 revealed that the proposed

population sample size of 67 was appropriate for correlational analysis at a 95%

confidence level with 5% margin of error for a population of 80 (Appendix I). The target

sample size for this study population of 80 for a 95% confidence level with 5% margin of

error was 67 participants. Seventy surveys were received. After subtracting incomplete

surveys and those that failed to meet the reliability checks built into the D. I. T-2 analysis

software, 58 usable surveys were collected in this study for a removal rate of 17.14%. If

one accepts a 7% margin of error using a population of 80, one can accept 58 surveys

with a 95% confidence level. A sample of 58 participants lends itself more to quantitative

statistical analysis than qualitative. The reliability checks used by the Center for the

Study of Ethical Development for analyzing survey responses in the D. I. T. -2 tool are

described in Chapter 3.

Nature of the Research Design for the Study

Correlational and causal-comparative designs were employed for the current

study to investigate whether there was a statistically significant relationship between

number of completions of online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making by

workers in the workplace, and whether there were statistically significant differences in

levels of ethical decision-making based on gender. There was no pre- or post-testing of

participants, and the study was not designed to show cause-and-effect relationships

between variables. Therefore, the study was not an experimental design (Babbie, 2013).

None of the variables was manipulated. If the purpose of the study was to describe the

variables without looking at relationships between and among them, the design would

have lent itself to a descriptive, non-experimental design (Babbie, 2013).

Quantitative correlational and causal-comparative designs use statistical methods

to examine relationships and differences between variables (Johnson & Christensen,

2012). The number of times a worker completed online ethics training and gender were

the independent variables in the current study. With gender, there were two groups to

compare (males; females). Student workers at this company were excluded. With online

ethics training, there were five groups to compare (no completions of online ethics

training to more than three completions). Although online ethics training is included in

the orientation for new-hires at this company and is also conducted online annually for all

associates, it was discovered that not every worker completed the online ethics training

offered at the target facility. Some took online ethics training elsewhere, and 10 claimed

to have never taken online ethics training.

The online ethics training emphasizes the company’s code of ethics and describes

an organizational culture of high ethical standards. The training includes an introduction

to workplace ethics and a section on workplace harassment prevention. Several short

video segments are interspersed in the online modules. These video segments highlight

incidents of workplace challenges to honesty and integrity, how co-workers can support

or undermine an organization’s culture, and how individuals can approach ethically

challenging situations.

All associates/employees who worked at the North Texas campus of the

university during the survey period were eligible for participation in the study. Members

of every job description were included except for employees participating in the federal

work-study program. Every associate/employee was encouraged to participate, but

participation was not mandatory. There was no compensation for participation, but

participants who complete the study were invited to be part of a random drawing for a

$100 Visa gift card. An email link was included at the end of the survey allowing

participants to enroll for the drawing anonymously. Consent was obtained online prior to

the link to the study. Online surveys were collected between December 5, 2016 and April

10, 2017 when it was determined that no more surveys would be forthcoming. Sixty-nine

surveys were returned; 58 were deemed usable. The criteria used to establish usability of

D. I. T. -2 surveys are described in Chapter 3.

The dependent variable is the level of ethical decision-making which was

measured using the Defining Issues Test version 2 (D. I. T. -2). The results of the D. I. T.

-2 test were analyzed at the Center for the Study of Ethical Development. The D. I. T. -2

analysis from the Center for the Study of Ethical Development provided numerical scores

for each participant’s Stage 2/3 (Personal Interest Schema Score), Stage 4 (Maintaining

Norms), Stage 5/6 (Post-conventional or P Score), and N2 (a summary score)

performance. These scores are described in Chapter 3.

Each of the independent variables was measured, and the results coded

numerically to allow for statistical analysis. Gender was included in the demographic

information obtained in the D. I. T. -2 test and was dichotomously coded. Number of

completions of online ethics training was measured by a question included in a

SurveyMonkey® tool which linked to the D. I. T. -2 test. Ethics training responses were

coded as one (had never completed online ethics training) to five (had completed online

ethics training more than 3 times). Numerical coding of the independent and dependent

variables allowed statistical analysis to be employed for addressing each research

question.

Definition of Terms

The following terms were used operationally in this research study and are

defined as follows:

Ethics. Some researchers distinguish between morals (what is right and wrong)

and ethics (principles that guide behavior) (Johnson, 2012). The two terms are used

interchangeably in social psychology research, and they were used interchangeably in this

study. Many researchers use the term integrity (being honest, being principled) when

discussing ethics in organizations. Thus, an ethical dilemma is the same as a moral

dilemma and acting with integrity is the same as acting ethically for the purposes of this

research.

Dishonest behavior. Dishonest behavior, also referred to as unethical work

behavior (Wouters, Maesschalck, Peeters, & Roosen, 2014), is action that violates

societal, institutional, or personal moral codes. Such action may be considered minor, like

gossiping or leaving work early. It may be more serious, like working on personal

projects during work time or taking supplies for personal use. It may be criminal

behavior, like embezzlement, forgery, assault, sexual harassment, or breaching

confidentiality.

Ethical awareness. Ethical awareness, sometimes referred to as ethical sensitivity

or moral sensitivity, is the ability to evaluate ethical criteria in a given situation

(Rodzalan & Saat, 2016). Without sensitivity to ethical situations one cannot recognize,

much less evaluate, the ethical aspects of a situation and decide upon the best course of

action. Rest (1979) determined that education increases ethical awareness (Rest, 1979).

Ethical decision. Jones defined ethical decisions as those that the general public

(the “larger community”) considers morally and legally acceptable (Jones, 1991, p. 367).

Ethical decision-making. Ethical decision-making is when a person has to

consider the best course of action to take in situations where ethical conflicts exist

(Rodzalan & Saat, 2016). Kohlberg (1969) and Rest (1979) found that there are certain

steps involved in decision-making, and that those steps are consecutive. People proceed

through those various steps in order and most reach a stage of moral development that is

acceptable to the society in which they live. It is generally believed that ethics is

something that can be taught, and one learns how to make more ethically sound decisions

by learning how to analyze situations (Noel & Hathorn, 2014).

Online ethics training. Ethics training usually consists of a presentation of basic

ethical principles and how they relate to the business model of an institution. In Weber’s

(2015) recent survey of ethics and compliance officers in large organizations about their

ethics training, most conduct ethics training using computer-aided (online) technology

(81%) during orientation or annually (28% and 31%, respectively) and the programs last

less than two hours (92%) (Weber, 2015). Wouters et al. (2014) and others have

described difficulties associated with providing only online ethics training, such as an

inability to convey the importance of the principles and the inability to gauge attendee

reaction to the material. The online approach eliminates problems with scheduling and

paying for employee attendance at on-site training sessions (Ponton, 2015). The current

study looked specifically at online ethics training as is presently provided by many

companies.

Completions of online ethics training. For the purpose of the current study,

completion of online ethics training is defined as having taken online ethics training at

the target facility or elsewhere.

Orientation. Orientation is a formal program to provide an introduction and

socialization to the organization’s culture. The orientation program at the target

institution (a private, for-profit university specializing in healthcare degrees) consists of

several online modules in which the company’s core values are presented and highlights

of the employee handbook are discussed. The orientation process defines acceptable

codes of conduct and addresses employer expectations.

Incidental variables. The D. I. T. -2 includes questions that elicit information

from participants about influences on ethical decision-making that Rest (1979) and other

researchers have studied. Those variables include age, educational level, race/ethnicity,

political liberalism, U.S. citizenship, and whether the participant speaks English as

his/her primary language, and are referred to in this study as “incidental variables.” The

research questions in this research study did not require an analysis of the influences of

those variables on the levels of ethical decision-making, but the data was provided as part

of the analysis from the Center for the Study of Ethical Development.

Assumptions, Limitations, Delimitations

The present research study relied on two assumptions, namely, that study

participants would be honest with their responses on the survey and that they would have

the cognitive ability to read and understand the scenarios. The research was delimited to

only employees at one campus of a private, for-profit university specializing in healthcare

degrees. Therefore, results of this study cannot be generalized to other workplace

settings. A further delimitation was that participation in the study would be voluntary, so

there was no random selection. It was, therefore, a convenience sample and is subject to

validity concerns.

The current study has four limitations. One limitation is that the generalizability

of the research findings will be circumscribed to this particular community during the

weeks in which this research was conducted. A second limitation may be social

desirability response bias (SDB) if participants perceived that their anonymity would not

be protected (Wouters et al., 2014) or if participants wanted to provide responses that

they thought would be rewarded in their jobs. A third limitation may be self-selection

bias if the survey attracted only workers who were interested in and knowledgeable about

ethics. A fourth limitation is the online administration of the survey with no way to verify

that the people who completed the survey were actually workers at the target facility.

Summary and Organization of the Remainder of the Study

Researchers have not satisfactorily investigated the relationships between online

ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making in the

workplace because studies of these relationships have been conducted primarily

with undergraduate or graduate students (Buck, 2015; Dzuranin et al., 2013). Although

there are studies of ethical decision-making in the workplace, few have looked

specifically at whether online ethics training is significantly related to the level of ethical

decision-making. The current study surveyed full-time and adjunct employees in a

private, for-profit university who had completed online ethics training at the target

facility or elsewhere and examined whether the number of completions of online ethics

training by men and women in the workplace was related in a statistically significant way

to the levels of ethical decision-making by those workers.

The current study drew from prior studies by using the same tools others used to

answer similar research questions, such as, what cognitive developmental steps are

necessary to improve ethical decisions making? Do the number of exposures to online

ethics training correlate with higher ethical decision-making scores? Researchers of these

and similar questions have generally used the cognitive developmental measurement tool

which Rest built upon the work of Kohlberg (Rest, 1979). Rest’s Defining Issues Test (D.

I.T.) and its refinement, the Defining Issues Test, 2nd edition (D. I. T. -2), have been used

extensively to study ethical decision-making (Craft, 2013; Noel & Hathorn, 2014). Ethics

training responses, elicited with a question loaded into an online survey structure,

SurveyMonkey®, were coded as one (had never completed online ethics training

program) to five (had completed online ethics training more than 3 times). Gender was

included in the demographic information obtained in the D. I. T. -2 test and was

dichotomously coded. With numerical coding for the independent variables and the

dependent variable, statistical analyses were performed. The results provided insight into

the relationships between the number of completions of online ethics training and levels

of ethical decision-making by workers in the workplace.

In Chapter 2, the theoretical models that directed this research are thoroughly

explained followed by a review of the literature about ethics education and ethical

decision-making. The literature review highlights the gap, namely, that most studies

involving ethical decision-making have been conducted in undergraduate and graduate

program, not with workers in the workplace. Two major themes are explored: whether

organizational culture, including the culture in academic institutions, affects ethical

decision-making, and whether ethics can be taught. Since there are conflicting results

from research studies about the importance of gender in ethical decision-making, this

variable is also explored in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 describes the research problem and the

questions that were addressed in the study. The research methodology and data collection

procedures are also contained in Chapter 3. The statistical analysis steps are described in

detail in Chapter 4, while Chapter 5 describes the findings and discusses their

implications.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Introduction to the Chapter and Background to the Problem

In this chapter, what is known to date about ethical decision-making is identified

and distilled in light of the research questions posed by the study. Craft (2013) looked at

the body of research on ethical decision-making conducted between 2004 and 2011 and

found that Rest’s (1979) model for ethical decision-making was the most common

theoretical basis upon which to conduct research in this area (Craft, 2013). Craft also

observed that research in this area looked at the intersection of Rest’s four dependent

variables (awareness, judgment, intent, and behavior) and either individual factors or

organizational factors. Individual factors included age, gender, maturity level, education

level, cognitive moral development, while organizational factors were ones such as codes

of conduct, policies and procedures, competitiveness, training (Craft, 2013). Lehnert et

al. (2015) undertook a meta-review similar to Craft’s and arrived at the conclusion that

awareness as a dependent variable had been sufficiently studied (Lehnert et al., 2015).

However, Lehnert et al. (2015) did not identify studies specifically looking at what

relationships, if any, exist between online ethics training and ethical decision-making by

workers in the workplace. They did not distinguish between the different training

approaches (Lehnert et al., 2015), so conclusions about relationships between online

training for workers and the dependent variable cannot be made without further research.

An extensive literature review failed to provide a satisfactory answer to the

following question: what are the relationships, if any, between online ethics training on

the level of ethical decision-making by workers in the workplace? In order to answer this

question, one must consider that the goal of ethics training is to enhance awareness of

ethical situations and provide directions on how to arrive at ethical solutions

(Hergenrader, 2010). Most such research has been conducted with convenience samples

of students enrolled in undergraduate or graduate programs (Buck, 2015; Dzuranin et al.,

2013; Gunia et al., 2012). Of recent research conducted in the workplace, Weber (2015)

and Weber and Wasieleski (2013) surveyed ethics and compliance officers about their

organizations’ ethics program. Since the researchers did not survey employees, their

findings about the success of the ethics-training programs on ethical awareness and

ethical decision-making may be partially inflated due to respondent bias (Babbie, 2013).

Leuter et al. (2013) studied ethical awareness in professional registered nurses, but only

28% of their respondents admitted to having received any ethics training (Leuter et al.,

2013).

Research looking at online ethics-training programs in the workplace will provide

a better idea of whether workers in the workplace are more aware of ethical situations by

reason of attending online ethics-training and whether workers make better ethical

decisions as a result. There is a need to address these questions so that businesses can

justify the cost of online ethics-training programs. The current study adds to the body of

knowledge about whether there is a statistically significant relationship between the

number of completions of online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making by

workers in the workplace.

The literature review consisted of a survey of peer-reviewed journal articles for

these search terms: ethical decision-making, ethics training, and ethical awareness. The

search engines employed in this endeavor included ProQuest, Business Source Complete,

OmniFile Full Text, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and ABI/Inform Complete. Literature before

2012 was reviewed as to methodology and findings and to see what the authors

recommended for future research. When appropriate, older materials located in ProQuest

were tracked to “cited by” to see if more recent research used the same methodology or

addressed the prior author’s recommendations, much as one obtains research participants

using a snowballing technique.

Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development and Rest’s (1979) four component

model of moral development were the most frequently cited theoretical bases upon which

to study ethical decision-making. Rest’s 1979 book contains a description of the work

done with Kohlberg, including the way Rest sought to validate Kohlberg’s stages by

designing the Defining Issues Test (Rest, 1979). Treviño was another early proponent of

Kohlberg’s work (Treviño, 1986). Treviño and colleagues contributed foundational

research on ethical choices in the workplace. Rest’s and Treviño’s seminal writings

provided rich background information on the thinking that lead to these authors’ works.

The following sections explain the theories and models that have shaped

discussions about ethical decision-making, prior research on the variables in the proposed

study (online ethics training and gender), the important themes of the present research

undertaking (whether it is possible to teach ethics and whether the ethical climate of the

organization affects ethical decision-making), how a quantitative methodological

approach was applied to this study, and how prior studies used the instruments selected

for this study.

Theoretical Foundations and/or Conceptual Framework

The most common theoretical models for studying ethical decision-making have

been those based on cognitive developmental theories (MacDougall, Martin, Bagdasarov,

& Mumford, 2014). These models described the mental processes that individuals

navigate as they analyze moral issues and make decisions about the best course of action.

Rest wrote that early cognitive development theory was influenced by Piaget’s

revolutionary work with young children in the 1930s (Rest, 1979). Unlike other

researchers of moral thinking at the time, Piaget tried to explain the subjects’ values

using stories to elicit their responses and stating those responses in the subjects’ own

words (Rest, 1979). Rest did not assume that everyone viewed the world with the same

understanding and was impressed with the definite views of right and wrong held by the

young children in the study (Rest, 1979). From this work, researchers began to look for

age-related differences in responses to moral situations (Rest, 1979).

Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Development originated with replication of Piaget’s

work interviewing older children about moral actions when faced with complex

hypothetical moral dilemmas (Rest, 1979). When Kohlberg analyzed the responses in the

interviews, several stages of moral development were evident, rather than the two

identified by Piaget (Rest, 1979). In particular, Kohlberg described the stages of decision-

making that people go through as they mature (Kohlberg, 1969). Thereafter, Kohlberg

formulated a theory that individuals proceed through three levels of moral thinking –

from pre-conventional (what has been defined by authority figures), conventional (what

coincides with expectations of family and friends), and post-conventional (what the

individual defines as personal values and universal principles) (Kohlberg, 1969).

Kohlberg subsequently subdivided each level into two stages, thus ending up with the six

stages of formal structures of reasoning. Most importantly Kohlberg believed that the

stages were hierarchical, and that one proceeds through the stages in fixed order (Colby,

Kohlberg, Gibbs, & Lieberman, 1983).

Rest (1979) expanded on Kohlberg’s theory and provided early validation of

Kohlberg’s fixed stages of moral development. Rest eventually developed a four-

component model of moral development describing four dependent variables to consider

when measuring ethical decision-making (Rest, 1979). The four steps in Rest’s model of

moral development begin with a person recognizing that a moral issue exists (awareness).

From there, the person has to make a judgment about the morality of the decision that is

required (judgment), decide that the moral issue supersedes other considerations (intent),

and then act upon the decision one has made (behavior) (Rest, 1979). These four

variables (awareness, judgment, intent, and behavior) are individual factors that may be

influenced by organizational factors such as codes of conduct, competitiveness, and

training.

Treviño, an expert in organizational ethics, further enhanced understanding of

cognitive moral development by introducing the idea that individual differences (like

personality) and environment (like organization culture) interact to determine ethical

behavior (Treviño, 1986). It was Treviño’s belief that a person still progresses through

the stages defined by Kohlberg but that while in each stage situational factors and

individual differences determine how the person will analyze a moral issue (Treviño,

1986). The significance of this person-situation interactionist model was the recognition

that the environment and personality both play important roles in one’s moral decision-

making (MacDougall et al., 2014).

Jones (1991) developed the issue-contingent model of ethical decision-making

which built on Kohlberg’s theory, Rest’s model, and Treviño’s model (Jones, 1991). The

early theorists recognized that situation was important. Jones, however, observed that the

level of moral intensity associated with an issue increases the likelihood that a person will

recognize it as an ethical issue (Jones, 1991). Jones further defined six aspects of

situations that increase moral intensity, and the recognition that the situation may have

ethical significance (Jones, 1991). This allowed for the possibility that intuition might

play a part in ethical decision-making and that the process might be less deliberate and

conscious than previously thought (MacDougall et al., 2014).

A further refinement of the idea that intuition might have a role in ethical

decision-making was the application of neurophysiological constructs defined by

Reynolds (2006) and developed by Reynolds, Leavitt, and DeCelles (2010). Reynolds’

neurocognitive model described how a person processes the stimulus of a situation by

comparing it to pre-existing experiences and determining automatically if an ethical issue

exists (Reynolds, 2006). Reynolds stressed the automaticity of the experience and the

influence of intuition. Reynolds et al. (2010) devised a test to measure implicit

assumptions about business morality with a sample of undergraduate business students

and members of an online mountain biker’s forum. Part of their 2010 study was to

provide data to validate the Implicit Assumptions Test (Reynolds et al., 2010). The

results of the first part of their study provided validating data.

The second part of their study was to test the hypothesis that implicit assumptions

that business is moral, combined with a competitive cue, will result in unethical behavior

(Reynolds et al., 2010). The sample for the second part of their study was undergraduate

students taking an introductory management course at a university located on the west

coast (Reynolds et al., 2010). An insurance claim was the scenario provided to the

participants in Study 2 (Reynolds et al., 2010). The competitive cue was provided by a

memo from the CEO of the company noting that the company would do whatever it took

to be competitive (Reynolds et al., 2010). Results of the study supported the validity of

the Implicit Assumptions Test (Reynolds et al., 2010). Furthermore, the results supported

the hypothesis that implicit assumptions about business morality could be shaped by a

competitive cue and result in unethical or immoral behavior (Reynolds et al., 2010).

The neurocognitive model explains how people can make decisions about ethical

dilemmas when under time constraints or other pressure, which is often the case with

ethical issues (MacDougall et al., 2014). A limitation of this model is that such

neurocognitive processes depend on prior experiences and accurate reflection on those

experiences (MacDougall et al., 2014). Without experience and reflection, the response to

the new stimulus risks being faulty or incomplete (MacDougall et al., 2014). A person

might make sound decisions when confronted with the same ethical issues over and over,

but ethical issues are not always so predictable (MacDougall et al., 2014). The intuitive

or deliberative process that was successful for the last ethical dilemma may not be

transferrable to a unique situation (MacDougall et al., 2014). The authors also realized

that a limitation of the model is that it does not take into account the effects of ethics

training or educational backgrounds (MacDougall et al., 2014).

Sense making or meaning-making ethical decision-making theories were

developed by Sonenshein and Dholakia (2012) and Mumford (MacDougall et al., 2014).

These theories arose in response to the uncertainty researchers confronted when trying to

apply earlier rationalist models to situations that might be interpreted by people with

different value systems. These theories rely on social psychology research that shows that

people sometimes rely on quick processes rather than methodical reasoning to resolve

ethical issues (MacDougall et al., 2014). Sense making models describe three stages of

decision-making that take into account individual factors and intuition, ultimately

arriving at resolution or justification (MacDougall et al., 2014). Sonenshein and Dholakia

demonstrated that the three stages have indefinite lines and that sometimes they overlap

(Sonenshein & Dholakia, 2012). This is in distinct opposition to Kohlberg’s clearly

defined, fixed stages (MacDougall et al., 2014).

Rest’s theory and Trevino’s model both contain cognitive moral development as

the critical element in ethical decision-making (Jones, 1991). Rest’s differs from

Trevino’s in that Rest includes intent as a step before acting on an ethical decision,

whereas Trevino’s model goes right from determination to decision (Jones, 1991).

Neither Rest’s theory nor Trevino’s model distinguishes moral issues in explaining the

decision to act on an ethical judgment (Jones, 1991). Jones (1991) introduced the idea of

intuition and the concerns of individuals who are affected by the moral issues in question

(Jones, 1991). To Jones, a person’s awareness of a moral issue as relevant to persons

close to him determine the intensity with which the person acts. Jones, however, doesn’t

consider the traits of the decision-makers (like Rest does) nor the organizational culture

(like Trevino does) (Jones, 1991). Jones’ model does agree with Rest’s definitions of the

four components of decision-making, but Jones adds that these four components are

affected by the intensity of the moral issue (Sonenshein & Dholakia, 2012).

Reynolds (2006) emphasized awareness and intensity as important components in

the ethical decision-making process, much as Jones did, and noted that there is an

individual component to the process. Reynolds noted that organizations focus energies on

ethics education programs, but they should also consider the individual differences in

analyzing ethical situations (Reynolds, 2006). Like Jones (1991), Reynolds looked at

intuition and relevancy of ethical situations rather than moral development or

organizational culture. Sonenshein and Dholakia (2012) built upon the individuality of

ethical decision-making that Jones (1991) described, and purport that individuals react

with intuition before they engage in the decision-making steps (Sonenshein & Dholakia,

2012).

In summary, rather than one overall best theory for describing and understanding

ethical decision-making, it may be that some decision-making strategies work in certain

situations while others are more applicable in other situations. Not every ethical dilemma

has the same sort of complexity and not every person has the same capacity for

concentration and deliberation or the experiences upon which to base quick decision-

making. It seems only fitting that different theories would be required to explain such

diverse situations and processes. However, since there is such a wealth of research using

Rest’s four component model of ethical decision-making and the complementary

instrument devised by Rest, the current research study used Rest’s model as the

supporting framework. Rest’s model has more relevancy to the questions posed in the

present study than those of Trevino, Jones, Reynolds, or Sonenshein, although the

stepwise progression in the development of the latter theories provide assistance in

interpreting the results of the present study. Perhaps when one is measuring ethical

decision-making using Rest’s tool, one should also consider the individual characteristics

of the respondents and the moral intensity they feel towards the situations presented in

the tool. Those are considerations for further research. The present study deals with levels

of ethical decision-making, and looking at how this sample of male and female workers

performed using Rest’s tool. This section describes the theoretical basis for the

independent variable for the present study: level of ethical decision-making. The next

section is a review of the literature that helped identify the gap in research on ethical

decision-making, and an exploration of pertinent themes.

Review of the Literature

There is some question about whether professionals who have taken ethics

courses in school or at their businesses make better decisions when confronted with

ethical dilemmas at work. Perhaps ethics education programs are not adequately

preparing learners for the ethical issues that will arise in their jobs. These are important

considerations because they force educators to question whether ethics programs are

meeting the needs of the workforce. Many businesses invest in costly ethics-training

programs, and there should be some return on that investment. Yet ethical dissolution

continues to make headlines years after the scandals that bankrupted innocent employee

stockholders at the Enron Corporation (Johnson, 2012). Van Hoorn (2015) found that the

values of professionals in the finance industry were almost identical to the values of the

general population, so concerns about ethical dissolution reach farther than just concerns

about large corporations. Many organizations reacted to scandals in banking, energy, and

healthcare industries by investing in mandatory ethics-training programs believing that

ethics can be taught and that ethics training improves decision-making (Wickham &

O’Donohue, 2012; Verschoor, 2014). With the investment in those programs comes a

need to study whether ethics training programs are having any effect on ethical decision-

making ability among the general workforce. Two major themes that emerged when

reviewing literature on ethical decision-making in the workplace and the effect of ethics

education were: (1) whether the culture of the organization affects ethical decision-

making, and (2) whether ethics can be taught and, if so, does education increase

awareness.

Ethical business culture. Cohen, Foglia, Kwong, Pearlman, Fox, and Biggs

(2015) reported the results of the most recent survey administered every two years since

2008 to employees at Veterans Health Administration (VHA). The authors described an

organization with an ethical culture as one in which members are empowered to do the

right thing even when it is costlier, in which members can identify and discuss ethical

issues, and where members know with whom they can address ethical concerns without

risk of retaliation (Cohen et al., 2015). From the 37,514 responses (only 29% of this large

organization) received during the survey in 2014, the authors concluded that employers

need to treat employees fairly, make ethics a priority, and send clear messages about

ethics if they want to have an ethical organization. They advised that ethics be integrated

throughout the organization beginning with the recruitment process, new hire orientation,

and performance reviews (Cohen et al., 2015). The work by Cohen et al. carries questions

because the authors did not acknowledge that the culture at VHA during the time of their

ethics survey was one of manipulating data and lying to officials about wait times for

appointments (Culture, Cover-ups Plague VA Health System, 2014; U.S. Department of

Veterans Affairs, 2015).

Armenta (2015) noted that having a code of ethics directly impacts ethical

conduct. Likewise, LaMontagne (2012) found that employees are more likely to report

unethical conduct if they perceive that the organization supports the company’s code of

conduct. Members of professional organizations also have codes of conduct which guide

decision-making and practice (Groessl, 2013). Research has shown that professional

codes of conduct are more readily accepted than organizational codes (Martin & Cullen,

2006). Through socialization, the norms of an organization are imposed on members

during orientation, continuing education, and daily interaction (Hoover & Pepper, 2015).

Umphress, Bingham, and Mitchell conducted a quantitative study to address a gap

they identified in 2010, namely, unethical acts that benefit the organization (Umphress,

Bingham, & Mitchell, 2010). They referred to this as unethical pro-organizational

behavior (UPB). Hypothesis One was that “organizational identification is positively

related to UPB” (Umphress et al., 2010, p. 770). Hypothesis Two was that “the positive

relationship between organization identification and UPB is stronger when perceived

reciprocity beliefs are high versus low” (Umphress et al., 2010, p. 771). Participants were

recruited from a pool of people who appeared for jury duty in a circuit court in the

southeastern United States. The study spanned four weeks, and 224 people (32% of the

initial pool) participated for the entire length of the study. UPB was assessed by using a

tool developed for the proposed study in which participants indicated their willingness to

use UPB. Their willingness was measured by a seven-point scale (strongly agree to

strongly disagree). The authors validated their tool by using it with three additional

sample groups which are further identified in the study. They evaluated the distinction of

the dependent variable, predictor variables, and control variables by using confirmatory

factor analyses plus the maximum likelihood estimation.

Hypothesis One was not supported by the data. That is, when an employee

strongly identified with the organization, the employee was not necessarily more inclined

to undertake UPB. Hypothesis Two was supported, meaning that workers who strongly

identified with their company and felt an obligation to reciprocate with positive behaviors

were more likely to engage in UPB. The authors admitted surprise at the findings for

Hypothesis One, and they suggested that future research look carefully at employee

intentions (like their intention to help or harm) and see if there are other factors that

might form or result from such intentions (Umphress et al., 2010). Sub-themes in this

research study were: (1) the effect of modeling and rewarding unethical behavior on UPB

in an organization; (2) whether increasing employees’ awareness of UPB will reduce its

impact; and (3) can one depend on self-reporting when analyzing ethical decision-making

data (Umphress et al., 2010).

Martin and Cullen (2006) undertook an analysis of Ethical Climate Theory (ECT)

as a framework for studying whether the ethical climates on the surface of organizations

extend within the organizations. This was a meta-analysis of 42 research studies with a

multitude of variables. They excluded studies in which the statistical analyses were not

included in enough detail to draw solid conclusions. The resulting analysis showed

consistency with other works that identified relationships that correlate positively with a

climate of well-being. Those climates associated with well-being were caring,

independence, law and code, and rules. Destructive climates were ones that included

behaviors such as falsifying documents and accepting bribes. An interesting finding from

the meta-analysis was the discovery that professional codes of conduct and other forms of

external rules are perceived more favorably than those that originated from within the

company. The authors observed that they did not identify any study with sufficient

statistical analysis that addressed the relationship between organizational identification

and psychological well-being (Martin & Cullen, 2006). Sub-themes in this study were:

(1) organizational commitment and job satisfaction, (2) dysfunctional behavior as a

consequence of ethical climate; and (3) the impact of codes of conduct or codes of ethics

(Martin & Cullen, 2006).

Kaptein (2008) reported the results of four empirical studies designed to validate

the Corporate Ethical Virtues (CEV) Model. The first study was an item generation

exercise. The second study subjected the items identified in the first study to exploratory

factor analysis in order to identify the least number of factors to show relationships

among the variables. In the third study, Kaptein subjected to further factor analysis the

items that remained from the second study. This resulted in a 58-item questionnaire that

can assess the ethical culture of a business.

The fourth study in Kaptein’s report was designed to determine if organizations

have distinct ethical cultures. Kaptein is with the Department of Business at Erasmus

University in The Netherlands. The sample for this study was drawn from employees

from three diverse companies in that country, resulting in 235 usable questionnaires. The

results were skewed in that the surveyed employees of one of the three companies had no

contact with upper management and were unable to address the questions relating to the

concept of congruency with management. Eight concepts or ethical virtues of

corporations were analyzed in this fourth study (“clarity, congruency of supervisors,

feasibility, supportability, transparency, discuss ability, sanction ability”) (Kaptein, 2008,

p. 940). Four of the ethical virtues (support ability, transparency, clarity, and congruency

of management) showed enough distinction on Analysis of Variance that they can be

considered discriminators.

The work by Kaptein (2008) reinforced prior evidence of the importance of

ethical codes of conduct and suggested that future research might look at the effect of

codes in providing clarity in ethically sensitive situations. Three interesting sub-themes in

this work were: (1) lack of necessary time or equipment as it relates to unethical conduct;

(2) lack of motivation/satisfaction as they relate to unethical conduct; and (3)

vague/ambiguous expectations as they allow the practice of unethical behavior (Kaptein,

2008).

Umphress et al. (2010), Martin and Cullen (2006), and Kaptein (2008) all agreed

that the ethical climate of an organization sets the tone for the ethical behavior of its

employees. Professional codes of conduct or ethics affect employees’ ethical decision-

making more than the companies’ own codes of conduct. Virtuous organizations are

those that provide a moral example from the top down and that provide employees with

the support they need in order to behave ethically. Ethical problems occur in the

workplace for many reasons including an emphasis on profits above all else, a collision

of cultures, and the greediness of a few (Liu & Qiu, 2015). Professional and corporate

codes of conduct provide frameworks from which ethical issues can be studied (Kaptein,

2015), but they are not foolproof.

The ethical climate in academic institutions, as in business organizations, is

determined by the tone of leaders and those in positions of power (Gibson et al., 2014).

Academic institutions have hierarchies with the dean having power over assistant deans,

senior professors having power over junior professors, and professors having power over

students (Gibson et al., 2014). If members of an academic institution feel powerless and

become disengaged in the work of the university, they may not feel obliged to behave

ethically (Chugh, Kern, Zhu, & Lee, 2014).

Disengagement in healthcare professionals is referred to as emotional burnout or

moral distress and results from job dissatisfaction and over work (Chopik, 2015). One of

the healthcare professions which is associated with high levels of moral distress is

nursing (Akella, 2016; Austin, 2012; Brotheridge, 2013; Moore, Leahy, Sublett, & Lanig,

2013; and Piotrowski & King, 2016). Emotional burnout and moral disengagement can

result in counterproductive work behavior (Schyns & Schilling, 2013) and poor ethical

decision-making (Chopik, 2015). Peers who witness unethical decision-making by

disengaged fellow workers risk assuming that such behavior is acceptable at the place of

work (O’Fallon & Butterfield, 2012). A person’s level of moral cognitive development

determines his/her likelihood of being influenced by the unethical behavior of peers

(Kohlberg, 1969).

Sulmasy, a medical ethicist, noted while speaking as a member of the Presidential

Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues that virtues such as respect and courage

are important components of an ethical climate (Presidential Commission, 2015b). Best

of all is to hire people who already have high standards of ethical sensitivity (Guerci,

Radaelli, Siletti, Cirella, & Rami Shani, 2015). Companies that are known for their

integrity and fairness can attract employees looking to work in an ethical environment.

Companies can also actively recruit workers with the same values as the organization,

and they can provide thorough training to encourage the alignment of values (Guerci et

al., 2015).

The studies in this section agree in that they affirm the importance of an ethical

climate in an organization, with published codes of conduct and with ethics modules

integrated throughout the onboarding processes (Armenta, 2015; Cohen et al., 2015;

Martin & Cullen, 2006). Armenta (2015) and Martin and Cullen (2006), in particular,

noted that professional codes of conduct carry more weight with employees than

organizational codes. The studies in this section mention the impact of negative ethical

climates on ethical performance of workers, and suggest that a robust ethical climate

should pervade an organization (Kaptein, 2008; Martin & Cullen, 2006; Umphress et al.,

2010). The discussion of disengagement in organizations, particularly academic

institutions, and especially healthcare organizations emphasize that the tone of those in

positions of power sets the ethical climate (Chopik, 2015; Gibson et al., 2014; Umphress

et al., 2010). This section describes the prior research of the independent variable for the

present study (level of ethical decision-making), and the relationship between this

variable and one of the dependent variables (number of times a worker completed online

ethics training).

The studies noted above are relevant to the present research study which

measured the ethical decision-making of the staff (mostly RNs) who provide instruction

to students entering the nursing profession. Nursing’s professional code of conduct is

emphasized in the curriculum. The survey design included a preliminary survey question

(Appendix A): How many times have you completed the online ethics training at this

campus or elsewhere? The university’s online ethics training emphasizes the company’s

code of ethics and describes an organizational culture of high ethical standards. The

training includes an introduction to workplace ethics and a section on workplace

harassment prevention. Short videos interspersed in the online ethics modules highlight

how co-workers can support or undermine an organization’s culture, and how individuals

can approach ethically challenging situations. Burnout, moral distress, and

disengagement are pertinent themes about organizational culture related to the present

research study because the main focus of the work performed at the target institution is

nursing education. The question then becomes, can virtues such as respect and courage,

integrity and honesty, be taught or are these qualities that are formed too early to be

impacted by education in the workplace? The next section explores the theme of ethics

education.

Teaching ethics. Lau (2010) considered this question in a study of two groups of

undergraduate business students in Ireland. The students in the control group were

enrolled in a mandatory organizational behavior class but had not taken a course in

ethics. The students in the treatment group were taking the mandatory ethics class. The

intervention consisted of teaching the JUSTICE model of ethical decision-making to the

treatment group to provide them with a simple device for learning decision-making

principles. The letters stand for different ethical principles. For example, J stands for

justice; U stands for utilitarian.

The control group completed the Attitudes Towards Business Ethics

Questionnaire (ATBEQ) before they took an ethics course. This tool was designed to

measure awareness of ethical principles, and it has been validated by a number of

researchers (Lau, 2010). The treatment group took the ATBEQ after the mandatory ethics

course. There were 707 suitable questionnaires evenly distributed between males and

females. A significant limitation to the study was Lau’s use of first year students in the

control group and second-year students in the treatment group. The results could not be

adjusted for the extra year of maturation for the treatment group.

The experiment supported Lau’s hypothesis that ethics education would increase

students’ awareness. The results indicated that students with ethics education were better

able to use moral reasoning when confronted with conflicts of interest, challenges to

personal integrity, and incidents of intimidation and bullying. Another finding was that

students who had a high level of readiness made higher scores on questions which tested

their ethical decision-making. The author concluded that ethics education, at least in an

undergraduate business program, does work. Lau’s suggestions for future research

included refining the concept of “readiness,” and to sample business professionals rather

than students (Lau, 2010). Three sub-themes that emerged from Lau’s work were (1)

gender differences in ethical decision-making ability, (2) the association between

learning expectations and higher motivation to learn ethical principles, and (3) the change

in students’ perceptions of corporate ethical misconduct after they have completed an

ethics course (Lau, 2010).

Ritter (2006) designed a mixed-methods study of the effect of ethics training on

decision-making and moral reasoning, sampling undergraduate business students at a

university in South Carolina (Ritter, 2006). The experiment was designed to incorporate

all recommended strategies for undergraduate ethics education and the corresponding

outcome criteria. Ritter wanted to determine if the suitable application of even a basic

ethics course in a business school program would increase ethical decision-making by

students.

There were 77 participants in the quantitative part of the study which consisted of

a post-test with Likert-scale measurements of awareness of ethical conduct. The sample

for the qualitative portion was 57 students who were enrolled in a mandatory

organizational behavior class. The researchers controlled for confounding variables by

selecting students in one program taught by the same instructor, in the same semester, at

the same time of day, on the same days of the week. The experimental group received

additional ethics training while the control group did not. The qualitative portion took a

pre-test and a post-test in which they were presented with two case scenarios and then

answered questions that involved their decision-making methods and what ethical

principles they used to determine their selected course of action.

The results revealed a significant association between female gender and personal

integrity when Analysis of Variance was used to detect such an interaction. A hypothesis

that the experimental group would show increased ethical awareness was not supported

(Ritter, 20006). The second hypothesis was not completely supported, either. That

hypothesis was that students who had taken the ethics course would use new decision-

making skills when faced with ethical dilemmas. This was tested with qualitative pre- and

post-test vignettes. The only significant finding was that women scored higher in ethical

decision-making skills after taking the course (Ritter, 2006).

Ritter (2006) concluded that ethics programs in undergraduate business programs

did not necessarily improve the ethical decision-making abilities of students except for

female students (Ritter, 2006). Ritter suggested that the gender difference may be due to

an intrinsic difference in the mental representation of ethical issues between males and

females. Women have more deeply conditioned stereotypes about business behaviors

which lead to glass-ceiling limitations, sexual harassment, and job roles, whereas men are

more cognizant of the utilitarian nature of business. With the evolution of gender roles

and identity since 2006, Ritter’s study might reveal different results if repeated today.

Ritter identified a need to conduct similar research with employees in a business

setting (rather than students) using real-life scenarios rather than hypothetical situations

(Ritter, 2006). Recommendations included repeating the study with a larger sample and

with additional variables (ethical judgment, ethical sensitivity, and ethical awareness)

(Ritter, 2006). Some sub-themes identified in Ritter’s work included: (1) the effect of

education on ethical competence, (2) the importance of an organizational ethical culture,

and (3) the need to determine if a person’s maturity correlates with level of ethical

performance (Ritter, 2006).

The quantitative study by Cloninger and Selvarajan (2010) looked at the impact of

ethics education on ethical judgment (Cloninger & Selvarajan, 2010). Their sample

consisted of 175 master’s level students enrolled in a mandatory business class at a

university in the southwestern United States, evenly divided by gender. Ninety-three

students participated in the pre-course section of the study with 82 completing the post-

course element. The researchers prepared four vignettes, each one with different levels of

ethical performance (ethical high performer, ethical low performer, unethical high

performer, unethical low performer). Ten incidents were built into each vignette to

measure six dimensions of ethical behavior such as falsification, or padding expense

accounts, which are the most common areas of misconduct encountered in business

organizations (Cloninger & Selvarajan, 2010). The participants randomly selected a

vignette and were asked to rate the incidents as ethical or unethical. One of the authors

(Selvarajan) had previously validated the vignettes by conducting scale development

work which resulted in the six selected dimensions being measured in the 2010 study by

Cloninger and Selvarajan. There were five anchors encompassing the range of the scales.

The study by Cloninger and Selvarajan (2010) supported the hypothesis that

students who completed the course made ethical judgments that were not as influenced

by job outcomes (performance appraisals) than students who had not taken the ethics

course (Cloninger & Selvarajan, 2010). They emphasized that even one course in ethics

results in better ethical reasoning, and thus, that ethics education is important. The

authors did not find a significant difference in the scores of younger students (those under

the median age of 31) and older students, but did find that the ethics course had a slightly

positive influence on those younger students. A suggestion for future research was to

focus on the effect of age on ethical judgment. Sub-themes identified in the work by

Cloninger and Selvarajan included: (1) comparing the effect of a citizenship course on

ethical behavior; (2) the effect of moral development on ethical decision-making; (3) the

importance of ethical leadership from top managers (Cloninger & Selvarajan, 2010).

The new shape that emerges when studying the articles by Lau (2010), Ritter

(2006), and Cloninger and Selvarajan (2010) is that the missing link in the extant body of

literature on ethical decision-making is research conducted in the workplace using real-

life scenarios. This shape emerges when one notices that all three research studies used

convenience samples of undergraduates or graduate students for research on ethical

decision-making, and that a confounding variable in each study is the maturity of the

student.

Rest, in fact, believed that ethical deliberation and resolution would be improved

with some kind of education (Rest, 1979). Rest reasoned that education or instruction

helped to make students aware of ethical issues. Rest’s own research showed that people

who have achieved higher maturation or have more awareness of ethical situations make

better decisions when faced with ethically difficult decisions. They do so by going

through more steps in the decision-making process. Jennings (2012) found this to be true

as well. Jennings acknowledged that business students studying law and ethics had

difficulty applying new knowledge to decision-making because they were unable to

recognize moral issues (Jennings, 2012). Jennings called for a new approach to teaching

ethics, namely, to challenge students to wrestle with real-life ethical issues as if they were

making the decisions. Prior Jonson, McGuire, and Cooper (2016) also called for an

exploration of different ways to present ethics to effect long-term improvement in ethical

decision-making (Prior Jonson et al., 2016).

The main focus of the work performed at the institution selected for this

dissertation research study is to prepare students for work as Bachelor’s-prepared RNs

(BSNs). Most of the instructors at the institution are registered nurses (RNs). A review of

the literature about ethical decision-making by RNs revealed that most nursing education

programs have included ethics education as part of the curriculum (Park, Kjervik,

Crandell, & Oermann, 2012). These authors noted that ethics education of nursing

students may not be effective because there are not enough qualified faculty to teach

ethics, there is limited time devoted to this topic, and the importance of teaching ethics to

nursing students is not universally recognized (Park et al., 2012).

Leuter et al. (2013) echoed the need for more ethics education for nurses (Leuter

et al., 2013). These authors conducted one of the few research studies aimed at measuring

ethical decision-making by nurses in the workplace (as opposed to student nurses). They

constructed a questionnaire which was administered to 374 RNs attending graduate

specialist training near Abruzzo, Italy, in early 2011. All the nurses were female. Most

were 40-49 years old and had completed only basic nursing education (57.5%). Most had

been practicing for nine to 23 years (26.3% for 9-16 years and 27.9% for 17-23 years),

mostly in hospitals, and most were not managers (72.7% nurses versus 27.3% nurse

managers).

The questionnaire gathered information about participants’ self-reported

knowledge of ethical frameworks and the way they obtained that knowledge. Participants

were asked about dealing with (1) end-of-life decisions, (2) rationing care, (3) advocating

for patients who were not competent to make their own decisions, and (4) interpersonal

conflicts with staff or patients and their families. Finally, they were asked about when to

seek advice on ethical issues.

The authors found that most (40.4%) responded that they had medium experience

with ethical issues, the most common issue being advocating for patients who had limited

decision-making capacity (65.8%) (Leuter et al., 2013). Twenty-nine percent claimed to

have a poor knowledge about ethics and 28.8% reported that they had never received

ethics education or studied ethical problems despite the frequency with which they are

confronted with ethical dilemmas in their work (Leuter et al., 2013). These authors noted

that Italian legislation from 1998 called for the establishment of ethics committees

throughout the country and observed that ethics committees were not doing enough to

educate healthcare professionals about dealing with the ethical dilemmas they face every

day (Leuter et al., 2013).

Mallari and Tariman (2016) undertook a systematic review of nursing literature to

identify and catalogue the frameworks used to analyze ethical dilemmas in modern

nursing practice (Mallari & Tariman, 2016). The authors settled upon 27 peer-reviewed

articles and identified more than 10 frameworks used to for nursing research about ethical

issues. Among the ten frameworks were national and international codes of ethics

promulgated by professional nursing organizations, the Declaration of Helsinki, the

Nuremberg Code, Swanson’s Nursing Caring Theory, and Deontological Code (Mallari

& Tariman, 2016). They found that nurses mostly relied on codes of ethics to guide their

ethical decision-making (Mallari & Tariman, 2016). These authors felt it most important

that nurses are educated as students or as nurses in the workplace to identify and use their

national codes of ethics as a foundation for sound ethical decisions. They noted two

weaknesses with using codes of ethics to guide ethical decision-making, namely, that (1)

codes are not enforceable but merely serve to guide nurses, and (2) codes must be

vigilantly updated since they are so integral. The authors acknowledged the importance

of ethics education in assuring competency in the nursing profession since ethics is the

foundation of such work (Mallari & Tariman, 2016).

A group of nurse experts who recognized the need for better ethics education for

practicing nurses designed an online education program with support from two academic

medical centers in the northeastern region of the U.S. and the Health Resources and

Services Administration (Robinson et al., 2014). Their program became the Clinical

Ethics Residency for Nurses (CERN). The developers sought to build upon the basic

codes of ethics for professional nurses and Rest’s model of developing competency in

moral decision-making. The result was a training program designed to increase ethical

awareness (recognize feelings of unease in ethically difficult situations) and improve

ethical decision-making (practice ways to address the situations that arose). The program

began with two basic courses in ethics followed by 80 hours of classroom lectures and

interactive participation and a clinical component with a mentor for 16 hours. The nurses

learned how to recognize their values and biases when confronting ethical dilemmas, how

to express their concerns using positive communication techniques, and how to use

reflection to incorporate the lessons from each day. The planners designed simulation

experiences for students so that they could practice their new skills in a non-threatening

environment (Robinson et al., 2014).

Pre- and post-testing was conducted in the mixed-methods design employed by

the CERN developers (Robinson et al., 2014). They employed the Moral Distress Scale

(Revised), the Ethics Knowledge Scale, and the Self-Efficacy Scale I Clinical Ethics to

measure the effectiveness of the program. They found a statistically significant decrease

in moral distress from pre-test to post-test and a slightly increased knowledge of ethical

issues by the end of the program. Narrative comments revealed the participants’ growth

in self-confidence and ability to advocate for patients as a result of the program

(Robinson et al., 2014).

Recognizing that ethics education is expensive for institutions and time-

consuming for participants Mumford, Steele, and Watts (2015) undertook a meta-analysis

of the evaluation of ethics education programs (Mumford et al., 2015). They noted the

importance of measuring the effect of ethics education over time and whether ethics

education transfers to the work setting (Mumford et al., 2015). Additionally, they noted

the importance of determining the generalizability of ethics education across cultures and

between different levels (undergraduate and doctoral, for example) (Mumford et al.,

2015). The authors considered whether the instructor was experienced in ethics education

and whether institutional outcomes (plagiarism, falsification of data) improved after

ethics education (Mumford et al., 2015). Bakhtadze (2015) also stressed the importance

of experienced educators to explain and role model responsible academic behavior

(Bakhtadze, 2015). The interconnectedness and intricacies of modern, global society

confer urgency on universities to prepare students to address ethical dilemmas in the

workplace (Bakhtadze, 2015). Ethical education in universities should provide a solid

foundation from which students acquire an understanding of students and teachers from

different cultures, with different values, but from which common truths are identified and

respected (Bakhtadze, 2015; Stefanidis & Banai, 2014). Finally, a measure of the success

of ethics education programs is whether there is a change in the culture of the

organization. Mumford et al. (2015) reported an improvement in the key institutional

outcomes identified at their own institution when measured over a five-year period after

the introduction of their ethics education program for the science and engineering

program (Mumford et al., 2015).

Swisher et al. (2012) found that extensive ethics education in a classroom setting

using transformative learning over a six-week period resulted in significant improvement

in post-conventional moral reasoning of undergraduate physical therapy students in

Australia as measured with the D. I. T-2 (Swisher et al., 2012). The ethics program

included drawing connections between classroom and real-life ethically-challenging

experiences (Swisher et al., 2012). The program built in opportunities for discussion of

ethical dilemmas and time for students’ self-reflection (Swisher et al., 2012). The authors

contend that the process of transformative learning closely resembles post-conventional

reasoning, and they conclude that this may have contributed to the increased scores in

that area by the end of the program (Swisher et al., 2012).

Armenta relied on Rest’s four component model of moral development to guide a

causal-comparative research study to measure the effect of educational level on moral

reasoning of real estate agents and used the D. I. T. -2 to measure and score the results

(Armenta, 2015). Armenta employed a causal-comparative design in order to compare

the effect of higher education and ethics education on ethical decision-making with

groups that are independent of each other. In particular, the goal was to determine if

licensed real estate agents with higher education can reach Kohlberg’s post-conventional

(highest, most principled) stage of moral development. Armenta found that additional

education did not increase moral reasoning (Armenta, 2015). In fact, results showed that

the more educated real estate agents scored lower in all levels of Kohlberg’s stages of

moral development (Armenta, 2015). None of the agents ascended to the post-

conventional stage, but rather operated within the conventional stage (Armenta, 2015).

One variable that might have influenced the results of the study was gender disparity

(more females than males in the study population). Another possible confounding

variable was that real estate agents with less formal education may have had similar

ethical education as those with more formal education because of continuing education

requirements in ethics for the profession (Armenta, 2015).

Ulrich, a pediatric nurse who specializes in bioethics, spoke at a recent meeting of

the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethics Issues. Ulrich stated that ethics

education builds confidence and equips learners with the vocabulary they need to voice

ethical concerns (Presidential Commission, 2015a). Ulrich was speaking about ethical

concerns in the healthcare setting wherein workers can experience moral distress when

ethical decisions do not align with the workers’ values. Finding oneself unable to

effectively advocate for patients who may not be able to speak for themselves diminishes

workers’ self-esteem and can lead to ineffective coping. Not only can this result in

disengaged workers, it can also lead to increased costs to hire and train replacement

workers. Empowering workers with ethical education and recognizing their voices makes

good business sense.

The theme that directed this section of the literature review was ethics training.

There was consensus that ethics education was valuable for increasing ethical reasoning,

but the studies differed in several respects. One difference was methodology. Lau (2010),

Ritter (2006), and Cloninger and Selvarajan (2010) sampled business students, and tested

ethical decision-making before and after an instructional intervention (Lau, 2010; Ritter,

2006; Cloninger & Selvarajan, 2010). Lau (2010), however, used a questionnaire and

vignettes, while Ritter (2006) and Cloninger and Selvarajan (2010) used only vignettes.

Lau (2010) and Ritter (2006) sampled undergraduates while Cloninger and Selvarajan

(2010) administered their tests to students in a master’s level business program. Lau

(2010) and Ritter (2006) found that women scored higher on measures of ethical

decision-making than men, but Cloninger and Selvarajan (2010) did not discuss gender in

their report. Leuter et al. (2013) used a questionnaire in their survey of ethical decision-

making by nurses in the workplace (Leuter et al., 2013). Gender was not an issue, as all

the nurses in their sample were female. Robinson et al. (2014) employed a mixed-

methods design when studying the effects of an ethics training program with a group of

professional nurses (Robinson et al., 2014). Their sample was predominantly female

(93%) and they did not report any gender differences.

Mumford et al. (2015) studied the designs of ethics education programs and how

those are evaluated. They determined that the most successful programs are those that

include a pre- and post-testing with an educational intervention. They discussed the

difficulties of evaluating ethics education, but point out that programs that are associated

with changes in behavior and changes in institutional outcomes provide the data to build

a theoretical model for ethics education assessment (Mumford et al., 2015).

The discussions presented in this section are relevant to the present study in two

ways: (1) they provide some background about the types of research designs that have

been employed to study ethical decision-making, and helped identify the gap, namely,

that most studies involving ethical decision-making have been conducted in

undergraduate and graduate programs, not with workers in the workplace; (2) they

present and describe some of the prior research of the independent variables for the

present study (number of times a worker completed online ethics training; gender) and

their relationship to the dependent variable (level of ethical decision-making). More

discussion about online ethics training is in the next section about ethics education as a

way of increasing ethical awareness. Some of the studies in this section also discuss

differences in ethical decision-making based on gender, and they provided part of the

reason for wanting to explore this topic in the present research. Indeed, RQ2 was

formulated to explore this topic further.

Increasing ethical awareness with education. Four dependent variables are most

commonly associated with ethical decision-making: awareness, intention, judgment, and

behavior. Rest initially described these variables and built them into the D. I. T.

measurement tool (Rest, 1979). Awareness is the ability to recognize that a moral issue is

contained in a situation. Judgment is the ability to decide that some action is required in

the situation. Intention is the resolve to address the moral issue in the situation. Behavior

is the act of engaging in the situation to bring about resolution (Rest, 1979). Craft (2013)

identified awareness as a necessary component in the ability of individuals to make

ethical decisions. Without awareness, one might not be able to recognize that an ethical

situation exists. Increasing awareness is the primary goal of ethics education programs

(Weber, 2015). In Craft’s review of empirical research between 2004 and 2011 on ethical

decision-making, judgment was the variable most frequently measured (55 studies),

followed by intent and behavior in that order. Of interest was the paucity of research

looking at awareness and the fact that there were no studies to that point which looked at

ethical awareness and ethical training (Craft, 2013).

Since 2011, a number of studies have investigated the impact of ethics training on

ethical awareness and ethical decision-making (Christensen et al., 2016; Dzuranin et al.,

2013; Wang & Thompson, 2013). These were conducted using convenience samples of

undergraduate or graduate students in business fields or science and engineering fields,

not workers in the workplace. Weber (2015) and Weber and Wasieleski (2013) analyzed

the effects of ethics training on ethical awareness and ethical decision-making in 10

representative industry groups by surveying their ethics and compliance officers (Weber,

2015; Weber & Wasieleski, 2013). A small percentage (3%) of the industry groups in

their studies was involved in health care. The kinds of health care industries represented

were not revealed. The ethics and compliance officers surveyed claimed that the main

point of ethics training involved making employees more aware of ethical issues and how

to address them while minimizing the companies’ risk exposure (Weber, 2015; Weber &

Wasieleski, 2013). These authors relied on self-reports by ethics and compliance officers

about their ethics programs; they did not survey employees to measure ethical awareness

and ethical decision-making. The authors found that a number of educational approaches

were used to provide ethics training to workers in those industries, the most frequent

being computer-aided training (online). Weber (2015) recognized that the costlier face-

to-face training has better results when the desired outcome is to improve ethical

decision-making (Weber, 2015).

Leuter et al. (2013) recognized the importance of ethics training on ethical

awareness in healthcare professionals (specifically registered nurses) and the willingness

of those healthcare professionals to seek the guidance of ethics consultants. Self-reports

of perceived ethical awareness indicated the majority were knowledgeable of ethical

issues in their work (70%) but only 28% admitted to having received any ethics training.

The authors did not explore the kinds of ethics training the rest had received (online,

face-to-face, reading material, or other) and did not attempt to measure ethical decision-

making (Leuter et al., 2013). Glasa et al. (2013) found no ethics training offered to

doctors, nurses, or other healthcare workers in the workplaces they sampled except for

one hospital (Glasa et al., 2013). The authors did not describe the type of ethics training

offered at that one institution, nor did they measure the effectiveness of the training

offered at that facility.

Noel and Hathorn (2014) sought to determine if ethics training conducted in

school or the workplace could predict ethical awareness, judgment, and intent. They

accepted that measuring intent was sufficient for measuring behavior. Their participants

were students enrolled in business courses at two colleges in the Midwest and

professionals in accounting and business (Noel & Hathorn, 2014). The authors did not

distinguish between the different educational approaches by students or professionals in

their study so it is not clear whether online ethics training was involved.

Martinov-Bennie and Mladenovic (2015) recognized the fundamental role of

ethical sensitivity on ethical decision-making. They recognized that providing a

framework for categorizing and analyzing ethical issues gave people the tools they

needed to make better decisions. They designed a mixed-methods approach to investigate

whether an ethical decision-making framework had an effect on ethical sensitivity

(awareness) in first-year accounting students. Their tool was a modified version of the

Ethical Conflict Resolution Process (ECRP) Framework from the Accounting

Professional and Ethical Accounting Board and a case that involved an ethical dilemma

(Martinov-Bennie & Mladenovic, 2015).

All students were given an assignment that required recognizing and analyzing

the ethical dilemma and the possible courses of action to take. Some students were

provided with the ECRP framework to guide their analysis and others were not given the

framework. The assignment was completed twice – during week two of the semester and

again during the final exam for the semester – so pre- and post-testing was conducted.

Quantitatively, data were obtained in order to determine the impact of the intervention on

student learning. Qualitatively, students provided insight into the nature of their decisions

(Martinov-Bennie & Mladenovic, 2015).

When the results were tabulated, it was evident that more students who used the

framework were successful in the course than students who were not provided with the

framework. Chi square analysis showed that the differences were not due to chance alone

and that the difference between those who used the framework and those who did not

were statistically significant (p=0.02). The authors concluded that providing students

with a framework for analyzing ethical issues improves their ethical decision-making

(Martinov-Bennie & Mladenovic, 2015).

Lehnert, Park, and Singh conducted their own meta-review of empirical research

on ethical decision-making in 2015 and concluded that ethical awareness as a dependent

variable has since been adequately covered (80 studies), but they concurred with Craft

(2013) that judgment and intention are the most frequently studied components of Rest’s

model (Lehnert et al., 2015). Lehnert et al. (2015) did not identify any research that

considered what relationships, if any, exist between ethics training and ethical awareness

or between ethics training and ethical behavior in the workplace. Nor did they distinguish

between the different types of ethics training offered (online or face-to-face or other)

(Lehnert et al., 2015).

The authors of articles in this section all looked at ethical decision-making as a

function of awareness (or sensitivity). They all recognized what Rest articulated in 1979

that in order to determine that an ethical decision needs to be made, the subject must first

recognize that an ethical issue exists (Rest, 1979). The articles in this section reinforced

the identification of the gap, namely, that most of the studies sampled undergraduate or

graduate students (Christensen et al., 2016; Dzuranin et al., 2013; Martinov-Bennie &

Mladenovic, 2015; Noel & Hathorn, 2014; Wang & Thompson, 2013). When industry

groups were studied (Weber, 2015; Weber & Wasieleski, 2013), the participants were not

workers so much as management (ethics and compliance officers). The studies that were

conducted in the healthcare industry (Glasa et al., 2013; Leuter et al., 2013), only studied

ethical awareness and did not measure decision-making.

The references in this section helped support the research design of the present

study to include an assessment of the number of times each participant had completed an

online ethics course. This section, therefore, further describes research about one of the

independent variables for the present study: number of times a worker completed online

ethics training. Beginning with Rest’s (1979) identification of awareness as one of the

variables associated with ethical decision-making, and seeing the ways other researchers

(Christensen et al., 2016; Craft, 2013; Martinov-Bennie & Mladenovic, 2015; Noel &

Hathorn, 2014; and Weber, 2015) addressed the question of awareness, the basis for

wanting to study this component in a sample of workers in a university that specializes in

healthcare degrees began to take form. Weber and Wasieleski’s (2013) analysis of the

effects of ethical awareness on industry (as determined by surveying ethics and

compliance officers) led to solidification of the preliminary question for participants in

this research study (Appendix A).

Gender and ethical decision-making. Reviews of empirical research on ethical

decision-making have not been able to clarify the role of gender in ethical decision-

making. There are gender differences associated with personal integrity (Lau, 2010) and

ethical decision-making (Ritter, 2006) but the data are inconsistent (Davis et al., 2014).

More than just biological sex as the difference, they found the gender differences to be

associated with personality traits and gender role attitudes. For example, women

generally depended on justice and utilitarianism when deciding on moral issues, while

men only considered justice. Men looked at global implications of ethical decisions more

than the context in which those decisions were made. Craft (2013) found that women

were considered to be more ethical than men, but men were more consistent in their

decision-making. Davis, Read, and Powell noted that females are slightly more ethical

than men and tend to report unethical behavior more readily (Davis et al., 2014). Lehnert,

et al. (2015) noted a number of inconsistencies in research that reported significant

differences based on gender (Lehnert et al., 2015). They found that 19 of the 24 studies

they reviewed (79%) reported that females are more ethical than males, but five studies

found that males were more ethical than females (Lehnert et al., 2015). They concurred

with Craft and Davis, Read, and Powell that the preponderance of literature points to

women responding more ethically than men (Lehnert et al., 2015).

Fredericks, Tilley, and Pauknerová (2014) questioned whether the gender

differences observed in ethical-decision-making reflect true differences or whether they

actually reflect contextual differences (Fredericks et al., 2014). They developed four real-

life scenarios and presented them by means of a survey to university business students in

New Zealand and the United States. Briefly, the scenarios were the following: (1) A

colleague was altering time cards which were being billed to a client; (2) Deciding

whether to encourage a big sale to a client who cannot afford the purchase but which

would earn the seller a large commission; (3) Deciding whether to date a subordinate

when there was no company policy about the action; and (4) Noticing a small accounting

error in the records of an old account which over time added significant cost to a former

customer. The error would be time consuming to correct, and nobody else had noticed it.

Statistical analysis revealed significant gender differences with only scenarios

three and four, and only scenario four showed those differences to be significant in both

New Zealand and the United States (Fredericks et al., 2014). The authors suggested that

the differences in scenario three might well be related to differences in power between

the two genders (men asking out a female subordinate) rather than to actual differences in

the ethics of the decision based on gender. When analyzing the differences found in

scenario four, the authors noted that both genders were in favor of telling their

supervisors about the accounting error and informing the former client, but the authors

were surprised by how many men were inclined not to correct the mistake. They

suggested that women are more likely to be influenced by relationships they had

developed with former clients (Fredericks et al., 2014). Fredericks et al. (2014)

summarized that the gender differences found in their study supports the need for gender

diversity in the workplace, for tolerance of gender differences so as to appreciate all sides

of a situation, and for gender collaboration in setting ethical standards for companies

(Fredericks et al., 2014).

Wang and Calvano (2015) conducted research looking specifically at gender and

moral judgment. Their sample population was undergraduate business students enrolled

in an introductory marketing course with an ethics component in a university on the East

Coast. They administered two surveys to participants during weeks eight and 11 of the

14-week. Female students represented 54% of the respondents. Ninety-five percent of the

sample was between 19 and 23 years old. The treatment group attended business ethics

training during the research semester. The control group had no ethics education during

or prior to the research semester. In the first survey, students were presented with one

business-related ethical dilemma: should a business owner notify a supplier of a billing

error and request correct payment which is higher than the first bill. The second dilemma

was non-business related and concerned returning cash found in an envelope to a stranger

(Wang & Calvano, 2015).

Wang and Calvano (2015) found that ethics education had no effect on the non-

business related ethical dilemma, but females were more likely to make an ethical

decision whether they had business ethics education or not. The authors concluded that

this finding supports prior studies showing that women are generally more caring and

empathetic than men and would, therefore, be more likely to make ethical decisions

(Wang & Calvano, 2015). When they analyzed responses to the business-related ethical

dilemma, they found that females who have not received ethics education are more likely

to choose an ethical decision than males. However, when both genders are taking

business ethics courses, males are more likely to act ethically in the business-related

ethical dilemma than females. The authors concluded that females in this study were less

responsive to business ethics education. The authors suggested that an area for further

research might be to study whether and why females are less responsive to business

ethics education than males (Wang & Calvano, 2015).

O’Connell (2015) designed a quantitative research study to measure whether

differences based on gender can explain the moral distress scores of nurses working in

Intensive Care Units (ICUs). Moral distress is the term frequently used in nursing

literature to refer to the disconnect between what a nurse recognizes as the best ethical

decision in a situation and institutional restraints that prevent the nurse from taking that

action (O’Connell, 2015). O’Connell obtained a convenience sample of 31 RNs working

in ICUs in the United States by accessing an online nursing website. Participants

completed a Moral Distress Scale (Revised) instrument. Seventy-seven percent (24

participants) were female. Ninety-three percent (29 participants) were Caucasian. Most

were BSNs (45%) while some were Master’s prepared or had Associates Degrees in

nursing. O’Connell’s study showed a statistically significant difference in moral distress

in males and females. Females reported higher mean moral distress scores than males.

Females with more nursing experience reported the highest mean levels of moral distress.

The most ethically stressful situation for female nurses in this study was the dilemmas

posed by families who chose to prolong life support measures when nurses felt the patient

would not want to continue (O’Connell, 2015). For males, the most distressing dilemma

was initiating life support measures when the nurses felt the actions were futile. This

study provides support for gender-based differences in ethical situations in the healthcare

industry, but the small sample size and homogeneity of the sample considerably limit the

assumptions one can draw from the data.

Society’s increased openness about gender differences and alterations in gender

orientation warrant keeping gender as a variable of interest in empirical studies on ethical

decision-making. If a person who is genetically male identifies more as a female, does

that person make more ethically sound decisions? Are such people more consistent in

their decision-making as males or do they view ethical issues as more utilitarian than

based on justice? Perhaps the differences observed by researchers in the past have

depended on personality traits like conformity, self-control, introversion/extroversion,

and empathy which may reflect traditional societal influences on gender identification.

Are women biologically more interested in the human condition and protecting the

environment, for example, or do those qualities reflect the roles customarily attributed to

women in Western culture?

Studies of ethical decision-making almost always included some discussion of

differences based on gender but the results have not been consistent. The studies included

in this section illustrated some of the different findings related to gender. Lau (2010),

Ritter (2006), Craft (2013), Davis et al. (2014), and Wang and Calvano (2015) found that

women scored higher on measures of ethical decision-making than men, but there were

some interesting differences. Craft (2013) found that men were more consistent in their

decision-making. Lehnert et al. (2015) found discrepancies about gender in ethical

decision-making literature before eventually concluding that women were more ethically

sensitive than males (Lehnert et al., 2015). Fredericks et al. (2014) looked at the

discrepancies in the literature about gender and concluded that the differences, if real,

could be used as a rationale for a more diverse workforce (Fredericks et al., 2014). The

study by O’Connell (2015) was pertinent for the present study because O’Connell’s

sample was workers in the healthcare field (O’Connell, 2015), and the present study

sampled workers at a university specializing in healthcare degrees. O’Connell found that

women nurses working in an ICU had statistically higher scores for moral distress than

male nurses working in the ICU, but O’Connell’s was a small sample (n = 31), and there

was only a small representation of males (5%).Since there was no clear answer as to

whether males or females score higher on ethical decision-making, and since gender data

was easily obtained using the D. I. T. -2 tool, the second research question was

formulated for the present study in the hopes of adding to the literature on this subject.

This section, describes research about the independent variable for RQ2: gender.

Methodology and instrumentation in studies on ethical decision-making.

Noting that there is a discrepancy in what Arab leaders say and what they actually do,

and that business leaders in Saudi Arabia are facing ethical issues as many in the West

are facing, Abu Bakar, Mujtaba, and Medjedel (2015) conducted a research study of

undergraduate Arab business students. The authors looked at a number of variables and

their effects on ethical maturity. Studies of business ethics conducted in a distinctly Arab

culture are uncommon and these authors attempted to shed light on the differences and

similarities between Middle Eastern and Western attitudes. They recognized that the

student population might not be fully generalizable (Abu Bakar et al., 2015).

The tool used by Abu Bakar et al. (2015) was the Personal Business Ethics Score

(PBES) which they translated from English to Arabic (Abu Bakar et al., 2015). The

authors administered this questionnaire to students as a surprise, meaning the students

were given no warning and were not allowed to discuss the questions with each other.

Students were allowed to opt out, but those who participated would be given credit

toward the midterm grade for participation.

The questionnaire takes about 20 minutes to complete. It consists of 21 items, 11

of which are scenarios which had been altered in this instance to be more culturally

meaningful to students in the Middle East. The authors did not include any examples of

how the scenarios had been altered. They acknowledged that over 90% of the students

were less than 24 years old, had no management experience, had never taken an ethics

course or attended ethics training, and were not aware that the university had a code of

ethics. Given this naiveté, they reasoned that the ethical scenarios in the PBES were

probably new to these students (Abu Bakar et al., 2015).

The authors admitted that Saudi Arabia is a patriarchal society and that males do

most of the professional work, but they made an effort to include female students in their

study. Students are segregated in Saudi Arabia, so female students were sampled

separately from male students. The overall response rate was 63% (males 61%; females

48%) (Abu Bakar et al., 2015).

Abu Bakar et al. (2015) used a t-test and Analysis of Variance to compare

differences in means for the independent variables (age, management experience, and

exposure to ethics) and the dependent variable (personal business ethics). As expected

given the limitations of the population described above, they found no statistically

significant differences (p> 0.05). Then the authors conducted a step-wise multiple

regression analysis to test effects of independent variables on the dependent variable.

They explained that step-wise multiple regressions essentially remove the weakest

correlated variables after each regression leaving the best ones for final analysis. The

authors met the minimum ratio of valid cases to independent variables (at least 5 to 1) but

not the preferred ratio. Nevertheless, they were able to say with some confidence that

legal knowledge from enrollment in a business law course was positively related to

PBES, meaning that legal knowledge is statistically associated with personal business

ethics. Students with some legal knowledge tended to have higher scores on PBES and

were considered to be more ethical (Abu Bakar et al., 2015).

Doyle et al. (2013) sampled actual workers (not students) in their study on how

tax preparers deliberate about ethical dilemmas. They used a quasi-experimental design

to compare responses by specialists (tax preparers) and non-specialists (people who are

not professionally associated with tax preparation) with social and tax-based ethical

dilemmas. For the social dilemmas, they used a short form of the original D. I. T. For the

tax-based dilemmas, they used a tax-specific form of the D. I. T. (called the TPDIT)

which the authors developed (Doyle et al., 2013). Examples of both the D. I. T. and the

TPDIT are included as appendices in the article.

Doyle et al. (2013) described a 39% response rate from tax professionals and a

45% response rate from non-specialists to their administration of the research instrument.

They did not define how the instrument was administered and did not provide a

breakdown of the types of work done by the non-specialists. In the specialist category,

they did distinguish between tax preparers in the private sector and Revenue specialists

whose job it is to collect money for the common good. They reasoned that tax preparers

are inclined to do everything within the law (and perhaps slightly outside the law) in

order to provide the best tax result for their private clients. The latter are motivated to

extract the most taxes they can so that there is more to distribute (Doyle et al., 2013).

Both specialists and non-specialists completed the D. I. T. and the TPDIT. The

order in which they took the tests was factored into the analysis using regressions.

Regressions also considered education (below degree level, at degree level, or at

postgraduate level). For social dilemmas, P scores for those without degrees were

significantly lower than for graduates but made no significant difference above the first

degree (Doyle et al., 2013).

GLM Repeated Measures analysis tested the dependent variables within-subjects

and between-subjects for the first three research questions: Does the tax profession attract

people prone to low levels of moral reasoning? Do people reason differently about an

ethical dilemma if it is set in a tax context? Does professional involvement of tax

professionals with tax affect their reasoning in a tax context? Separate GLM Repeated

Measures for the two groups and a MANOVA on both scores confirmed there was no

support for the question about the profession attracting people with lower moral

reasoning. Tax preparers were affected by the context of setting an ethical dilemma in a

tax scenario, as one would expect. Tax preparers also showed a lower level of reasoning

when the dilemma was set in a tax scenario (Doyle et al., 2013).

The researchers posed a fourth question. Does the socialization/training of tax

professionals affect their reasoning in a tax context? The purpose of posing this question

was to see if tax preparers in the private sector function at higher levels of moral

reasoning in Kohlberg’s model than tax preparers in the public sector (Revenue

specialists). A final GLM Repeated Measures analysis allowed them to consider within-

subject measures and between-subject measures and control for order effects. There was

a statistically significant interaction (p<0.01) between context and the type of participant.

Indeed, private sector specialists did employ lower levels of moral reasoning when

deliberating in the tax scenario (TPDIT). Public sector (Revenue) specialists scored

almost the same as non-specialists in this area. All participants scored about the same in

the social context, but there was a clear distinction between tax professionals when

evaluating ethical issues in a tax context (Doyle et al., 2013). This study showed no effect

on moral reasoning with regard to age or gender.

One conclusion reached by Doyle et al. (2013) was that ethics training might

improve ethical reasoning as Rest (1979) suggested. In particular, the authors observed

that other researchers have shown improvement in ethical decision-making by accounting

students after taking an ethics course, but whether students transferred their improved

decision-making as a student to actual dilemmas in the workplace still could not be

determined. They recommended that ethics training for tax professionals include tax-

specific scenarios, perhaps alongside social scenarios, so that students can learn how to

reason through ethical dilemmas in the same manner consistently (Doyle et al., 2013).

Noel and Hathorn (2014) used the D. I. T. -2 and conducted multiple linear

regressions to examine gender and ethics training, and cognitive moral development,

alone and in combination, as predictors of ethical decision-making, ethical intent, and

ethical awareness (Noel & Hathorn, 2014). They compared scores from students and

from professionals who had received ethics training and were able to control for social

desirability bias (SDB). Ethical awareness was measured on a five-point scale and ethical

intent was measured using the Multidimensional Ethics Scale.

Their sample included 194 women (43.3%) and 254 men. Using independent t-

tests of gender and the ethical variables in their study (awareness, intent, and judgment or

decision-making), they found a significant difference between men and women in

awareness scores and decision-making scores but not in intent (Noel & Hathorn, 2014).

However, women scored significantly higher in ethical intent than men with the addition

of SDB (Noel & Hathorn, 2014).

After identifying the predictor variables, Noel and Hathorn (2014) conducted

multiple regression analysis and found that ethics training significantly predicted the

variance in ethical decision-making after controlling for the other variables they studied,

R2 change = .01, F(1, 439) = 4.49, p< .05). Additional multiple regression analyses

showed that ethics training significantly predicted the variance in ethical intent (R2

change = .04, F(1, 441) = 30.19, p< .001), and the variance in ethical awareness (R2

change = .27, F(5,442) = 31.91, p< .001) (Noel & Hathorn, 2014).

Lehnert et al. (2015) criticized the continued use of quantitative methods such as

questionnaires, surveys, and scenarios to study ethical decision-making (Lehnert et al.,

2015). They wanted to see mixed method designs to explore the underlying reasons

behind employees’ choices in ethically sensitive situations and to see develop more

encompassing theories. Lehnert et al. (2015) observed that the majority of empirical

research on ethical decision-making has been conducted with convenience samples of

students only (73 of 139 such studies), or combinations of students and other workers.

They proposed that researchers be more mindful of generalizing their findings to the

general population when sampling student populations, especially since there is some

evidence suggesting that older people make better ethical decisions than younger people

(Alonso-Almeida, Fernández de Navarrete, & Rodriguez-Pomeda, 2015). Lehnert et al.

(2015) would like to see if there are other factors, like experience working in companies

with strong ethical cultures (Jennings, 2012), longer exposure to positive role models

(Baden, 2014), or station in society (Abu Bakar et al., 2015) in older people that

influences them to make better decisions.

Mudrack and Mason (2013) questioned the value of using scenarios to measure

ethical judgment, especially when researchers fail to include the actual scenarios in their

reports. It is difficult to extrapolate meaning from studies in which similar but slightly

different scenarios have been used with similar but slightly different populations.

Mudrack and Mason tackled this problem by surveying the literature in which ethical

judgment was measured using responses to vignettes. They identified several themes

among the vignettes. The most common was the Dilemma theme in which a scenario

presents a clear dilemma with two choices, neither of which is particularly satisfying.

Other themes were Conspiracy, Sophie’s Choice, Runaway Trolley, and Whistle

Blowing. The authors carefully considered the instances in which each theme would yield

the best information. For example, they observed that Dilemma vignettes might

appropriately reveal relationships in ethical judgments when the protagonist has to act in

an unethical manner or risk serious consequences. Each theme has its own strengths and

weaknesses, and they proposed that future research be directed to describing and defining

those different applications. Mudrack and Mason emphasized the need for clarity when

designing scenarios to measure ethical awareness or ethical judgment (Mudrack &

Mason, 2013).

A number of other researchers have used vignettes, case studies, and stories as

teaching tools for ethics education. Groessl (2013) described the use of case studies and

stories in a multidisciplinary ethics education course conducted with nursing students and

social work students. The nursing students worked entirely online in the course. The

social work students worked online and had face-to-face discussions in classes. The

strengths of the program were that students had the opportunity to consider ethical

situations from different professional perspectives and to recognize that there were also

similarities (Groessl, 2013).

Tong and Lipman (2013) developed a case study to illustrate how to analyze a

difficult medical ethics dilemma. The case study concerned a 67-year-old man with

pulmonary fibrosis and heart failure who had recently signed a do-not-resuscitate (DNR)

order. During the admission in question, the man developed breathing difficulty and

cardiac decline and would require intensive care to support his worsening condition. The

dilemma was that the one intensive care unit bed available was traditionally held for

emergent admission of patients with acute heart attacks and the admitting officer did not

want to fill that bed with a patient who had DNR status. Tong’s part of the commentary

on the case study emphasized the need for the participants to understand what DNR status

means in the state in which they are working and for there to be some understanding of

who makes decisions about admitting patients to the ICU (Tong & Lipman, 2013). Tong

mentioned the scarce resources available to treat the critically ill and how practitioners

need to work together to find a solution that protects both the patient presently in need of

acute care and that of the potential patient needing acute care.

Lipman analyzed the case by first discussing the decision of how best to treat the

patient before them (Tong & Lipman, 2013). Pulmonary fibrosis carries a grave

prognosis even in the best of circumstances. Would placing him on a ventilator prolong

his life or prolong his death? What were the patient’s wishes given the risks and benefits

of intubating him and placing him in the ICU on a ventilator? Lipman included the call

for a discussion with patients about end-of-life care when discussing treatment goals with

patients who signed DRN orders (Tong & Lipman, 2013). The published report of this

discussion illustrates the different ways ethical dilemmas can be analyzed and decided

and provides an example for practitioners.

Recognizing the complexity of ethical dilemmas such as the one described above,

Antes et al. (2012) conducted a study of undergraduate business students using personal

case studies and reflection as a means of confronting ethical problems (Antes et al.,

2012). The authors hypothesized that persons would make better ethical decisions if they

applied knowledge from previous personal experiences and reflected on those previous

experiences. Additionally, they reasoned that using positively framed case examples and

process-oriented reflection would provide the best results. They recruited 134

undergraduate student volunteers (mostly male, mostly Caucasian, mostly business

majors) who were offered extra credit for participation in the study. The volunteers were

provided with simulation scenarios selected to be meaningful to students since most of

them had experience working in retail stores. They were to consider the scenarios from

the management role. Each scenario posed a distinct type of ethical problem that would

greatly impact the company (Antes et al., 2012). Results showed that individuals did

make better decisions when they applied knowledge from prior experiences, especially

when those experiences were positive, and when they reflected on prior outcomes when

confronted with a new dilemma. The authors suggested that there might be cases that are

more effective than others in stimulating higher-order ethical decision-making and that

educators would benefit from further research in determining the best cases to use for

ethics instruction (Antes et al., 2012).

Swanson (2015) was also a proponent of using stories to convey ethical content to

learners (Swanson, 2015). Swanson recognized that, although case studies are frequently

used to teach ethics, students are not always engaged in the process and fail to recognize

the moral content in the stories. Swanson developed guidelines for using fictional stories

with appropriate ethical content (FSEC) to bring abstract terms to life in a non-

threatening manner. Rather than presenting a business case scenario with the facts of the

case and engage students in dissecting it, Swanson suggested that the case be presented as

a story with a plot.

Swanson illustrated this point by showing two ways of conveying the same

information. In a traditional business case study format, the information might be stated

as follows: “The culture at ABC Corp was intensely competitive” (Swanson, 2015, p. 4).

The same information stated in FSEC case study sentence format might read: “When

John arrived in the lobby of ABC Corp. he noticed no smiles or eye contact among the

crowd of blue-suited workers who hurried ahead of their fellow executives to win spots in

the elevators” (Swanson, 2015, pp. 4-5). Swanson pointed out that the same content was

conveyed in the FSEC sentence in a way that allowed students to visualize the people

who worked at the company and to enter into the culture of the company (Swanson,

2015). This first FSEC classification was referred to as narrative and dialog. Swanson’s

other classifications for FSECs are: entertainment quality (must captivate and stimulate

students’ imaginations), degree of content transparency (the minimal amount required to

convey the message), story length (shorter is better), and ethical message (carefully

embedded in the story so students develop their ability to analyze moral situations)

(Swanson, 2015). Problems using stories to teach ethics content include the difficulty of

tailoring stories so that they appeal to today’s culturally diverse students, and the

difficulty in determining how individual students are interpreting the stories (Swanson,

2015). The author points to other research which shows that students correctly answering

questions about ethical dilemmas does not necessary mean that they will make ethically

correct decisions when confronting them in the workplace (Swanson, 2015).

Taking into consideration the admonition of Lehnert et al. (2015) to use

qualitative or mixed methodology but conscious of the need for consistency to close one

more gap in the literature, the present research study employed quantitative methodology

(correlational and causal-comparative) with a validated instrument (with scenarios)

(Lehnert et al., 2015). Five stories or scenarios were presented in the D. I. T. -2 to

measure ethical decision-making and how people interpret dilemmas: (1) Knowing that a

rich man in famine-struck village is hoarding food, a man has to decide whether or not to

steal some of the rich man’s food for his starving family; (2) A newspaper reporter has to

decide whether or not to disclose a political candidate’s minor shop-lifting charge from

20 years ago; (3) The chairman of a district’s school board has to decide whether or not

to continue having open meetings after the first open meeting erupts in incivility and

subsequent threatening phone calls to board members; (4) A patient in the end-stages of

cancer begs her physician for increased doses of pain medication which will likely kill

her; and (5) Students on a university campus take over the administration building after

demonstrating in the streets over the White House decision to send troops to help with

political unrest in a South American oil-rich country. For a closer look at one of the

examples, “Cancer” (Story #4) is described as follows:

Mrs. Bennett is 62 years old and in the last phases of colon cancer. She is in

terrible pain and asks the doctor to give her more pain-killer medicine. The doctor

has given her the maximum safe dose already and is reluctant to increase the

dosage because it would probably hasten her death. In a clear and rational mental

state, Mrs. Bennett says that she realizes this, but she wants to end her suffering

even if it means ending her life. Should the doctor give her an increased dosage?

(Rest & Narvaez, 1998, “Cancer – (Story #4),” para. 1).

Survey participants were next prompted to respond to the following question: “Do

you favor the action of giving more medicine?” (Rest & Narvaez, 1998, “Cancer – (Story

#4),” answer sheet). The choices were: “(1) Should give Mrs. Bennett an increased

dosage to make her die. (2) Can’t decide. (3) Should not give her an increased dosage.”

(Rest & Narvaez, 1998, “Cancer – (Story #4),” answer sheet).

There are 12 issues identified in the D. I. T. -2 for each of the scenarios. For each

issue, respondents were prompted to rate them in terms of importance (1 meaning great

importance, 2 meaning much importance, 3 meaning some importance, 4 meaning little

importance, and 5 meaning no importance). The 12 issues identified for the “Cancer”

scenario were:

1. Isn’t the doctor obligated by the same laws as everybody else if giving an overdose would be the same as killing her?

2. Wouldn’t society be better off without so many laws about what doctors can and cannot do?

3. If Mrs. Bennett dies, would the doctor be legally responsible for malpractice?

4. Does the family of Mrs. Bennett agree that she should get more painkiller medicine?

5. Is the painkiller medicine an active heliotropic drug?

6. Does the state have the right to force continued existence on those who don’t want to live?

7. Is helping to end another’s life ever a responsible act of cooperation?

8. Would the doctor show more sympathy for Mrs. Bennett by giving the medicine or not?

9. Wouldn’t the doctor feel guilty from giving Mrs. Bennett so much drug that she died?

10. Should only God decide when a person’s life should end?

11. Shouldn’t society protect everyone against being killed?

12. Where should society draw the line between protecting life and allowing someone to die if the person wants to?

Finally, survey participants were asked to select which are the top four most

important of the 12 issues; that is, they were asked to rank the 12 issues in order of

importance. The schema was posed with just enough information to activate the

participant’s moral schema, but not enough to direct his or her judgment. The participant

had to fill in the areas that were not provided, decide which items made sense to them,

and rate and rank them in gradations from highly important to not important at all. The D.

I. T. -2 test allows the participant to activate his or her own ethical decision-making skills

when answering the questions. The presumption is that these are the same ethical

decision-making skills they use in real life (Rest, Narvaez, Thoma, & Bebeau, 1999). It

made sense to subject empirical research on ethical decision-making in the present study

to the same measurements that have been validated and replicated by other researchers so

as to better compare apples to apples. Confounding the findings with new approaches

would not have been beneficial for this study.

The literature review on the different methodologies and tools used to measure

ethical-decision making helped to solidify the decision to use a quantitative methodology

and Rest’s D. I. T. -2 tool. The Personal Business Ethics Score (PBES) used by Abu

Bakar et al. (2015) and Noel and Hathorn (2014) showed how multiple regressions could

help identify which of several independent variables (if any) had a statistically significant

relationship with ethical decision-making in undergraduate business students (Noel &

Hathorn, 2014). The study by Mudrack and Mason (2013) illustrated how vignettes or

scenarios can be used in quantitative research of ethical decision-making (Mudrack &

Mason, 2013). This was important to explore for the present study because the D. I. T. -2

tool contains a number of scenarios with issues that require rating and ranking. Mudrack

and Mason (2013) emphasized the importance of clarity in the scenarios (Mudrack &

Mason, 2013). Examining the D. I. T. -2 tool for clarity was undertaken before deciding

upon that tool for this study.

The literature review was initially undertaken broadly in order to identify the most

fitting theoretical framework. From Rest’s (1979) framework, the review was extended to

look at the research of others who had used Rest’s framework to study ethical decision-

making. Themes began to emerge, the most salient being the effect of business culture on

ethical decision-making, and ways of conducting and evaluation ethics training. The gap

revealed itself as study after study referred to samples of undergraduate or graduate

students, and the fact that many studies of ethics training did not include the form of

training (face-to-face or online, one time or multiple programs). The discrepancy of

findings regarding gender as a variable in ethical decision-making turned into a viable

research question, given the availability of the data as part of the D. I. T. -2 tool.

Summary

Within Chapter 2, the body of research on ethics training and ethical decision-

making was described and examined. Included was a description of the methodology,

instrumentation, and findings of studies using undergraduate and graduate students,

followed by the methodology, instrumentation, and findings of the few studies that have

been conducted using workers in the workplace. The studies that looked at gender were

emphasized since that individual factor was easily factored into the present research study

and since the findings, so far, have been equivocal.

The development of Rest’s Theory of Moral Development was described as was

the evolution of the Defining Issues Test (D. I. T.), an instrument used by many

researchers to measure ethical decision-making. Publications describing how the D. I. T.

has been used and the way the findings have been interpreted were reviewed. The

following themes were explored: the effect of organizational climate/culture on

organizational ethics and the importance of education on moral development. The

variable of gender differences in ethical decision-making was explored.

In this chapter, other studies that used quantitative designs were reviewed, in

particular, those studies in which multiple regressions were used to measure and analyze

factors contributing to ethical decision-making. Similarly, the present research study lent

itself to quantitative design because all the data was collected in nominal format. The

statistical analyses to which the data was subjected allowed relationships between and

among variables to be assessed as well as the statistical significance of the findings

(Johnson & Christensen, 2012). In the next chapter, the methodology of this study is

presented in greater detail.

Chapter 3: Methodology

Introduction

The purpose of this quantitative correlational and causal-comparative study was to

determine the relationship between the number of completions of online ethics training

and levels of ethical decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private,

for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees, and to examine whether there

are statistically significant differences in ethical decision-making based on gender. Rather

than measuring ethical decision-making by undergraduate and graduate students, this

research looked specifically at workers who participated in online ethics training. This

study codified variables for online ethics training and gender. The dependent variable,

level of ethical decision-making, was measured using a validated tool (D. I. T. -2).

Numerical data for the independent variables and the dependent variable were subjected

to statistical analyses. The results from this study contribute to the field by providing

businesses with data to help them determine whether online ethics training is a

worthwhile investment and to consider other variables when analyzing ethical decision-

making in the workplace.

In this chapter, the research problem is examined in relationship to the research

questions and their corresponding hypotheses. The methodology and design are described

and the reason for their selection is explained. The choice of the sample population and

how data was collected and analyzed is included in this chapter. This is also the chapter

in which ethical considerations and research limitations are explained.

Statement of the Problem

This study proposed the following problem statement: It is not known if and to

what extent there is a relationship between the number of completions of online ethics

training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers in the workplace, and if

there are statistically significant differences in ethical decision-making based on gender.

Ethical problems occur in the workplace for many reasons including an emphasis on

profits above all else, a collision of cultures, and the greediness of a few (Liu & Qiu,

2015). Professional and corporate codes of conduct provide frameworks from which

ethical issues can be studied (Kaptein, 2015), but they are not foolproof. Individual

factors like ethical sensitivity, vulnerability to peer pressure, and personal values also

contribute to the ethical decisions made in the workplace (Guerci et al., 2015).

Since the goals of ethics training include increasing a person’s sensitivity to

ethical situations and providing guidelines for how to deal with them (Hergenrader,

2010), it is important that the effect of such programs be assessed to determine if they are

meeting those goals. Convenience samples of students enrolled in undergraduate or

graduate programs have provided considerable insight into the effects of ethics training in

academic settings (Buck, 2015; Dzuranin et al., 2013; Gunia et al., 2012) but there is little

evidence to suggest that academic knowledge of ethics carries over into the workplace. A

study designed to look at the relationship between online ethics training in the workplace

and levels of ethical decision-making has the goal of providing businesses with data to

determine the value of such programs. Are businesses getting their money’s worth out of

online ethics-training programs?

The current study attempted to shed light on the relationship, if any, between the

number of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making

by workers in the workplace. It provided a broad look at this subject because the sample

population was not limited to a particular job description, like banking professionals,

nurses, managers, academicians, or administrators. The sample population was men and

women with varying job descriptions and levels of education who are employed by a for-

profit university which specializes in healthcare.

Research Questions and Hypotheses

Gaps in the scientific literature on ethical decision-making raise the questions that

were central to this study, namely, is there a statistically significant relationship between

the number of times a person completes online ethics training and the level of ethical

decision-making and are there statistically significant differences in ethical decision-

making based on gender? Ethics training usually consists of a presentation of basic

ethical principles and how they relate to the business model of an institution. Online

ethics training is that which is provided by a computer-based program. In some

businesses, online ethics education is part of the orientation program for newly hired

employees. Continuing education programs for some professionals include computer-

based ethics material. In the current study, participants were instructed to indicate broadly

how many times they had completed online ethics training offered at the target facility or

elsewhere. Gender was defined as male or female for the purposes of this study, and the

answers were dichotomously scored as one for male and two for female. Level of ethical

decision-making was measured using the D. I. T. -2 tool. The tool provides for rankings

and ratings of five ethical scenarios. A participant’s responses are analyzed and scored by

the Center for the Study of Ethical Development at the University of Alabama, which

maintains the database for all studies using the D. I. T. -2 tool. The scores indicate a

participant’s level or score according to criteria for Stage 2/3 ethical decision-making,

Stage 4 ethical decision-making, or Stage 5 ethical decision-making, and there is an

overall score for ethical decision-making which is called the N2 score. These ranks and

ratings are described on below under Instrumentation.

The central question that arose from the gap identified in the literature was

divided into the two following research questions and hypotheses so that they could be

quantitatively measured and analyzed:

RQ1: To what extent, if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between

number of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical

decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit

university that specializes in healthcare degrees? The independent variable is

number of times a worker completed online ethics training. The dependent

variable is level of ethical decision-making

H10: There is no statistically significant relationship between number of

completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making

by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that

specializes in healthcare degrees.

H1a: There is a statistically significant relationship between number of completions

of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at

the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees.

RQ2: Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores? The

independent variable is gender. The dependent variable is ethical decision-

making.

H20: There is no statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers, as represented by mean N2 scores.

H2a: There is a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers, as represented by mean N2 scores.

Research Methodology

Quantitative research seeks primarily to explain phenomena while qualitative

research explores meaning (Babbie, 2013). Most research on ethics education has used

quantitative methodology, which supports pre- and post-testing, for example, to measure

the effects of an educational approach on ethical behavior (Watts et al., 2017). However,

given the constructs involved in the complex actions of recognizing that an ethical

situation exists, deciding to act, and then acting, there is much to be gained by

considering a qualitative approach. With qualitative studies, the research can explore why

people make the decisions they make, not just measure the levels of those decisions

(Watts et al., 2017). Theory development that might shed more light on the best

instructional methods for ethics education are well-suited to qualitative exploration

(Watts et al., 2017).

In fact, a few qualitative studies have been employed to study ethics education.

Watts et al. (2017) conducted a systematic review of studies of ethics education

employing qualitative methodology. They found that, of the 24 studies about ethics

education published between 2000 and 2015 that were strictly qualitative (not mixed-

methods), most used thematic analysis and grounded theory to evaluate ethics education.

Watts and colleagues identified a number of gaps in best practices among the qualitative

studies they reviewed, and recommend that better descriptive clarity would make it easier

to replicate qualitative studies of ethics education (Watts et al., 2017).

This study was conducted in order to investigate whether there was a statistically

significant relationship between number of completions of online ethics training and

levels ethical decision-making by workers in the workplace, and whether there were

statistically significant differences in ethical decision-making based on gender. Since

most of the studies of ethics education are quantitative, and given that best practices in

qualitative methodology for studying ethics education are not well-established, a

quantitative approach was selected for this research. In particular, a type of quantitative

research, correlational, which uses statistical methods to explain relationships between

variables (Johnson & Christensen, 2012) and the extent or degree of the relationships

between those variables (Landrum & Garza, 2015), seemed most appropriate for

answering the first research question posed in this study. A causal-comparative approach

allows a researcher to look at the means of independent groups when the dependent

variable is continuous (Laerd, 2015). Considering this approach, an independent-samples

t-test was conducted to answer the second research question. Independent variables in

this study are number of completions of online ethics training and gender. The dependent

variable is level of ethical decision-making as measured by N2 scores.

In this study, the number of times a participant completed online ethics training

was measured by collecting their responses to a question posed at the beginning of the

survey: How many times have you completed the online ethics training offered at this

campus or elsewhere? The possible responses were never, one time, two times, three

times, and more than three times, and the responses were coded from one to five. A

Spearman’s correlation was conducted to test the first research question: To what extent,

if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between number of completions of

online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at the North

Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees?

Spearman’s correlation was chosen over Pearson’s because the first two assumptions of

the Pearson’s correlation is that both variables must be continuous and paired. In this

study, the independent variable and dependent variable for RQ1 are not continuous and

paired. An independent-samples t-test was selected to answer the second research

question: Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making between

male and female workers, as represented by mean N2 scores? The independent variable is

gender. The dependent variable is ethical decision-making.

The dependent variable for both research questions, level of ethical decision-

making, was measured in this study using Rest’s D. I. T. -2 test. The D. I. T. -2 test was

administered as a link on SurveyMonkey®. Initial analysis of the responses was done by

the Center for the Study of Ethical Development which owns the tool. Statistical analysis

of these groups of data allowed a thorough look at the interaction of the variables and

their relationships.

Research Design

The research problem guides the research questions, and the research questions

guide the kinds of designs that can be used to find the answers (Babbie, 2013). The

research questions in this study directed an investigation into whether there was a

statistically significant relationship between the number of completions of online ethics

training (independent variable) and the level of ethical decision-making (dependent

variable) in a naturally occurring setting (a workplace) without manipulating any of the

variables. It also sought to compare differences in ethical decision-making based on

gender. The study provided data about possible additional relationships between levels of

ethical decision-making and incidental variables, such as education levels, ethnicity, and

age, but the purpose of the study was not to explore or discover new information about

those relationships or differences. The study looked at relationships and mean

differences, not cause and effect. The study considered variables, not phenomena. For

these reasons, experimental and quasi-experimental designs and qualitative designs were

not appropriate. The study lent itself to quantitative correlational and causal-comparative

designs because their ability to use statistics to examine and display relationships

between variables, compare groups that may not be evident using other research designs

(Babbie, 2013).

The population for this study was a convenience sample of associates/employees

at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university specializing in healthcare

degrees who had completed online ethics training at the target facility or elsewhere. This

company was identified as one with a robust online ethics-training program. The

employees who had completed the company’s online ethics training had been given

information about the company’s code of ethics which described an organizational

culture of high ethical standards. The training included an introduction to workplace

ethics and a section on workplace harassment prevention. Several short video segments

were interspersed in the ethics presentation. These video segments highlighted incidents

of workplace challenges to honesty and integrity, how co-workers could support or

undermine an organization’s culture, and how individuals could approach ethically

challenging situations. However, not all employees had completed any online ethics

training. Ten participants (17.2%) had never completed ethics training.

The study was open to all levels of employees on the North Texas campus at this

organization, excluding student workers. The research was not limited to a particular job

description. The study had support from campus leadership, and every

associate/employee was encouraged to participate. However, participation was not

mandatory. For those who participated, online consent was obtained prior to allowing

access to the link to the study. The data collection occurred during one block of time

between December 5, 2016 and April 10, 2017. It originated with an email from the

Administrative Assistant at the university to all full-time and adjunct workers. Reminders

were given in person at faculty meetings until 70 surveys were in the researcher’s

SurveyMonkey account.

One research variable in the study (gender) was dichotomously coded from

demographic data obtained as part of the D. I. T. -2 test. Data for the other research

variables were obtained by measuring the responses provided to a question about the

number of times participants completed online ethics training, and by measuring rank and

ratings responses to the D. I. T. -2 test as defined by Rest. The D. I. T. -2 test collected

data about other factors that have been studied by ethics researchers, including questions

about age, race/ethnicity, U.S. citizenship, political liberalism, English as the primary

language, and education level. These other factors are considered incidental factors for

the purpose of this study, and, although of interest, were not subjected to statistical

analysis.

After checking assumptions about the research design (appropriate categories of

variables) and assumptions about the data (monotonicity between variables), a

Spearman’s correlational analysis was conducted to correlate levels of ethical decision-

making to number of completions of online ethics training (RQ1). Further inferential

analysis using independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the means of levels

of ethical decision-making by male workers and female workers at this facility (RQ2).

The t-test was analyzed for the assumptions of homogeneity of variances, normality, and

independence (Johnson & Christensen, 2012. These tests are more fully described below.

Population and Sample Selection

Site authorization was obtained by discussing the research proposal with the

Executive Director and providing the draft proposal to the university Dean by email. The

email suggested how the results might benefit the university, described how

confidentiality would be maintained, assured that the study would allow participants to

opt out, and assured that the survey would result in minimal disruption; thereafter, written

approval for the study was obtained. This was followed by receiving IRB approval from

the private, for-profit university of which the North Texas campus is a part.

The investigation was conducted at a private, for-profit university specializing in

healthcare degrees. The site was purposefully chosen because this company places

considerable emphasis on academic integrity and maintains a robust employee ethics-

training program which is provided online. The sample was a convenience sample of all

full-time and adjunct employees on the North Texas campus of the particular private, for-

profit target university. Full-time and adjunct employees work under a variety of job

descriptions; there are workers with varying educational levels in the workforce; the

cultural and professional backgrounds are varied. This company was identified as one

with a strong online ethics-training program. Ethics training was conducted as part of the

general orientation of new employees. There was no randomization of participants.

Rather, all persons employed at the university were offered the opportunity to participate

in the study with the exception of student workers.

Participants who fit the sample population received an invitational email at their

company email address which was initially sent from the Administrative Assistant at the

campus. From there, they were prompted to a SurveyMonkey® window that described

the research study in more detail, explained how confidentiality would be maintained,

invited them to indicate their agreement to participate, and further linked them to a

preliminary question: How many times have you completed the online ethics training

offered at this campus or elsewhere? The options were never, one time, two times, three

times, or more than three times. Of the 58 usable surveys, one participant failed to answer

the question about the number of times he/she had completed online ethics training and

10 participants (17.2%) indicated they had never completed online ethics training.

A priori power analysis using G*Power 3.1.9.2 (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, &

Buchner, 2007) revealed that the proposed population sample size of 67 was appropriate

for a quantitative correlational study at an 80% confidence level (adjusted down from

95% due to small sample size) with 5% margin of error for a total population of 80

(Appendix I). Bebeau (2002) reported effect sizes in research studies of ethical decision-

making using the D. I. T. tool for ethics instruction in several professional preparation

programs. Bebeau found an average of 0.45 for the effect size for nursing preparation (the

range was 0.16 to 0.65) (Bebeau, 2002). Using this reported effect size as a basis for

comparison, the anticipated effect size for the present study was Cohen’s (1988) medium

effect size, d = .50.

The D. I. T. -2 requires approximately 30 minutes to complete. The D. I. T. -2 has

a reliability check built into the analysis which is called a New Check total score. When a

New Check total score for any participant is over 200, the participant is removed, or

purged, from the study (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). Online surveys were collected between

December 5, 2016 and April 10, 2017 with the goal being to obtain 67 usable surveys.

Seventy surveys were obtained, but only 58 were deemed usable by the Center for the

Study of Ethical Development (a 17.14% removal rate). There was no attempt to contact

participants after they submitted their survey responses other than to elicit their feedback

about the survey and to thank them for their participation. No participants were given the

opportunity to re-submit their surveys, so attrition of participants was not addressed in

this study.

Instrumentation

Online access to the D. I. T. -2 survey was obtained from and scored by the

Center for the Study of Ethical Development, 307 Carmichael Hall, University of

Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 (http://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/dit-scoring/). The test

uses ethical dilemmas to test moral reasoning. Participants were presented with five

narratives written in the third person describing a situation to which the third party must

respond. Participants decided the best course of action for the third party by selecting

“should do,” shouldn’t do,” or “can’t decide.” Then participants graded the decision

according to 12 statements devised by Rest to correspond with different stages of ethical

reasoning. Finally, of the 12 statements, participants were asked to select the four most

important ones and sort them in order of importance.

Online surveys were collected between December 5, 2016 and April 10, 2017.

The data were exported electronically to the Center for the Study of Ethical Development

for scoring. The process for scoring is that the four most important statements are given

weight to correspond with the highest stage of moral reasoning. This weighted process

results in a “P” score which was so named because it stands for “principled moral

thinking” (Rest, 1986). Some authors distinguish the “P” score as “P%” so as not to be

mistaken for the statistical p score. For the purposes of this research study, “P” was used

to represent the result of the weighted score for the highest stage of moral reasoning.

Hundreds of studies have been conducted in the United States using Rest’s tools (Doyle

et al., 2013). Generally, junior high school students have “P” scores in the 20s and moral

philosophers score in the 60s, with gradations in between for interval levels of maturity

and learning. The mean “P” score for this study sample was 30. The levels of ethical

decision-making are expressed as N2 scores which demonstrate the degree to which one

uses higher order ethical decision-making. The N2 scores generally range in the 40s for

college students, in the 50s for professionals, and in the 60s for experts in moral

philosophy or political science (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). The N2 scores for this sample

of workers at the North Texas campus of a for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees ranged from 3.5 to 63 (mean = 26).

Seven criteria were used to determine if the D. I. T. -2 indeed measures moral

judgment development: (1) differences in age and educational level; (2) improvements

over time; (3) relationships between general cognitive skills and moral reasoning; (4)

changes based on ethical training; (5) relationships between decision-making and

behavior; (6) relationships between political outlook and ethical decision-making scores

(Thoma & Dong, 2014). The specificity of the criteria helped to establish the validity of

the tool. Additionally, D. I. T. -2 studies showed that the results were stable when used

with standard psychometric measurement tools and were discriminately valid for

distinguishing between liberal and conservative political beliefs and between verbal

reasoning and general intelligence quota (I.Q.) tests (Thoma & Dong, 2014). There is less

than one-half of a percent difference in the D. I. T. -2 between males and females (Thoma

& Dong, 2014).

On the other hand, levels of education have been found to be strong predictors of

variance in scores using this tool (Thoma & Dong, 2014). There are 15 education levels

classified in the demographics of the D. I. T. -2 test. Full-time and adjunct workers at the

target institution were invited to participate in this research project, regardless of job title

or education level. The variable for education level is incorporated as part of the D. I. T. -

2 tool. Participants taking the D. I. T. -2 test are asked to respond to the following: What

is your level of education? Please mark the highest level of formal education you are

currently enrolled in or have completed. The responses to the demographic question

about education level are analyzed at the Center for the Study of Ethical Development,

and the raw data are included in the spreadsheet sent to researchers using the tool. The

codes for response options are listed in Table 1.

Table 1 Codes for Education Levels in the D. I. T. -2 Test

Code Description

1 Grades 7, 8, 9

2 Grades 10, 11, 12

3 Vocational/Technical School

4 Junior college

5 Freshmen in a Bachelor’s Program

6 Sophomore in a Bachelor’s Program

7 Junior in a Bachelor’s Program

8 Senior in a Bachelor’s Program

9 Professional Degree (MD, MBA, JD, RN)

10 Professional Degree in Divinity

11 Master of Education (M.Ed.)

12 Master of Science in Nursing (MSN)

13 Doctor of Education (Ed.D), Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP)

14 Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

15 Other

Scoring for the D. I. T. -2 provides a breakdown of responses based on moral

development stages as defined by Kohlberg (1969) and Rest (1979). These

developmental stages or schemas are referred to as developmental indices. Level 1 is also

referred to as a Pre-Conventional/Personal Interest Schema with two stages: (Stage 1)

Avoiding punishment; (Stage 2) To serve one’s own needs. Level 2 is referred to as a

Conventional/Maintain Norms Schema with two stages: (Stage 3) Needing to be a good

person in your own eyes and those of others and believing in the Golden Rule; (Stage 4)

To keep the institution going and avoid breakdown of the system. Level 3 is the Post-

Conventional Schema with two defined stages: (Stage 5) Abiding by laws for the welfare

of all and the protection of all people’s rights – the greatest good for the greatest number;

and (Stage 6) Believing in the validity of universal moral principles and a sense of

personal commitment to them. The developmental stages were further refined by

combining some of them into schemas (Rest, Thoma, & Edwards, 1997). The D. I. T. -2

analysis from the Center for the Study of Ethical Development currently provides

numerical scores for each participant’s Stage 2/3 (Personal Interest Schema Score), Stage

4 (Maintaining Norms), and Stage 5/6 (Post-conventional or P Score) performance. It

also provides one N2 score per participant which considers rankings of items in terms of

importance (one to four) and ratings of items in terms of importance (one to five) (Rest,

Thoma, & Edwards, 1997). The N2 index is the number used to represent a participant’s

moral development which is the measure for ethical decision-making. Therefore, the

analysis from the Center for the Study of Ethical Development provides numerical scores

for each participant’s Stage 2/3, Stage 4, Stage 5/6 (the P score), and N2 performance.

The N2 scores for this study were between 3.54 and 63.23 (mean = 26).

Rest’s D. I. T. -2 test for ethical decision-making has been extensively tested and

validated (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). Bebeau and Thoma reported Cronbach’s alpha as

0.81. Rest and colleagues built reliability detectors into the D. I. T. in the form of

reliability checks (Rest et al., 1997). These were further refined in the D. I. T. -2 in what

are called the New Check total score. When the New Check total score is over 200, the

participant’s survey is marked as “purged” (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). These checks help

pick up instances when participants fill in the answer bubbles to form a Christmas tree,

for example (Rest et al., 1997). The New Check also tags surveys with excessive missing

data, inconsistencies among the rating and ranking items, or surveys with a

disproportionate number of meaningless items selected (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). More

reliable scores can be determined if the “purged” surveys are discarded.

In order to measure the independent variable for RQ1 (number of times

participants had completed online ethics training), responses were collected for a

preliminary survey question: How many times have you completed the online ethics

training at this campus or elsewhere? Study participants could have completed the online

ethics training offered at the campus during orientation for newly hired employees. It was

possible that some employees never took the online ethics training offered at the campus

or elsewhere, so the choices were never, one time, two times, three times, more than three

times (Appendix A). The independent variable for RQ1 is an ordinal level of

measurement.

Gender was one of the demographic variables embedded in the D. I. T. -2 tool and

was the independent variable for RQ2 in this study. Responses were scored as one for

male and two for female. The level of measurement for gender is nominal. An

independent-samples t-test was run in order to compare the mean N2 scores of male and

female workers. N2 scores are scale measurements.

Validity

The Center for the Study of Ethical Development has collected data from the

Defining Issues Test for over 30 years. Hundreds of studies have been conducted in the

United States using Rest’s tools (Doyle et al., 2013). Researchers who wish to use the test

must obtain permission from the Center for the Study of Ethical Development and must

submit the test results to the Center for the Study of Ethical Development for analysis. In

this way, the Center for the Study of Ethical Development has a rich depository of

information on the types of research being conducted using the tool and on the results.

Overtime, the validity of the D. I. T. and the more recent version, the D. I. T. -2, have

been established (Thoma & Dong, 2014).

The process for scoring is that the four most important statements in each scenario

of the D. I. T. -2 survey are given weight to correspond with the highest stage of moral

reasoning. This weighted process results in a “P” score (which ranges from 0 to 95) for

“principled moral thinking” (Rest, 1986). Generally, junior high school students have “P”

scores in the 20s and moral philosophers score in the 60s. The levels of ethical decision-

making are expressed as N2 scores which demonstrate the degree to which one uses

higher order ethical decision-making. The N2 scores generally range in the 40s for

college students, in the 50s for professionals, and in the 60s for experts in moral

philosophy or political science (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). The N2 scores for this sample

of workers at the North Texas campus of a for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees ranged from 3.5 to 63 (mean = 26). As Grove, Gray, and Burns (2015)

observed, validity is not determined dichotomously, but rather on a continuum (Grove et

al., 2015). Researchers have to consider how valid an instrument is, not just whether

validity is present (Grove et al., 2015). In the 30 years since Rest developed the D. I. T.

test, researchers have been benchmarking results and determining the validity of the tool.

Construct validity. Seven criteria were used to determine construct validity of

the D. I. T. -2, whether it measures the concept of moral judgment development: (1)

differences in age and educational level; (2) improvements over time; (3) relationships

between general cognitive skills and moral reasoning; (4) changes based on ethical

training; (5) relationships between decision-making and behavior; (6) relationships

between political outlook and ethical decision-making scores (Thoma & Dong, 2014).

The specificity of the criteria helped to establish the validity of the tool.

A series of studies using the P score or the N2 score to measure the effects of

educational intervention on moral judgement were compared. The results showed that the

N2 score is more sensitivity to educational intervention than the P score. The matched t-

test for the P scores was 11.20 in the whole sample of studies, and the t-tests for the N2

scores was 13.94 (Rest, Thoma, Narvaez, & Bebeau, 1997). The authors concluded that

the N2 is a better indicator of differences in educational levels on moral judgement than

the P score (Rest et al., 1997). This was followed by an examination of a large sample

showing that 30 – 50% of the variance in N2 scores can be explained on the basis of

educational level (junior high to doctoral) (Thoma & Dong, 2014).

Rest, Thoma, Narvaez et al. (1997) used a one-way ANOVA to determine the

validity of the D. I. T. -2 test to differentiate the ethical decision-making ability according

to educational level. The F statistic for a composite sample drawn in 1979 for educational

groups was 294 (N2) versus 203 (P), df = 3, p< .01 (Rest, Thoma, Narvaez et al., 1997).

The same statistic computed on a composite sample in 1995 showed an F statistic of 293

(N2) versus 249 (P) (Rest, Thoma, Narvaez et al., 1997). The conclusion is that the N2

score differentiates the ethical decision-making scores of persons in different educational

levels better than the P score (Rest, Thoma, Narvaez et al., 1997)

The D. I. T. -2 has been found to be significantly associated (r = .60) with moral

comprehension (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). Age and education account for 53% of the

variance in D. I. T. scores (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). Additionally, D. I. T. -2 studies

showed that the results were stable when used with standard psychometric measurement

tools and were discriminately valid for distinguishing between liberal and conservative

political beliefs and between verbal reasoning and general intelligence quota (I.Q.) tests

(Thoma & Dong, 2014). There is less than one-half of one percent difference in the D. I.

T. -2 between males and females (Thoma & Dong, 2014).

Bailey (2011) provided validity data to support the D. I. T. -2 as a tool to measure

ethical decision-making. Bailey’s research supported what Rest et al. (1999) found,

namely, that there is a correlation between ethical development and political orientation

(Rest et al., 1999). Bailey found a statistically positive correlation between accuracy of

ethical decision-making scores using the D. I. T. -2 test and the raters’ N2 scores (r[44] =

.416, p = .002). In addition, Bailey found that participants who score high on ethical

decision-making (had high N2 scores) were able to accurately identify others with high

ethical decision-making abilities based on their responses to their D. I. T. -2 survey

responses (τeth = .238, t (43) = 5.09, p < .001, d = .77, where τeth stands for accuracy in

evaluating ethical development) (Bailey, 2011).

Internal and external validity. This study was not designed to explain reasons

for differences in ethical decision-making by persons who had completed different

amounts of online ethics training or the reasons for differences based on gender. So

internal validity was not investigated. External validity, or the extent to which the

findings of this study can be generalized to the general population and the general setting

(Grove et al., 2015), was of concern when the research was designed. However, the

findings were not significant, so generalizability was deemed less important. The

response rate (89%) was very good, but when the data was reviewed and surveys purged,

the result was 72.5% (58 out of 80 possible surveys). Although Babbie (2013) considered

this a very good response rate (Babbie, 2013), the ratio of males versus females (10

males, 48 females) further constrained the generalizability of the findings. The setting

was one of several campuses across the United States of a university that specializes in

healthcare degrees. The design of this study did not encompass the other campuses of this

university, nor was consideration given to other kinds of universities in the country, nor

universities in other countries. The results of this study cannot be generalized beyond the

immediate confines of this study.

Reliability

More than 35 years of data collected from researchers using the D. I. T. and the D.

I. T. -2 have provided a wealth of information to establish the reliability of the instrument

(Doyle et al., 2013). Rest and colleagues built reliability detectors into the D. I. T. in the

form of reliability checks (Rest, Thoma, & Edwards, 1997). These were further refined in

the D. I. T. -2 in what are called the New Check total score. When the New Check total

score is over 200, the participant is removed from the study (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003).

These checks help pick up instances when participants fill in the answer bubbles to form

a Christmas tree, for example (Rest, Thoma, & Edwards, 1997). More reliable scores can

be determined if those questionnaires with unreliable answers are discarded. Rest,

Thoma, and Edwards (1997) undertook an extensive review of the first 20 years of data

when challenged by another researcher whose instrument was used in Europe. The

authors noted how other researchers replicated the early studies and described the

consistency of the findings (Rest, Thoma, & Edwards, 1997).

100

Cronbach’s alpha, which measures internal consistency, is in the upper .70s to

low .80s with the D. I. T., and increased to .81 with the D. I. T. -2 (Bebeau & Thoma,

2003), although it tends to be lower if the whole range of educational levels are not

represented in a sample. Mayhew (2012) also sampled 1,496 students using the D. I. T. -2

to study moral development and also found internal consistencies with prior studies

especially with regard to the effect of education on moral development (Mayhew, 2012).

Thus, the reliability of the D. I. T. -2 has been particularly well established.

The guide provided with the D. I. T. -2 test provided instructions for calculating

internal reliability for a research sample (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). Using the instructions

in the guide, Cronbach’s alpha for this research study was calculated by subjecting the

following variables contained in the D. I. T. -2 data to reliability analysis using IBM

SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 24) software: FAMN2, REPN2, SCHN2,

CANN2, DEMN2. Cronbach’s alpha for this study is .664. The educational levels

represented in this sample contained 10 of the 15 educational levels distinguished in the

D. I. T. -2 test. Therefore, Cronbach’s alpha of .664 for this study is in line with the

internal consistency of the D. I. T. -2, particularly given that five educational levels were

not represented in this sample. Refer to Table 3 for descriptive characteristics of the

sample, including education levels, and Figure1to see a histogram showing gaps in the

educational levels of the study sample.

Data Collection and Management

The data collection steps are outlined as follows. Permission to use the D. I. T. -2

test was obtained from the Center for the Study of Ethical Development, 307 Carmichael

Hall, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487

101

(http://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/dit-scoring/). The researcher completed a form to allow

the Center for the Study of Ethical Development to charge the researcher’s credit card

when the surveys were analyzed. No data was collected before receiving approval by the

university Institutional Review Boards (IRB) and the organizational IRB to work with

human subjects. A professional account was established with SurveyMonkey® in order

to circulate a recruitment letter and link respondents to the D. I. T. -2 survey tool. With a

professional account, the Email Invitation Collector settings were changed to disable IP

address tracking so email addresses would not be stored in the survey results

(http://help.SurveyMonkey.com/categories/Get_Responses).

The study was approved by the IRB at the university and the IRB at the

organization where the study was to be conducted. When IRB approval from both entities

was obtained, it was determined that testing would begin on December 5, 2016.

Introductory materials, consent materials, and the preliminary question about online

ethics training was attached to the SurveyMonkey® platform and the survey was

activated.

The Administrative Assistant at the North Texas campus of the target

organization sent an email to all full-time and part-time employees on December 5, 2016

with an invitation to participate in an online ethics survey. The email contained a link to

the SurveyMonkey® platform which contained an information statement, an online

consent form, a link to the preliminary question about how many times the participant

had completed online ethics training, and a final link to the D. I. T. -2 tool. Recipients

were asked to complete the survey on their own time (during breaks or after hours).

Participants were informed that this research was an independent project and

102

participation or refusal would have no impact on their employment. No compensation

was offered for participation, but participants who completed the study were invited to

enroll in a drawing for a $100 Visa gift card. An email link was included at the end of the

survey allowing participants to enroll for the drawing anonymously.

The survey included an Information and Consent Form (Appendix C) followed by

a preliminary survey question to elicit data on the number of times the participant has

completed online ethics training at the facility or elsewhere coded as one (had never

completed online ethics training) to five (had completed online ethics training more than

3 times) (Appendix A). Following the introduction, consent materials, and preliminary

question, the participant was linked to the online D. I. T. -2 survey with its five scenarios

(to measure level of ethical decision-making). Testing required approximately 30 minutes

for each respondent. The instructions advised participants to complete all five scenarios

and the corresponding questions. If a participant completed at least four stories with nine

of 12 items rated and 14 of 20 items ranked, the survey was acceptable for analysis. No

identifying information was requested from any participant.

Online surveys were collected from December 5, 2016 to April 10, 2017. During

the collection period, the researcher was allowed to make personal announcements at two

faculty meetings and to send two follow-up emails requesting participation. When

participants completed the surveys, they were collected on the SurveyMonkey® platform

until all completed surveys were received. By the end of business day on April 10, 2017,

there were 70 completed surveys in the researcher’s SurveyMonkey® account, and it was

determined that no further surveys would be forthcoming. Fifty-eight surveys were

103

subsequently deemed usable. The criteria for determining usability is described under

Instrumentation.

Thereafter, the survey responses were exported electronically to the Center for the

Study of Ethical Development where responses to the D. I. T. -2 were securely

maintained and analyzed. The raw data and a summary of D. I. T. -2 developmental

indices calculated by the Center for the Study of Ethical Development was returned

electronically to the researcher in a PeaZip® compression and encrypted folder for

Microsoft Windows. The PeaZip® folder contained .xlxs, .pdf, .spv, and .sav files, along

with scored .sav and scored .xlxs files which allowed the research to conduct further

statistical analysis.

All data will be kept in electronic format in a locked file cabinet in the

researcher’s home office for three years after the study is completed, after which the data

will be destroyed using the most reliable method available at that time. The researcher is

the only person with access to the locked file cabinet. There are no paper files containing

the data collected for this study. The Center for the Study of Ethical Development retains

the raw data of the D. I. T. -2 tool indefinitely as they own the tool. The responses in their

database cannot be traced to individual email addresses, IP addresses, or other identifying

information. SurveyMonkey® retains backup media for their surveys as long as the

account holder maintains an active account and for approximately 12 months after the

account is deleted. Backup media is overwritten as new backup media accrues

(http://help.SurveyMonkey.com/articles/en_US/kb/Data-Ownership?bc=Your_Data).

Promptly after the study is completed, the associated SurveyMonkey® account will be

104

deleted so the data can be calendared for the 12-month retention period and the backup

media placed in line for overwriting.

Data Analysis Procedures

In this study, the researcher sought answers to the following research questions:

RQ1: To what extent, if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between

number of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical

decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit

university that specializes in healthcare degrees?

RQ2: Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making between

male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores?

The corresponding hypotheses were:

H10: There is no statistically significant relationship between number of completions

of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at

the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees.

H1a: There is a statistically significant relationship between number of completions of

online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at

the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees.

H20: There is no statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores.

H2a: There is a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores.

105

Research question one examined whether there was a relationship between the

number of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making

by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes

in healthcare degrees, whether such a relationship, if any, was significant, and if so, to

what strength and in what direction. Research question two compared the mean ethical

decision-making scores of male and female workers to determine if there were

statistically significant differences between the two groups. Data was collected to

measure the dependent variable in both research questions, level of ethical decision-

making, using Rest’s D. I. T. -2 test. That data was reported as the N2 score. Data for the

independent variable in RQ1, number of completions of online ethics training, was

measured by asking participants to indicate the number of times they completed online

ethics training offered at the campus or elsewhere. Those responses were coded as one

(had never completed online ethics training) to five (had completed online ethics training

more than 3 times). Data for the independent variable in RQ2, gender, was collected as

part of the demographic information included in the D. I. T. -2 test.

The D. I. T. -2 test contained instructions and a sample scenario as an

introduction. The five actual scenarios were presented in the sections that followed the

sample scenario. The remaining sections directed participants to indicate their answers

for rating and ranking the moral issues presented in the scenarios. Then they were

directed to provide demographic information (age, sex, ethnicity, and level of education).

A preface to the survey explained the purpose of the study, explained how confidentiality

would be maintained, sought consent for participation, and asked participants how many

times they completed ethics training at the target facility or elsewhere.

106

Ethical decision-making can be measured using Rest’s D. I. T. -2 test which has

been extensively tested and validated (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). The D. I. T. -2 has been

found to be significantly associated (r = .60) with moral comprehension (Bebeau &

Thoma, 2003). Cronbach’s alpha of the D. I. T. -2 is .81, which shows the high internal

consistency among the test items (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). The levels of ethical

decision-making are expressed as N2 scores which demonstrate the degree to which one

uses higher order ethical decision-making. The N2 scores generally range in the 40s for

college students, in the 50s for professionals, and in the 60s for experts in moral

philosophy or political science (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). The N2 scores for this sample

of workers at the North Texas campus of a for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees ranged from 3.5 to 63 (mean = 26).

The D. I. T. -2 online survey (Appendix E) was obtained from and scored by the

Center for the Study of Ethical Development, 307 Carmichael Hall, University of

Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 (http://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/dit-scoring/). The

scores were returned to the researcher in electronic format. From there, the researcher

imported the data into an IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 24), merged it with

gender data, and analyzed the effect of gender on the dependent variable.

There were 80 associates/employees at the target facility. Student workers were

excluded from the study. Using G*Power software one can estimate the sample size

needed for a pre-determined confidence level and margin of error with a given population

(Faul et al., 2007). A priori power analysis using G*Power 3.1.9.2 (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang,

& Buchner, 2007) revealed that the proposed population sample size of 67was

appropriate for quantitative correlational research at a 95% confidence level with 5%

107

margin of error for a population of 80 (Appendix I). Seventy surveys were received. After

subtracting incomplete surveys and those that failed to meet the reliability checks built

into the D. I. T-2 analysis software, 58 usable surveys were collected in this study for a

removal rate of 17.14%. If one accepts a 7% margin of error using a population of 80,

one can accept 58 surveys with a 95% confidence level.

Understanding the nature of the variables is a basic step in selecting statistical

tests for answering the research questions (Laerd Statistics, 2015). Table 2 illustrates the

type of variables used in this study and the tools used to measure them.

Table 2 Variables by Name, Type, Description, and Measurement Tool

Variable Name Variable Type Description Measurement Tool

Online ethics-training program

Gender

Independent, RQ1

Independent, RQ2

Modules in online ethics-training program

Dichotomous coding

Preliminary question responses coded as one

to five.

Obtained with D. I. T. - 2 test

Level of ethical decision-making

Dependent Categorized nominal data from individual

responses to scenarios

Defining Issues Test, 2nd edition (D. I. T. -2),

as defined by Rest (1986).

In planning the statistical analysis for RQ1, the use of Pearson’s correlation was

rejected because the study did not have two continuous variables being paired (Laerd

Statistics, 2015). The independent variable (number of completions of online ethics

training) and the dependent variable (levels of ethical decision-making) were ordinal.

These factors along with small sample size (N = 58) made Spearman’s correlation

108

analysis, a nonparametric measure of statistical dependence, the next consideration for

determining the degree of correlation between the two variables for RQ1. Assumptions

for the research design and for the data were met. These assumptions are, that there are

two continuous or ordinal variables, that the two variables are paired, and that there is

monotonicity of data (Laerd Statistics, 2015). The results are reported in detail in Chapter

An independent-samples t-test was used to compare the mean ethical decision-

making scores of male workers and female workers, as measured by N2 scores. An

assumption is that the variances of the two categorical, independent groups (males and

females) are equal in the population. The assumption of independence of observation was

met, in that none of the group members could belong to both groups. A boxplot was

created using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 24) software, showing that there

were no outliers for which to account (Figure 3). Tests for normality (Shapiro-Wilk, Q-Q

Plot, skewness, and kurtosis) and for homogeneity of variances were conducted. The

results of these tests, including tables and figures, are presented in chapter 4.

Ethical Considerations

No ethical problems were anticipated or encountered in conjunction with the

study. Permission from the target organization was obtained before any research was

conducted (Appendix H). The identity of the target organization has been protected by

redacting all identifiers prior to publication of the study. No data collection began before

receiving approval by the university and organizational Institutional Review Boards

(IRB) to work with human subjects. Evaluating the job performance of any of the

participants was not part of this research, nor were any participant identifiers collected.

109

There is no way to distinguish any participant’s responses from the responses of any

other participant. No identifying information was collected. Survey responses were

obtained anonymously, and there is no way to trace any participant’s survey responses to

that participant. No person or organization stands to benefit materially from this research.

A monetary incentive was offered to elicit as many completed surveys as possible.

If at any time while taking the survey a participant changed his/her mind, that

person could elect not to continue by simply clicking the “X” in the upper right-hand

corner. Participants were able to withdraw at any time before selecting the final “Submit”

button at the end of the survey. When the participant clicked the “Submit” button at the

end of the survey, those responses were final but were also completely anonymous and

untraceable to any individual participant. For privacy reasons, the employees were given

the option to opt out with no questions asked. Participants had no obligation to join the

study. Participation in this research study held minimal risk as it was not possible to

identify the participants. The Information and Consent form (Appendix C) informed

potential participants of their ability to withdraw at any point. All data will be kept in

electronic format in a locked file cabinet in the home office of the researcher for three

years after which it will be destroyed using the most reliable method available at that

time. No one will have access to the locked file cabinet except the researcher. The Center

for the Study of Ethical Development retains their analyses of the D. I. T. -2survey

responses indefinitely as they own the tool. The responses in their database cannot be

traced to individual email addresses, IP addresses, or other identifying information.

SurveyMonkey® retains backup media for their surveys as long as the account holder

maintains an active account and for approximately 12 months after the account is deleted.

110

Backup media is overwritten as new backup media accrues

(http://help.SurveyMonkey.com/articles/en_US/kb/Data-Ownership?bc=Your_Data).

Promptly after the study was completed, the associated SurveyMonkey® account was

deleted so the data could be calendared for the 12-month retention period and the backup

media placed in line for overwriting.

Limitations and Delimitations

The study was delimited to only workers at one campus of a private, for-profit

university located in North Texas which specializes in healthcare degrees. A further

delimitation is that participation in this study was voluntary, so there was no random

selection. It was, therefore, a convenience sample and is subject to validity concerns.

There were a number of limitations in the study. One limitation was that the

generalizability of the research findings will be circumscribed to this particular

community during the weeks in which this research was conducted. A second limitation

may be social desirability response bias (SDB) if participants perceived that their

anonymity would not be protected (Wouters et al., 2014) or if participants wanted to

provide responses they thought would be rewarded in their jobs. This limitation is outside

the control of the researcher. The developers of the D. I. T. -2 incorporated New Checks

in the tool to help distinguish unreliable responses (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003), but there is

still the possibility that some participants were able to impose their biases. A third

limitation may be self-selection bias if the survey attracted only workers who were

interested in and knowledgeable about ethics. This limitation is unavoidable, but every

effort was made to make participation appealing to the many diverse workers at the

organization. The language in the Recruitment Letter (Appendix B) was designed to be

111

broadly appealing and encompassing. A fourth limitation was the online administration of

the survey with no way to verify that the person who completed the survey was actually a

worker at the target facility. Hopefully, this limitation was minimized by sending

invitations to the workers’ campus email addresses rather than their personal email

addresses.

Summary

The purpose of this quantitative correlational and causal-comparative study was to

determine the relationship between online ethics training and ethical decision-making by

workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees, and to examine whether there are statistically significant differences

in ethical decision-making based on gender. The research adds to current learning about

online ethics training and ethical decision-making in the workplace by looking directly at

workers in the workplace rather than extrapolating from studies of university students. In

particular, the study measured the number of times participants completed online ethics

training and the level of ethical decision-making of full-time and adjunct men and women

who work on the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university specializing in

healthcare degrees. Statistical analyses revealed relationships among the variables and

determined strength and direction of relationships. The mean ethical decision-making

scores between male and female workers were compared using the independent-samples

t-test, after checking assumptions. The study contributes to the field by providing

businesses with data to support investment in online ethics training. Rather than

measuring ethical decision-making by undergraduate and graduate students, this research

looked specifically at workers in the workplace and their completion of online ethics

112

training. It provided data to assess relationships among gender, completion of online

ethics training in the workplace, and ethical decision-making, and the strength and

direction of such relationships. The research questions align with the problem statement

in that the questions reduced the study to component parts of the problem statement and

used established tools to measure the data. For example, ethical decision-making was

measured using a tool validated by years of research which has resulted in a satisfactory

reliability index of .81 (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003).

In this chapter, the research problem was examined in relationship to the research

questions and their corresponding hypotheses. The methodology and design were

described and the reason for their selection was explained. The choice of the sample

population and how data was collected and analyzed was included in this chapter. Ethical

considerations and research limitations were discussed. Chapter 4 is devoted to the

analysis of data. Relationships between the independent variables (number of

completions of online ethics training and gender) and the dependent variable (level of

ethical decision-making) are explained in Chapter 4. A summary of the findings and

recommendations for further research are presented in Chapter 5.

113

Chapter 4: Data Analysis and Results

Introduction

Researchers at the Ethics Resource Center have collected longitudinal cross-

sectional research on business ethics for over 20 years (Ethics Resource Center, 2013).

Their research sets the benchmark for ethical businesses nationally and globally, and they

provide a network of resources for ethics and compliance professionals. Their scientific

publications are readily available for businesses and organizations who wish to learn

what works and what doesn’t work when dealing with ethical risks employees face every

day. Despite this wealth of information and the ease of accessing it, businesses continue

to fall victim to scandals that affect their corporate image, their financial health, and the

well-being of their employees. Could it be that mandated corporate integrity agreements

and expensive mandatory ethics programs have failed to address what Ciulla, Martin, and

Solomon suggested, “that business ethics is primarily about the ethics of individuals”

(Ciulla, Martin, & Solomon, 2011, p. xvii)?

Ethics-training programs attempt to inform participants about ethical principles.

Studies supporting research in this area have been conducted largely in universities not in

the workplace (Lau, 2010; Ritter, 2006; Wang & Calvano, 2015). Few studies have

distinguished between face-to-face ethics training and computer-based (online) ethics

training (Weber, 2015). Research into differences in ethical decision-making based on

gender have had mixed findings, but many studies have shown that women tend to make

more ethical decisions than men (Davis et al., 2014; Lehnert et al., 2015). Researchers at

the Ethics Resource Center have conducted surveys about ethics training in the

workplace, but their surveys have not provided data about the types of ethics training and

114

how often it is offered (Ethics Resource Center, 2013).This research study was designed

as a quantitative correlational and causal-comparative study to investigate if there was a

relationship between the number of completions of online ethics training and levels of

ethical decision-making, and if there were statistically significant differences in the levels

of ethical decision-making based on gender by individuals in the workplace. Here are the

research questions and hypotheses that guided this study:

RQ1: To what extent, if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between

number of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical

decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit

university that specializes in healthcare degrees?

H10: There is no statistically significant relationship between number of

completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making

by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that

specializes in healthcare degrees.

H1a: There is a statistically significant relationship between number of completions

of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at

the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in

healthcare degrees.

RQ2: Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores?

H20: There is no statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores.

115

H2a: There is a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making

between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores.

A convenience sample was sought from the North Texas campus of a private, for-

profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees. This facility employs a robust

online ethics education program that is intended for use during orientation of new

employees. The population is diverse and multicultural. Workers from all ages and

educational levels and job descriptions were invited to participate in the survey. The first

hypothesis was tested using a Spearman’s correlation. The second hypothesis was tested

using an independent-samples t-test to test for a difference in means scores for levels of

ethical development between males and females. This chapter details the descriptive data

that was obtained, contains a review of the statistical procedures employed, and includes

a discussion of the inferential statistics that were used to test the hypotheses.

Descriptive Data

The research study was conducted at the North Texas campus of a private, for-

profit institution that specializes in healthcare degrees between December 5, 2016 and

April 10, 2017. Eighty full-time and adjunct workers throughout the organization were

invited to participate in the study by taking a survey that was positioned on a

SurveyMonkey® platform. The survey required about 30 minutes because it involved

reading five scenarios, then rating and ranking 12 issues for each scenario. A random

drawing for a $100 Visa gift card was offered as an incentive to participate. Updates at

two associates meetings and two reminder emails urged participation which was targeted

for a sample size of 67. See Appendix I for the parameters of the a priori power

calculation. On April 10, 2017, it was clear that no more surveys would be forthcoming

116

and the on-line survey was closed. Seventy surveys were registered in the researcher’s

SurveyMonkey® account but when incomplete surveys were removed and others were

removed because they failed the reliability check built into the survey tool, there were 58

usable surveys (a usable response rate of 82.86%).

The survey responses were exported electronically from SurveyMonkey® to the

Center for the Study of Ethical Development where responses to the D. I. T. -2 were

securely maintained and analyzed. The raw data and a summary of D. I. T. -2

developmental indices calculated by the Center for the Study of Ethical Development was

returned electronically to the researcher in a PeaZip® compression and encrypted folder

for Microsoft Windows. The PeaZip® folder contained .xlxs, .pdf, .spv, and .sav files,

along with scored .sav and scored .xlxs files which allowed the research to conduct

further statistical analysis.

Participants responded to the following initial question on the research survey:

How many times have you completed the online ethics training offered at this campus or

elsewhere? Ten participants had never taken online ethics training (17.5%) whereas

31.6% had completed online ethics training more than three times. One participant did

not respond to the question about online ethics training. Analysis of the demographic data

revealed that most of the participants were female (82.7%). Table 3 displays the

descriptive characteristics of the sample.

117

Table 3 Descriptive Characteristics of the Sample

Variables n Percent

Gender

Male

Female

17.2%

82.7%

Age (years)

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60-69

70+

Did not answer

12.7%

23.6%

27.3%

18.2%

16.4%

1.8%

Age (mean + standard deviation) 45.1 + 12.5

Race

African American or Black

Asian or Pacific Islander

Hispanic

Caucasian or non-Hispanic

Other

27.6%

6.9%

51.7%

6.9%

Number of times completed online ethics training

Never

1 time

2 times

3 times

>3 times

Did not answer

17.5%

28.1%

17.5%

5.3%

31.6%

Educational Level

Grades 10-12

Vocational/Technical

Junior in Bachelor’s Program

Senior in Bachelor’s Program

MD, MBA, JD, RN

MEd

MSN

Ed. D, DNP

PhD

Other

1.7%

3.4%

1.7%

10.3%

13.8%

29.3%

6.9%

13.8%

8.6%

118

Although four males scored in the highest percentile category for level of ethical

decision-making as measured by the N2 score, the largest number of males (60%) scored

in the middle percentiles. The highest score for level of ethical decision-making in this

study was reached by a female participant. However, all the scores in the lowest

percentile were by females. The data for 58 N2 scores was easier to visualize when

converted to quartiles in an Excel spreadsheet. Table 4 shows the descriptive statistics for

level of ethical decision-making by gender. Table 5 depicts scores on level of ethical

decision-making (N2) grouped into percentiles, and the number of times participants

completed online ethics training.

Table 4 Descriptive Statistics for N2 Scores by Gender

Categorical variables n Percent

N2 Score in First Quartile

Male

Female

24%

N2 Score in Second Quartile

Male

Female

21%

N2 Score in Third Quartile

Male

Female

21%

N2 Score in Fourth Quartile

Male

Female

17%

119

Table 5 Descriptive Statistics for N2 Scores by Number of Times Completed Ethics Training

Number of times completed ethics training n Percent

N2 Score in Lowest 25% percentile

Never completed ethics training

Completed ethics training 1 time

Completed ethics training 2 times

Completed ethics training 3 times

Completed ethics training >3 times

N2 Score in Second 25% percentile

Never completed ethics training

Completed ethics training 1 time

Completed ethics training 2 times

Completed ethics training 3 times

Completed ethics training >3 times

N2 Score in Third 25% percentile

Never completed ethics training

Completed ethics training 1 time

Completed ethics training 2 times

Completed ethics training 3 times

Completed ethics training >3 times

12%

N2 Score in Highest 25% percentile

Never completed ethics training

Completed ethics training 1 time

Completed ethics training 2 times

Completed ethics training 3 times

Completed ethics training >3 times

No response 1 1%

Descriptive statistics for the levels of education represented in the study sample

was also reviewed. The gaps are displayed in Figure 1. The educational levels

represented in this sample contained 10 of the 15 educational levels distinguished in the

D. I. T. -2 test. Therefore, Cronbach’s alpha of .707 for this study is in line with the

internal consistency of the D. I. T. -2, particularly given that five educational levels were

not represented in this sample (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003).

120

Figure 1. Histogram showing gaps in educational levels

Data Analysis Procedures

The first research question was: To what extent, if any, is there a statistically

significant relationship between number of completions of online ethics training and the

level of ethical decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-

profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees? RQ2 was designed to determine if

there were statistically significant differences in mean scores of ethical decision-making

between males and females. The number of online ethics training was measured on a

numerical scale from 1 (Never) to 5 (More than 3 Times). Gender was represented by 1

for male and 2 for female. Levels of ethical decision-making were numerically

121

represented by scores provided by the Center for the Study of Ethical Development,

which are referred to as N2 scores. These numerical scores were manipulated statistically

using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 24) software to test the hypotheses.

The data were analyzed relative to RQ1 to see if the number of completions of

online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making are correlated. In planning the

statistical analysis for RQ1, the use of Pearson’s correlation was rejected because the

study did not have two continuous variables being paired (Laerd Statistics, 2015). The

independent variable (number of completions of online ethics training) and the dependent

variable (levels of ethical decision-making) were ordinal. These factors along with small

sample size (N = 58) made Spearman’s correlation analysis, a nonparametric measure of

statistical dependence, the next consideration for determining the degree of correlation

between the two variables for RQ1. Monotonicity of the two variables was not readily

apparent on scatterplot (Figure 2), but when the variables were analyzed using IBM SPSS

Statistics for Windows (version 24) software, the results indicated there was a weak,

positive monotonic relationship (rho = .03). These findings are not statistically significant

(p = .825, p< .05). If the null hypothesis is true, there is an 82% chance that the positive

relationship between online ethics training and ethical decision-making happened by

chance.

122

Figure 2. Scatterplot of N2 scores

An independent-samples t-test was used to compare the mean ethical decision-

making scores of male workers and female workers, as measured by N2 scores. An

assumption is that the variances of the two categorical, independent groups (males and

females) are equal in the population. The assumption of independence of observation was

met, in that none of the group members could belong to both groups. A boxplot was

created using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 24) software, showing that there

were no outliers for which to account (Figure 3).

123

Figure 3. Boxplot of N2 scores

The Shapiro-Wilk test was conducted to test for normality (p< .05). The

assumption of normality was met with regard to the mean scores for ethical decision-

making by males (p = .542) but not females (p = .010). See Figure 4 for SPSS output for

the Shapiro-Wilk test.

Figure 4. Shapiro-Wilk test of normality

The mean scores for ethical decision-making were not normally distributed for

females. Given that reason and since the sample size (N = 58) was borderline-high for use

124

with the Shapiro-Wilk test (Laerd Statistics, 2015), the Q-Q plot for ethical decision-

making (as represented by N2 scores) was reviewed. The Q-Q plot is reasonably

consistent with normality given that the deviations from the straight line are minimal

(Figure 5).

Figure 5. Q-Q plot of N2 scores

Skewness and kurtosis are shown in Figure 6, the descriptive statistics output

from SPSS testing for RQ2. These coefficients provide additional information regarding

normality. Ethical decision-making scores were normally distributed for males with a

skewness of 0.332 (standard error = 0.687) and kurtosis of -1.270 (standard error = .334)

and for females with a skewness of 0.758 (standard error = 0.343) and kurtosis of -0.147

(standard error= 0.674) (Figure 6).

125

Figure 6. Descriptive statistics showing skewness and kurtosis values.

Another assumption to address when considering the use of independent-samples

t-tests for data analysis is whether the variances are equal. IBM SPSS for Statistics

(version 24) software provides the calculation of Levene’s Test for Equality of Variance

as part of the independent-samples t-test. The output from this test was reviewed and

there was homogeneity of variances for ethical decision-making scores for male and

female workers (p = .23, p > .05). (Figure 7).

126

Levene's Test for Equality of

Variances

F Sig.

N2 score Equal variances assumed 1.101 .299

Equal variances not assumed

Figure 7. Levene’s test for equality of variances

Since the design is correlational, the Correlation Bivariate Normal Model was

used as the lead power test. For N = 58, the G*Power 3.1.9.2 analysis estimated a

statistical power (1 – β) of about .75 or 75% to detect an effect of medium strength

(Cohen’s d = .5). If gender really has an effect of medium strength on ethical decision-

making, there is a 75% likelihood that the post-hoc comparisons will detect that influence

as statistically significant at the required level of .05. The results of the power analysis

are shown in Figure 8

Figure 8. Post hoc Correlation Bivariate power analysis

Total sample size

Exact - Correlation: Bivariate normal model Tail(s) = One, Correlation ρ H0 = 0, Correlation ρ H1 = 0.3, α err prob = 0.05

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

127

Statistical power was evaluated for the post-hoc comparisons used to compare the

independent pairs (i.e., males and females). Parameters for the analysis were set as

follows: Type I error rate (α) was set at .05. The two independent samples in this study

were males (n = 10) and females (n = 48), totaling 58, and so this sample size was put

into the analysis (Figure 9).

Figure 8: Determining the statistical power available to support t-test post-hoc comparisons using G*Power software

Results

This research study is novel in its approach of taking an ethical decision-making

measurement tool to workers in the workplace and attempting to answer quantitative,

correlational questions about the relationship between the number of completions of

online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making, and examining differences on

mean scores of ethical decision-making based on gender. The theoretical framework for

this study was Rest’s (1979) model for ethical decision-making which defined levels of

ethical decision-making and discussed the impact of individual and organizational factors

Total sample size

t tests - Means: Difference between two independent means (two groups)

Tail(s) = One, Effect size d = 0.5, Allocation ratio N2/N1 = 0.208333, α err prob = 0.05

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

0.55

0.6

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

128

thereon. This research study was designed as a quantitative correlational and causal-

comparative study to determine the relationship between online ethics training (an

organizational factor) and the levels of ethical decision-making by individuals in the

workplace, and to explore differences in ethical decision-making based on gender (an

individual factor).

The first research question was: To what extent, if any, is there a statistically

significant relationship between number of completions of online ethics training and the

level of ethical decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-

profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees? To address RQ1, a Spearman’s

correlational analysis was conducted to assess the relationship between the number of

completions of online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making (represented

by N2 scores) in this sample of workers (N = 58). Spearman’s was chosen over Pearson’s

because the variables under investigation are not continuous and paired. Monotonicity

was not readily apparent from looking at the scatterplot (Figure 2), which revealed a wide

distribution of ethical decision-making scores with no clear clustering.

However, using SPSS, the Spearman’s rho was calculated as 0.03 (p = .825),

showing that there is a weak correlation between number of online ethics training and

levels of ethical decision-making in this sample. There is a weak monotonic relationship.

The null hypothesis cannot be rejected. See Figure 10 for the SPSS output for

Spearman’s calculation.

129

Correlations

How many times have you taken the online ethics training offered at this

campus or elsewhere? N2 score

Spearman's rho How many times have you taken the online ethics training offered at this campus or elsewhere?

Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .030

Sig. (2-tailed) . .825

N 57 57

N2 score Correlation Coefficient .030 1.000

Sig. (2-tailed) .825 .

N 57 58

Figure 9: Results of Spearman’s correlational analysis

Post-hoc G*Power 3.1.9.2 (Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, & Buchner, 2007) analysis was

conducted. The analysis showed a 75% chance that the findings from this sample are

falsely negative given a sample size of 58 and alpha of 0.05 (Appendix J). There is

actually insufficient data to accept or reject the conclusions reached with this study

sample.

The second research question was: Is there a statistically significant difference in

ethical decision-making between male and female workers as represented by mean N2

scores? The dependent variable was ethical decision-making as represented by N2 scores

on the D. I. T. -2 test. Gender was the independent variable. To answer RQ2, an

independent-samples t-test was selected to establish whether there was a statistically

significant difference between the mean N2 scores of males and females. Results of the t-

test are shown in Figure 11. Inspection of the boxplot revealed no outliers in the data.

Ethical decision-making (N2) scores for each males and females were normally

distributed, as assessed by Shapiro-Wilk's test (p> .05). Homogeneity of variances was

assumed, as assessed by Levene's test for equality of variances (p = .299). There was no

130

statistically significant difference between the mean levels of ethical decision-making

(N2 scores) of males (n = 10, M = 31.32, SD = 11.22) and females (n = 48, M = 24.97,

SD = 15.55). The results of Levene’s test, F(56) = 1.10, p = .299, indicate that the

variances of the two groups are assumed to be approximately equal. The standard t-test

results were used. The results of the independent-samples t-test were not significant, t(56)

= 1.2, p = .23. However, the null hypothesis depends on sample size (Laerd Statistics,

2015), so the results of the independent-samples t-test in this small sample should be

interpreted with that understanding.

t-test for Equality of Means

t df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference

95% Confidence Interval

Lower Upper

Equal variances

assumed 1.222 56 .227 6.34746 5.19314 -4.05565 16.75056

Equal variances not

assumed 1.512 17.119 .149 6.34746 4.19849 -2.50588 15.20079

Figure 11. Independent-samples t-test for equality of means

The formula used to calculate effect size for the independent-samples t-test post-

hoc was t squared divided by t squared plus n1 (number of males) plus n2 (number of

females). The effect size was .03 which is considered small according to the guidelines

established by Cohen (1988). In this study, only 3% of the variance of levels of ethical

decision-making (N2 scores) is explained by gender. The 95% confidence interval was -

4.06 to 16.75.

At a significance level of 0.05, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected. The

inequality of sample size makes the interpretation less precise. Post-hoc power analysis

was run on this group using G*Power 3.1.9.2 statistical software (Appendix L) showing a

75% chance that the findings from this sample are falsely negative (α = 0.5). The study

131

has a high Type II error rate because of the limited sample size, so only tentative

conclusions could be made based upon this data (Agresti & Franklin, 2007).

Summary

The purpose of this quantitative correlational and causal-comparative study was to

determine if the independent variable (number of completions of online ethics training)

was related to the levels of ethical decision-making by workers at one campus of a

university that specializes in healthcare degrees, and examine whether there are

statistically significant gender differences in levels of ethical decision-making.

Descriptive statistics provided insight into the characteristics of the sample population.

Using G*Power 3.1.9.2 for determining sample size provided some assurance that an

appropriate sample was obtained (70 surveys from a population of 80) but some surveys

were missing crucial data. Twelve surveys were purged by the Center for the Study of

Ethical Development because of apparent inconsistencies in the participants’ ratings and

rankings, excessive selection of meaningless data or missing data, or poor discrimination

between the rates and ranks (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003). The number of completions of

online ethics training was missing for three surveys. The resulting number of usable

surveys was 58.

A Spearman’s correlation was used to test to what extent, if any, the number of

completions of online ethics training were related to the level of ethical decision-making

by workers at a private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees. The

results showed that there was no statistically significant relationship between number of

completions of online ethics training and level of ethical decision-making (rs 0.03, p =

.825). An analysis of the data showed that the number of completions of online ethics

132

training had no effect on the level of ethical decision-making in this sample population.

However, power analysis revealed that there was probably an insufficient number of

participants with complete surveys to confidently accept or reject the conclusions. There

is a 67% probability that the findings from the sample are falsely negative. Perhaps there

is a relationship between number of completions of online ethics training and levels of

ethical decision-making that could not be found in this sample. The implications of this

finding will be discussed further in Chapter 5.

The second research question called for a comparison of the mean ethical

decision-making scores by male and female workers as measured by N2 scores. This

question was addressed with an independent-samples t-test which showed that there was

no statistically significant difference in levels of ethical decision-making between males

and females (t(56) = 1.2, p = .23). Power analysis for this group also showed that the

limited sample size made the results vulnerable to Type II error.

Chapter 5 provides an overview of the study, tying together the theoretical

framework, the relevance of the research questions, the choice of the study population,

and the results. Problems encountered in conducting the study are presented. Chapter 5

includes recommendations for future research and practice.

133

Chapter 5: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

Introduction

Can businesses expect online ethics training during orientation to produce a

satisfactory level of ethical decision-making by workers? Will repeated exposures to

online ethics training improve the level of ethical decision-making by workers? Are there

differences in decision-making based on gender? This quantitative correlational and

causal-comparative study was designed to address these questions so that businesses

could better measure the value of online ethics-training programs for men and women in

the workplace.

The two research questions for the study are the following: (RQ1) To what extent,

if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between number of completions of

online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at the North

Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees?

(RQ2) Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making between

male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores? The population for this

study was a convenience sample of associates/employees at a company with a robust

online ethics-training program. However, not all employees had completed any online

ethics training. The study was open to all levels of employees on the North Texas campus

at this organization, excluding student workers. The research was not limited to a

particular job description. The study had support from campus leadership, and every

associate/employee was encouraged to participate.

Participation was high (70 of 80 full-time and adjunct employees submitted

surveys) but not all submissions were usable. The findings from the completed, usable

134

surveys provide support for prior research and shed some light on the value of online

ethics training of men and women in the workplace. Chapter 5 summarizes the findings

of this study, describes the theoretical, practical, and future implications, and includes

recommendations for future research and practice.

Summary of the Study

An extensive literature review failed to provide a satisfactory answer to the

following question: what are the relationships, if any, between number of completions of

online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers in the

workplace? Most prior research about ethical-decision-making was conducted with

convenience samples of students enrolled in undergraduate or graduate programs (Buck,

2015; Dzuranin et al., 2013; Gunia et al., 2012). Of recent research conducted in the

workplace, Weber (2015) and Weber and Wasieleski (2013) surveyed ethics and

compliance officers about their organizations’ ethics program. The researchers did not

survey employees, however, so their findings about the success of the ethics-training

programs on ethical awareness and ethical decision-making may be partially inflated due

to respondent bias (Babbie, 2013). Leuter et al. (2013) studied ethical awareness in

professional registered nurses, but only 28% of their respondents admitted to having

received any ethics training (Leuter et al., 2013).

Research looking at online ethics-training programs in the workplace will provide

a better idea of whether workers in the workplace are more aware of ethical situations by

reason of attending online ethics-training and whether workers make better ethical

decisions as a result. There is a need to address these questions so that businesses can

justify the cost of online ethics-training programs. The purpose of this quantitative

135

correlational and causal-comparative study was to determine the relationship between

online ethics training and ethical decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus

of a private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees, and to examine

whether there are statistically significant differences in levels of ethical decision-making

based on gender. The current study adds to the body of knowledge about the relationship

between online ethics training and levels of ethical decision-making by workers in the

workplace. The methodology selected to study this relationship was quantitative because

it employed the use of an extensively validated survey tool to measure levels of ethical

decision-making (the Defining Issues Test, version 2, or D. I. T. -2). Responses to the D.

I. T. -2 survey and gender were coded in a way that allowed statistical analysis.

A theme that emerged from the literature on ethical decision-making included the

effect of ethics education on ethical awareness and, thereby, ethical decision-making.

Weber (2015) found that face-to-face ethics training has better results when the desired

outcome is to improve ethical decision-making (Weber, 2015). Groessl (2013) conducted

an ethics education program for nursing students and one for social work students. The

nursing students’ program was entirely online; the program for social work students was

a combination of online and face-to-face instruction. Groessl did not look at the

difference in outcome between the two groups, however. Noel and Hathorn (2014)

expressed the need for more research investigating the relationship, if any, between

online ethics training and ethical decision-making by workers in the workplace (Noel &

Hathorn, 2014). This research study was significant in that it addressed that gap in the

literature, namely, measuring the effects of online ethics education on levels of ethical

decision-making by workers in a workplace.

136

A second theme from the literature was the presence or absence of gender

differences in ethical decision-making in the workplace. Research into gender differences

in ethical decision-making have had mixed findings, but many studies have shown that

women tend to make more ethical decisions than men (Davis et al., 2014; Lehnert et al.,

2015). This study addressed this theme by looking at differences in levels of ethical

decision-making (N2 scores) by gender.

The convenience population for this study was the North Texas campus of a

private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees. Research studies

looking specifically at ethical decision-making in healthcare fields was reviewed in order

to provide better insight into the findings, and to tailor the recommendations. Some

studies revealed little or no exposure to ethics training by healthcare professionals (Glasa

et al., 2013; Leuter et al., 2013). When Swisher, van Kessel, Jones, Beckstead, and

Edwards introduced an extensive ethics education program for physical therapy

undergraduate students in Australia over a six-week period, they found a significant

improvement in N2 scores (Swisher et al., 2012). Wright-St. Clair and Newcombe (2014)

studied ethical awareness and ethical decision-making by occupational therapists in New

Zealand, but they did not look at ethics training as an independent variable (Wright-St.

Clair & Newcombe, 2014). Mallari and Tariman acknowledged the importance of ethics

education in assuring competency in the nursing profession since ethics is the foundation

of such work (Mallari & Tariman, 2016). This study added to the body of knowledge

about ethical decision-making by workers who prepare students for degrees in healthcare.

A Spearman’s correlation was conducted to determine if there was a statistically

significant relationship between the number of completions of online ethics training and a

137

participant’s level of ethical decision-making (represented by an N2 score on the D. I. T.

-2 tool). To address the second research question, whether there were statistically

significant differences in levels of ethical decision-making based on gender, an

independent-samples t-test was run. The findings of these tests are summarized in the

following section of this chapter.

Summary of Findings and Conclusion

To address RQ1, a Spearman’s correlation was conducted to determine if there

was a statistically significant relationship between the number of completions of online

ethics training and a participant’s level of ethical decision-making (represented by N2

scores). Monotonicity of the two variables was not readily apparent on scatterplot, but

when the variables were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (version 24)

software, the results indicated there was a weak, positive monotonic relationship (rho =

.03). These findings are not statistically significant (p = .825). If the null hypothesis is

true, there is an 82% chance that the positive relationship between online ethics training

and ethical decision-making happened by chance. In this study, the number of

completions of online ethics training had no effect on the level of ethical decision-

making. At a significance level of 0.05, the null hypothesis could not be rejected. One

cannot conclude that any of the groups of online ethics training completions have a

different mean N2 score than any other group. However, there is actually insufficient data

to accept or reject the conclusions. This was confirmed by calculating the probability of

Type II error using SPSS. Calculations showed a 67% chance that the findings from this

sample are falsely negative. The small number of completed surveys was not sufficient to

138

allow one to conclude that the number of completions of online ethics training had no

effect on the levels of ethical decision-making.

Post-hoc power analysis of RQ1 using G*Power 3.1.9.2 is shown in Appendix J.

The analysis estimated a statistical power (1-β) of 75% (N = 58) to detect an effect of

medium strength (Cohen’s d = .5). If the number of times a person completes online

ethics classes influences the level of ethical decision-making at medium strength, there is

a 75% chance that the post-hoc comparison used in this study will detect that influence as

statistically significant at the level of .05.

The second research question was: Is there a statistically significant difference in

ethical decision-making between male and female workers as represented by mean N2

scores? To answer RQ2, an independent-samples t-test was selected to establish whether

there was a statistically significant difference between the mean N2 scores of males and

females. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean levels of

ethical decision-making (N2 scores) of males (n = 10, M = 31.32, SD = 11.22) and

females (n = 48, M = 24.97, SD = 15.55). The results of Levene’s test, F(56) = 1.10, p =

.29, indicate that the variances of the two groups are assumed to be approximately equal.

In this study, only 3% of the variance of levels of ethical decision-making (N2 scores) is

explained by gender. At a significance level of 0.05, the null hypothesis cannot be

rejected. The study has a high Type II error rate because of the limited sample size, so

only tentative conclusions could be made based upon this data (Agresti & Franklin,

2007).

Post-hoc power analysis of RQ2 using G*Power 3.1.9.2 is shown in Appendix L.

The analysis estimated a statistical power (1-β) of 41% to detect an effect of medium

139

strength (Cohen’s d = .5). If gender influences the level of ethical decision-making at

medium strength, there is a 41% chance that the post-hoc comparison used in this study

will detect that influence as statistically significant at the level of .05. The results would

be more reliable if the two groups were equal in size (Agresti & Franklin, 2007).

This study advanced scientific knowledge about the relationship between online

ethics training and the levels of ethical decision-making and about differences in ethical

decision-making based on gender by addressing gaps in the literature on those topics. The

inability to reject the null hypotheses for RQ1 and RQ2 in this study highlight the

difficulties in designing and conducting measurements of ethical decision-making in the

workplace and the need for different approaches. Some suggestions for alternative ways

to address the research questions are discussed below.

Implications

Despite the inability to reject the null hypotheses, this study advanced scientific

knowledge about the relationship between number of completions of online ethics

training and levels of ethical decision-making by identifying that question as a gap in the

literature and designing a research study to address the gap. Furthermore, this study

added to the information about differences in ethical decision-making based on gender. In

this section, theoretical, practical, and future implications will be presented to illustrate

how this study drew upon past research and advances scientific knowledge in this area.

This section will include an analysis of the strengths and weakness of the study. The final

section will contain recommendations for future research and practice.

Theoretical implications. Of the theoretical models used to describe ethical

decision-making, Rest’s (1979) model is strongly validated and widely used. The four

140

steps in Rest’s model of moral development begin with a person recognizing that a moral

issue exists (awareness), making a judgment about the morality of the decision that is

required (judgment), deciding that the moral issue supersedes other considerations

(intent), and then acting upon the decision one has made (behavior) (Rest, 1979).

Awareness, judgment, intent, and behavior are individual factors identified by Rest that

may be influenced by organizational factors such as ethics training. The Center for the

Study of Ethical Development houses over 30 years of research using Rest’s D. I. T. -2,

mostly with undergraduate and graduate students. The current study employed the long-

version of Rest’s D. I. T. -2 tool in surveying workers at the North Texas campus of a

private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees. In order to complete

the D. I. T. -2 survey, one must have proficiency in reading English and be able to

concentrate well enough to answer a series of 12 questions for each of five ethical

dilemmas, then have the ability to rank those answers according to the degree of

importance. Limited information is provided about the five ethical dilemmas so as not to

influence the participant. Not every ethical dilemma has the same sort of complexity and

not every person has the same capacity for concentration and deliberation or the

experiences upon which to base decision-making.

The results of this study are non-conclusive, mostly because of small sample size.

Of 80 possible participants, there were 70 actual participants. However, many of the

surveys were submitted after completing the first set of questions, leaving four ethical

dilemmas unanswered. A number of participants failed to include data that was crucial to

this study, namely, number of times they had completed online ethics training, or gender.

141

A number of surveys were rejected or purged by the Center for the Study of Ethical

Development because of high scores on the reliability formula called New Check.

Practical implications. Although inconclusive, the results of this study can

provide some direction to businesses regarding ethics education programs. The first

implication is that, despite online ethics education being a requirement of new-hire

orientation, a number of full-time and adjunct workers indicated they had never

completed the online ethics program at this campus. Businesses should institute

monitoring programs to insure compliance with onboarding requirements for ethics

training. Repeated exposure to online ethics training was not associated with higher

levels of ethical decision-making in this study, but the small sample size made it

impossible to draw conclusions. A practical approach to the orientation process might

include an exploration of the types of ethics education completed by newly hired

workers, especially those with advanced degrees, and/or their prior experience with

ethical situations (Rest, 1979). Perhaps the design of an ethics education program is more

important than the number of times a person attends. No new information about

differences in ethical decision-making based on gender resulted from this study.

However, taking another look at age differences would be a promising avenue to pursue

with a larger sample.

Future implications. Neither null hypothesis could be confidently rejected in this

study. The high likelihood of Type II errors due to small sample size allow only tentative

conclusions to be drawn. However, the problem of unethical behavior in the workplace

continues to exist. Quantitative research in this area is still necessary. The design of the

142

current study was sound, and the response rate was high (87.5%). What was difficult to

procure were complete, usable surveys.

One way to increase the number of usable surveys is to choose the shorter form of

the D. I. T. -2 tool. Instead of five scenarios, each with 12 questions for rating and four

for ranking, the shorter version contains three scenarios. The long version is

recommended because of its increased reliability and validity (Bebeau & Thoma, 2003),

but the loss of suitable surveys needs to be weighed when making the decision about the

tool.

Another way to increase the survey yield is to use the study’s invitation to

emphasize crucial information needed for the survey. In an effort to avoid a possible bias,

gender was camouflaged in the invitation to this study with the result that three people

left this blank. Even though their surveys were deemed usable for the purposes of

measuring levels of ethical decision-making, their surveys could not be used in this study

with gender as an independent variable.

An approach for future research would be to include a series of questions to

determine a respondent’s prior exposure to ethics training (online, face-to-face, case

studies, seminars, classroom) and prior exposure to ethical situations. Adding such a

series of questions to the current study was deemed too burdensome, given the length of

the D. I. T. -2 test. However, such a series of questions would probably have provided

greater insight into possible relationships with levels of ethical decision-making. It would

be worthwhile to repeat the survey in the future using the shorter version of the D. I. T. -

2, incorporating some of the research modifications noted above, and then extending the

143

survey to the other campuses associated with the private, for-profit university that

graciously allowed the current study.

Strengths of the study were the design which included the clear identification of a

gap in the literature and a solid research tool, and access to a convenience population of

willing participants (87.5% response rate). Weaknesses included the limited number of

usable surveys (58 out of 80), introducing the survey immediately before the Christmas

break for the university, using the long version of the tool rather than the short version,

and communicating to participants that they could ask the researcher for help with the

tool.

Recommendations

A careful examination of the results of the data revealed areas that could have

been altered to provide more meaningful information. The gap identified in the literature

was valid and remains pertinent today. The research questions were appropriate for the

design of the study. Suggestions for improvement in the methodology were stated above

and will be discussed further in this section.

Recommendations for future research. Future research on this topic is

warranted because there remain no clear answers to the questions posed in this study: to

what extent, if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between number of

completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers

at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare

degrees? Are there differences in levels of ethical decision-making based on gender? This

study attempted to provide answers but the small sample size did not allow for definitive

conclusions. The study should be repeated with some alterations in order to get a larger

144

sample size and to be sure participants provide important responses (number completions

of online ethics training, gender) for the independent variables.

There is a short version of the D. I. T. -2 tool which contains three scenarios

instead of five. The short version does not contain the scenario of the patient with cancer

who is suffering from intractable pain. The cancer scenario is of special interest for a

population such as the one recruited for this study (a university that specializes in

healthcare degrees). As Jennings noted, exposure to real-life ethical decisions helps

increase awareness of ethical issues (Jennings, 2012), which is one reason why the long

version of the measurement tool was selected. The increased reliability and validity of the

long version was also considered. However, there are ways to manipulate the choice of

scenarios in conjunction with the Center for the Study of Ethical Development, and, in

the future, that is one design change that would be beneficial.

The invitation to potential participants should emphasize that gender and number

of times the person has completed online ethics training are the two key variables being

studied. They should be advised that if they do not wish to include that information, they

should opt out of participation because their surveys will not be usable. Emphasizing

these two variables should result in more usable surveys, or at least a better gauge of the

number of surveys necessary to achieve adequate statistical power.

Finally, including a series of questions about prior exposure to ethics training

(online, face-to-face, case studies, seminars, classroom) and prior exposure to ethical

situations would allow for a more meaningful interpretation of the relationships between

the number of completions of online ethics training and the levels of ethical decision-

making. Just knowing the number of times a person has completed online ethics training

145

is not enough to draw conclusions about the training’s impact on the person’s level of

ethical decision-making. Armenta (2015) raised a similar question when results showed

that real estate agents in the sample who had higher levels of education did not score

higher on ethical decision-making (using the D. I. T.-2 tool) than less-educated real estate

agents. Armenta considered that the number of continuing education requirements for

ethics for real estate agents (regardless of education) might have raised the ethical

awareness of all real estate agents and, thus, leveled the distinction (Armenta, 2015).

Rest (1979) noted that maturation and education were important determinants of

ethical decision-making. In line with this tenet, adding a series of questions about prior

ethics training and experience would not be so burdensome to the participant if the

shorter version of the D. I. T. -2 tool was used. It would be worthwhile to repeat the

survey using the shorter version of the D. I. T. -2, incorporating some of the research

modifications noted above, and then extending the survey to the other campuses

associated with the private, for-profit university that graciously allowed the current study.

Recommendations for future practice. Businesses of all sizes continue to

confront unethical behavior (Ethics Resource Center, 2013). As a result, many

organizations began investing in mandatory ethics-training programs in the belief that

ethics can be taught and that training improves decision-making (Wickham &

O’Donohue, 2012; Verschoor, 2014). At the private, for-profit university that provided

the convenience sample for this study online ethics education is a requirement for newly-

hired workers. Despite this requirement, a number of full-time and adjunct workers

indicated they had never completed the online ethics program at this campus. Ethics and

Compliance Officers or Human Resource (H. R.) Department professionals in businesses

146

should incorporate a monitoring program to insure compliance with onboarding

requirements for ethics training.

The current study shows that using the D. I. T. -2 tool is an acceptable way of

measuring ethical decision-making in the workplace. Better results might be obtained by

using a shorter version of the tool. The study shows that gender still does not necessarily

explain levels of ethical decision-making by workers in the workplace, although it is

possible that, with a larger sample, one might see a difference emerge.

A recommendation for practice, then, is that studies such as the current study be

repeated with larger samples and different workers so that trends can emerge. Another

recommendation is that more distinctions be made when planning new-hire ethics

orientation about the types of ethics education and prior ethics experiences of new hires.

Until research clearly demonstrates the value of online ethics training, a variety of ethics

training should be provided as part of an orientation program (Weber, 2015). Repeated

exposure to online ethics training was not associated with higher levels of ethical

decision-making in this study, but the small sample size made it impossible to draw

conclusions. Until further research is done looking at the number of online ethics training

and levels of ethical decision-making, the people charged with onboarding newly-hired

workers should provide ethics training during orientation and again in short sessions to

improve outcomes (Weber & Wasieleski, 2013).

147

References

Abu Bakar, A. R., Mujtaba, B. G., & Medjedel, A. (2015). Ethical maturity scores of

future Arab business leaders based on gender, age, seniority, management, and

ethics training. Open Ethics and Law Journal, 1 (Suppl 1: M2), 8-16.

http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/2352633501501010008

Agresti, A., & Franklin, C. (2007). Statistics: The art and science of learning from data.

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Akella, D. (2016). Workplace bullying: Not a manager’s, right? Journal of Workplace

Rights, 6(1), 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2158244016629394

Alonso-Almeida, M. M., Fernández de Navarrete, F. C., & Rodriguez-Pomeda, J. (2015).

Corporate social responsibility perception in business students as future

managers: a multifactorial analysis. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(1),

1-17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/beer.12060

Antes, A. L., Thiel, C. E., Martin, L. E., Stenmark, C. K., Connelly, S., Devenport, L. D.,

& Mumford, M. D. (2012). Applying cases to solve ethical problems: The

significance of positive and process-oriented reflection. Ethics & Behavior, 22(2),

113-130. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2012.655646

Armenta, B. J. A. M. G. (2015). Investigating the moral development of working

professionals using the Defining Issues Test 2 (Doctoral dissertation). Available

from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3684948)

Austin, W. (2012). Moral distress and the contemporary plight of health professionals.

HEC Forum, 24(1), 27-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10730-012-9179-8

Babbie, E. (2013). The practice of social research. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.

148

Baden, D. (2014). Look on the bright side: A comparison of positive and negative role

models in business ethics education. Academy of Management Learning &

Education, 13(2), 154-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amle.2012.0251

Bailey, C. D. (2011). Does the Defining Issues Test measure ethical judgment ability or

political position? Journal of Social Psychology, 151(3), 314-330. Retrieved from

http://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/uploads/8/4/9/8/84986096/_2011__does_the_dit

_measure_ethical_judgment_ability_or_political_position.pdf

Bakhtadze, I. (2015). The importance of ethics and its relevance to challenges of global

education. Journal in Humanities, 4(1), 5-9.

Bebeau, M. J. (2002). The Defining Issues Test and the Four Component Model:

Contributions to professional education. Journal of Moral Education, 31(3), 271-

295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305724022000008115

Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (2003). Guide for D. I. T. -2. Minneapolis, MN: Center for

the Study of Ethical Development, University of Minnesota.

Brotheridge, C. M. (2013). Explaining bullying: Using theory to answer practical

questions. Team Performance Management, 19(3/4), 185-200.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/TPM-07-2012-0023

Buck, W. F. (2015). A competitive business ethics simulation game. Retrieved from

http://businessethicssimulation.net/images/A_Competitive_Business_Ethics_Sim

ulation_Game-Academia_version.pdf

Canary, H. E., & Jennings, M. M. (2008). Principles and influence in codes of ethics: A

centering resonance analysis comparing pre- and post-Sarbanes-Oxley codes of

149

ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(2), 263-278.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9417-1

Chopik, W. J. (2015). Relational attachment and ethical workplace decisions: The

mediating role of emotional burnout. Personality and Individual Differences, 75,

160-164.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.007

Christensen, A. L., Cote, J., & Latham, C. K. (2016). Insights regarding the applicability

of the Defining Issues Test to advance ethics research with accounting students: A

meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(1), 141-163.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2349-7

Chugh, D., Kern, M. C., Zhu, Z., & Lee, S. (2014). Withstanding moral disengagement:

Attachment security as an ethical intervention. Journal of Experimental Social

Psychology, 51, 88-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.11.005

Ciulla, J. B., Martin, C., & Solomon, R. C. (2011). Honest work: A business ethics

reader. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cloninger, P. A., & Selvarajan, T. T. (2010). Can ethics education improve ethical

judgment? An empirical study. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 75(4), 4-11,

49.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Cohen, J. H., Foglia, M. B., Kwong, K., Pearlman, R., &Fox, E. (2015). How do

healthcare employees rate the ethics of their organization? An analysis based on

VA IntegratedEthics® staff survey data. Journal of Healthcare Management,

60(3), 169-185.

150

Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J., & Lieberman, M. (1983). A longitudinal study of

moral judgment. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,

48(1/2), 1-96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1540-5834.ep11861322

Craft, J. L. (2013). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 2004-

2011. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(2):221–259.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1518-9

Culture, Cover-ups Plague VA Health System. (2014, July 14). Quality Progress, 47(7),

12. Retrieved from http://asq.org/quality-progress/2014/07/keeping-current.html

Davies, T. L., Lavin, A. M., & Moen, D. H. (2015). The effect of recent Internal Revenue

Service missteps on taxpayer perceptions. Journal of Business & Accounting,

8(1), 102-116. Retrieved from

http://asbbs.org/files/2015/JBA_V8_2015.pdf#page=103

Davis, B., Read, D., & Powell, S. (2014). Exploring employee misconduct in the

workplace: Individual, organizational, and opportunity factors. Journal of

Academic and Business Ethics, 8, 1-12. Retrieved from

http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/131546.pdf

Doyle, E., Hughes, J. F., & Summers, B. (2013). An empirical analysis of the ethical

reasoning of tax practitioners. Journal of Business Ethics, 114(2), 325-339.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1347-x

Dzuranin, A. C., Shortridge, R. T., & Smith, P. A. (2013). Building ethical leaders: A

way to integrate and assess ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(1),

101–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1371-x

151

Ethics Resource Center. (2013). National business ethics survey of the U.S. workforce.

Arlington, VA: Ethics Resource Center. Retrieved from

http://www.ethics.org/nbes/

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3.1.9.2: A flexible

statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biometrical

sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.

Fredericks, S. M., Tilley, E., & Pauknerová, D. (2014). Limited gender differences in

ethical decision making between demographics in the USA and New Zealand.

Gender in Management: An International Journal, 29(3), 126-147.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/GM-08-2012-0069

Gibson, C., Medeiros, K. E., Giorgini, V., Mecca, J. T., Devenport, L. D., Connelly, S., &

Mumford, M. D. (2014). A qualitative analysis of power differentials in ethical

situations in academia. Ethics & Behavior, 24(4), 311-325.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2013.858605

Glasa, J., Krcmeryova, T., Glasova, H., & Glasova, M. (2013). Clinical ethics committees

in Slovakia - present situation and perspectives. Revista Romana de Bioetica,

11(3), 123-129.

Groessl, J. (2013). An interdisciplinary ethics module for MSW and nursing students.

Social Work Education, 32(5), 639-649.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2012.695342

Grove, S. K., Gray, J. R., & Burns, N. (2015). Understanding nursing research: Building

an evidence-based practice. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier.

152

Guerci, M., Radaelli, G., Siletti, E., Cirella, S., & Rami Shani, A. B. (2015). The impact

of human resource management practices and corporate sustainability on

organizational ethical climates: An employee perspective. Journal of Business

Ethics, 126(2), 325-342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1946-1

Gunia, B. D., Wang, L., Huang, L., Wang, J., & Murnighan, J. K. (2012). Contemplation

and conversation: Subtle influences on moral decision-making. Academy of

Management Journal, 55(1), 13–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.0873

Hergenrader, S. M. (2010). An experimental study of the effect of addressing non-

conscious factors in ethical decision-making during ethics training in public

administration. Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Database.

(UMI No. 3414911)

Hoover, K. F., & Pepper, M. B. (2015). How did they say that? Ethics statements and

normative frameworks at best companies to work for. Journal of Business Ethics,

131(3), 605-617. http://dx.doi.org /10.1007/s10551-014-2255-z

Hultman, K. (2002). Balancing individual and organizational values: Walking the

tightrope to success. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Jennings, M. M. (2012). Business ethics: Case studies and selected readings. Mason,

OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2012). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative,

and mixed approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Johnson, C. E. (2012). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership: Casting light or

shadow. Los Angeles: Sage.

153

Jones, T. M. (1991). Ethical decision-making by individuals in organizations: An issue-

contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366-

395.http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1991.4278958

Kaptein, M. (2008). Developing and testing a measure for the ethical culture of

organizations: The corporate ethical virtues model. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 29(7), 923-947.http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.520

Kaptein, M. (2015). The effectiveness of ethics programs: The role of scope,

composition, and sequence. Journal of Business Ethics, 132(2), 415-431.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2296-3

Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to

socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and

research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.

Laerd Statistics. (2015). Statistical tutorials and software guides. Retrieved from

https://statistics.laerd.com/

Landrum, B., & Garza, G. (2015). Mending fences: Defining the domains and approaches

of quantitative and qualitative research. Qualitative Psychology, 2(2), 199-209.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/qup0000030

LaMontagne, R. M. (2012). Facing ethical dilemmas in the workplace: A qualitative

study of HR managers’ perceptions of the influences on their behavior and the

implications for building an ethical culture in organizations (Doctoral

dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI

No. 3513137)

154

Lau, C. L. L. (2010). A step forward: Ethics education matters! Journal of Business

Ethics, 92(4), 565-584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0173-2

Lehnert, K., Park, Y., & Singh, N. (2015). Research note and review of the empirical

ethical decision-making literature: Boundary conditions and extensions. Journal

of Business Ethics, 129(1), 195-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2147-2

Leuter, C., Petrucci, C., Mattei, A., Tabassi, G., & Lancia, L. (2013). Ethical difficulties

in nursing, educational needs and attitudes about using ethics resources. Nursing

Ethics, 20(3), 348-358.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/09697330124555665

Liu, Y., & Qiu, C. (2015). Unethical pro-organizational behavior: Concept, measurement

and empirical research. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies,

3(3), 150-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jhrss.2015.33020

MacDougall, A. E., Martin, A. A., Bagdasarov, Z., & Mumford, M. D. (2014). A review

of theory progression in ethical decision-making literature. Journal of

Organizational Psychology, 14(2), 9-19. Retrieved from http://t.www.na-

businesspress.com/JOP/MacDougallAE_Web14_2_.pdf

Mallari, M. G., & Tariman, J. D. (2016, Winter). Ethical frameworks for decision-making

in nursing practice and research: An integrative review. DePaul Online Journal of

Nursing Research. Retrieved from

http://via.library.depaul.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=son-

research-synthesis

Martin, K. D., & Cullen, J. B. (2006). Continuities and extensions of ethical climate

theory: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 175-194.

http://dx.doi.org /10.1007/s10551-006-9084-7

155

Martinov-Bennie, N., & Mladenovic, R. (2015). Investigation of the impact of an ethical

framework and an integrated ethics education on accounting students' ethical

sensitivity and judgment. Journal of Business Ethics, 127(1), 189-203.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-2007-5

Mayhew, M. J. (2012). A multilevel examination of the influence of institutional type on

the moral reasoning development of first-year students. Journal of Higher

Education, 83(3), 367-388.http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2012.0020

Moore, L. W., Leahy, C., Sublett, C., & Lanig, H. (2013). Understanding nurse-to-nurse

relationships and their impact on work environments. Medsurg Nursing, 22(3),

172-179.

Mudrack, P. E., & Mason, E. S. (2013). Dilemmas, conspiracies, and Sophie’s Choice:

Vignette themes and ethical judgments. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(3), 639-

653. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1611-0

Mumford, M. D., Steele, L., & Watts, L. L. (2015). Evaluating ethics education

programs: A multilevel approach. Ethics & Behavior, 25(1), 37-60.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2014.917417

Noel, C. Z. J., & Hathorn, L. G. (2014). Teaching ethics makes a difference. Journal of

Academic and Business Ethics, 8, 1-31. Retrieved from

http://www.aabri.com/manuscripts/131661.pdf

Nonis, S., & Swift, C. O. (2001). An examination of the relationship between academic

dishonesty and workplace dishonesty: A multi-campus investigation, Journal of

Education for Business, 77(2), 69-77.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832320109599052

156

O’Connell, C. B. (2015). Gender and the experience of moral distress in critical care

nurses. Nursing Ethics, 22(1), 32-42.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969733013513216

O'Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2012). The influence of unethical peer behavior on

observers' unethical behavior: A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Business

Ethics, 109(2), 117-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1111-7

Park, M., Kjervik, D., Crandell, J., & Oermann, M. H. (2012). The relationship of ethics

education to moral sensitivity and moral reasoning skills of nursing students.

Nursing Ethics, 19(4), 568-580. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0969733011433922

Piotrowski, C., & King, C. (2016). The enigma of adult bullying in higher education: A

research-based conceptual framework. Education, 136(3), 299-306.

Ponton, R. F. (2015). Evaluating continuing professional education in ethics. The

Psychologist-Manager Journal, 18(1), 12-30.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/mgr0000026

Presidential Commission. (2015a). Meeting 21, Presidential Commission for the Study of

Bioethical Issues. Retrieved from http://bioethics.gov/node/4946

Presidential Commission. (2015b). Meeting 22, Presidential Commission for the Study of

Bioethical Issues. Retrieved from http://bioethics.gov/node/5264

Prior Jonson, E., McGuire, L., & Cooper, B. (2016). Does teaching ethics do any good?

Education & Training, 58(4), 439-454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ET-11-2015-

0110

Rest, J., & Narvaez, N. (1998). Defining issues test. University of Minnesota, University

of Alabama, Center for the Study of Ethical Development.

157

Rest, J. R. (1979). Development in judging moral issues. Minneapolis, MN: University of

Minnesota Press.

Rest, J. R. (1986). DIT: Manual for the defining issues test. Center for the Study of

Ethical Development, University of Minnesota.

Rest, J. R., Narvaez, D., Thoma, S. J., & Bebeau, M. J. (1999). D. I. T.-2: Devising and

testing a revised instrument of moral judgment. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 91(3), 644-659.

Rest, J. R., Thoma, S., & Edwards, L. (1997). Designing and validating a measure of

moral judgment: Stage preference and stage consistency approaches. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 89(1), 5-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.89.1.5

Rest, J. R., Thoma, S. J., Narvaez, D., & Bebeau, M. J. (1997). Alchemy and Beyond:

Indexing the defining issues test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 498-

507.

Reynolds, S. J. (2006). Moral awareness and ethical predispositions: Investigating the

role of individual differences in the recognition of moral issues. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 91(1), 233-243. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-

9010.91.1.233

Reynolds, S. J., Leavitt, K., & DeCelles, K. A. (2010). Automatic ethics: The effects of

implicit assumptions and contextual cues on moral behavior. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 95(4), 752-760. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019411

Ritter, B. A. (2006). Can business ethics be trained? A study of the ethical decision-

making process in business students. Journal of Business Ethics, 68(2), 153-164.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9062-0

158

Robinson, E. M., Lee, S. M., Zollfrank, A., Jurchak, M., Frost, D., & Grace, P. (2014).

Enhancing moral agency: Clinical ethics residency for nurses. Hastings Center

Report, 44(5), 12-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hast.353

Rodzalan, S. A., & Saat, M. M. (2016). Ethics of undergraduate students: A study in

Malaysian public universities. International Journal of Information and

Education Technology, 6(9), 672-678.

http://dx.doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2016.V6.772

Romious, T. S., Thompson, R., & Thompson, E. (2016). Ethics training and workplace

ethical decision of MBA professionals. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(1),

190-198. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n1p190

Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-

analysis of destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly,

24(1), 138–158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.09.001

Sonenshein, S., & Dholakia, U. (2012). Explaining employee engagement with strategic

change implementation: A meaning-making approach. Organization Science,

23(1), 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0651

Stefanidis, A., & Banai, M. (2014). Ethno-cultural considerations in negotiation:

Pretense, deception and lies in the Greek workplace. Business Ethics: A European

Review, 23(2), 197-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/beer.12047

Steinzor, R. (2015). (Still) "Unsafe at any speed": Why not jail for auto executives?.

Harvard Law & Policy Review, 9(2), 443-469.

159

Swanson, D. (2015). Fictional stories with ethical content: Guidelines for using stories to

improve ethical behavior. Ethics & Behavior, 1-17.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2015.1081095

Swisher, L. (2010). Moral reasoning among physical therapists: Results of the Defining

Issues Test. Physiotherapy Research International, 15(2), 69-79 11p.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pri.482

Swisher, L. L., van Kessel, G., Jones, M., Beckstead, J., & Edwards, I. (2012). Evaluating

moral reasoning outcomes in physical therapy ethics education: Stage, schema,

phase, and type. Physical Therapy Reviews, 17(3), 167-175 9p.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/1743288X12Y.0000000011

Teixeira, A. A. C. (2013). Sanding the wheels of growth: Cheating by economics and

business students and 'real world' corruption. Journal of Academic Ethics, 11(4),

269-274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10805-013-9192-9

Thoma, S. J., &Dong, Y. (2014). The defining issues test of moral judgment

development. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 19(3), 55-61.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0100590

Tong, B., & Lipman, H. I. (2013). Case study: Whose bed? Hastings Center Report,

43(2), 13-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hast.153

Treviño, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A person-situation

interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601-617.

http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.1986.4306235

Umphress, E. E., Bingham, J. B., & Mitchell, M. S. (2010). Unethical behavior in the

name of the company: The moderating effect of organizational identification and

160

positive reciprocity beliefs on unethical pro-organizational behavior. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 95(4), 769-780. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019214

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (2015). Review of alleged mismanagement at the

health eligibility center (VAOIG-14-01792-510). Retrieved from

www.va.gov/oig/pubs/VAOIG-14-01792-510.pdf

U.S. Sentencing Commission. (2016). 2016 guidelines manual. Retrieved from

www.ussc.gov/guidelines/2016-guidelines-manual

Valentine, S., Godkin, L., & Vitton, J. (2012). Perceived corporate ethics and individual

ethical decision-making: When in Rome, doing as the Romans do. Journal of

Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 9(2), 55-67. Retrieved from

http://t.www.na-businesspress.com/JLAE/ValentineS_Web9_2_.pdf

Valentine, S., Nam, S., Hollingworth, D., & Hall, C. (2014). Ethical context and ethical

decision-making: Examination of an alternative statistical approach for

identifying variable relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 124(3):509–526.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1879-8

van Hoorn, A. (2015). The global financial crisis and the values of professionals in

finance: An empirical analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(2), 253-269.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2225-5

Verschoor, C. C. (2014). Training is critical for a strong ethical culture. Strategic

Finance, 96(3), 13-14, 61. Retrieved from http://www.imanet.org/docs/default-

source/sf/09_2014_ethics-pdf.pdf?sfvrsn=0

161

Wang, G., & Thompson, R. G. (2013). Incorporating global components into ethics

education. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(1), 287-298.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9295-x

Wang, L., & Calvano, L. (2015). Is business ethics education effective? An analysis of

gender, personal ethical perspectives, and moral judgment. Journal of Business

Ethics, 126(4), 591-602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1973-y

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), 85-117. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/beq2014233

Watts, L., Todd, M., Mulhearn, J., Medeiros, E., Mumford, D., & Connelly, S. (2017).

Qualitative evaluation methods in ethics education: A systematic review and

analysis of best practices. Accountability in Research, 24(4), 225–

242.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2016.1274975

Weber, J. (2015). Investigating and assessing the quality of employee ethics training

programs among US-based global organizations. Journal of Business Ethics,

129(1), 27-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2128-5

Weber, J., & Wasieleski, D. M. (2013). Corporate ethics and compliance programs: A

report, analysis and critique. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(4), 609-626.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1561-6

Wickham, M., & O’Donohue, W. (2012). Developing an ethical organization: Exploring

the role of ethical intelligence. Organization Development Journal, 30(2), 9-29.

Wouters, K., Maesschalck, J., Peeters, C. F. W., & Roosen, M. (2014). Methodological

issues in the design of online surveys for measuring unethical work behavior:

162

Recommendations on the basis of a split-ballot experiment. Journal of Business

Ethics, 120(2), 275-289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1659-5

Wright-St. Clair, V.A., & Newcombe, D. B. (2014). Values and ethics in practice-based

decision making/Les valeurs et l'éthique lors des prises de décision dans la

pratique. The Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 81(3), 154-162.

163

Appendix A

Preliminary Survey Question

Note the online appearance of the question was slightly different in the SurveyMonkey® platform containing the link to the D. I. T.-2 test.

Indicate your response to the following question:

How many times have you completed the online ethics training offered at this campus or

elsewhere?

o Never o 1 time o 2 times o 3 times o More than 3 times

164

Appendix B

Recruitment Letter

• What did you think when NBC News Anchor Brian Williams admitted he lied about being in a military helicopter that was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade

over Iraq and even embellished his story on The Tonight Show?

• Did it trouble you to learn that the Internal Revenue Service spent $60,000 of tax-payer money at a convention in 2010 to produce video parodies of “Star Trek”

and “Gilligan’s Island”?

• Are you concerned that Veterans’ Administration Hospitals are wracked with scandals, including at least one hospital tying patient wait times (sometimes fatal)

to employee bonuses?

These scandals occurred despite laws that were meant to discourage ethics scandals and despite the widespread emphasis on corporate ethics. Most companies now employ online ethics training programs to familiarize workers with the companies’ codes of ethics and to emphasize honesty and integrity as basic principles of the corporate culture. My doctoral research study proposes to measure the effectiveness of online ethics training programs.

I invite you to participate – anonymously – in my research study and help construct a database of information about online ethics programs. Some questions may require some thought so it will take about 30 minutes to complete this survey. Your feedback would be valuable! Please take the time to participate!

Click here to go to the consent form. Thank you in advance! –Carol Johns [contact information redacted]

1 Image obtained from:

http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=ethics&view=detailv2&id=04A0EFAD68A12A2A6E1464FC88C20479E0A44468&selectedi ndex=45&ccid=XcfdYNak&simid=608044241764223028&thid=OIP.M5dc7dd60d6a43d69463ecffde4eac699o0&mode=overlay&fir st=1

165

Appendix C

Informed Consent

Introduction:

I have been invited to participate in this research study. The purpose of the study was explained in a

recruitment letter written by Carol Johns. The recruitment letter contained contact information for Carol Johns

and I have had the opportunity to have all my questions answered by emailing or calling her. Basically, the study

will measure the way workers make decisions that involve ethical issues. I understand that there are no right or

wrong answers, but rather individual responses will reflect decision-making levels that can be measured and

studied.

How the Study Will Be Conducted:

This is an online survey that will be available to all employees at my workplace. Variables in the study

will examine relationships between participants’ educational levels and gender but there will be no way to

distinguish my responses from the responses of any other participant. No identifying information will be

collected. My survey responses will be obtained anonymously and there will be no way to trace my survey

responses to me. If at any time during the survey I change my mind, I can elect not to continue by simply

clicking the “X” in the upper right-hand corner. I understand that when I click the “Submit” button at the end of

the survey my responses will be final but will also be completely anonymous and untraceable to me.

I agree to answer all the questions in the survey to the best of my ability and will not leave areas blank.

Blank areas will result in a survey that is not usable.

Voluntary Participation

I understand that I do not have to participate and that if I refuse to participate the decision will have no

effect on my continued employment.

Risks and Benefits to Participants:

There are no known or anticipated risks associated with taking this survey except for the time it takes to

complete the survey. The study is not expected to confer any direct benefit to me. However, knowledge gained

from this survey may provide insight into future planning and implementation of online ethics training programs.

Confidentiality

I understand that no personal identifiers will be collected in this survey. Neither my name nor any

identifying information will be obtained during this survey. The findings of the survey will be published in the

doctoral dissertation of Carol Johns which will be available on the ProQuest database but nothing in the

dissertation will be traceable to me as a result of my participation.

I understand that when I select the “I Agree” button I am giving voluntary consent to participate in this

study and that a link to the study will be opened. If I choose not to participate I can simply delete this message.

Even after I begin the study I may still elect to withdraw. I can withdraw at any time before hitting the final

“Submit” button and there will be no consequences as a result.

I Agree

166

Appendix D

Permission Letter to Use the D. I. T.-2 Tool

167

Appendix E

Copy of the D. I. T.-2 Tool

DIT-2 Defining Issues Test

Version 3.1

__________________________________________________________________

University of Minnesota Copyright, James Rest & Darcia Narvaez

Instructions

This questionnaire is concerned with how you define the issues in a social problem. Several stories about social problems will be described. After each story, there will be a list of questions. The questions that follow each story represent different issues that might be raised by the problem. In other words, the questions/issues raise different ways of judging what is important in making a decision about the social problem. You will be asked to rate and rank the questions in terms of how important each one seems to you.

This questionnaire is in two parts: one part contains the INSTRUCTIONS (this

part) and the stories presenting the social problems; the other part contains the questions (issues) and the ANSWER SHEET on which to write your responses.

Here is an example of the task:

Sample Scenario: Presidential Election

Imagine that you are about to vote for a candidate for the Presidency of the United

States. Imagine that before you vote, you are given several questions, and asked which issue is the most important to you in making up your mind about which candidate to vote for. In this example 5 items are given. On a rating scale of 1 to 5 (1 = Great, 2 = Much, 3 = Some, 4 = Little, 5 = No) please rate the importance of the item (issue) by selecting one choice on the answer sheet.

Assume that you thought that item #1 (below) was of great importance, item #2

had some importance, item #3 had no importance, item #4 had much importance, and item #5 had much importance. Then you would complete the answer sheet as shown below.

168

Great

importance Much

importance Some

importance Little

importance No

importance

Financially are you personally better off now than you were four years ago?

Does one candidate have a superior moral character?

Which candidate stands the tallest? X

Which candidate would make the best world leader?

Which candidate has the best ideas for our country’s internal problems, like crime and health

care? X

Further, the questionnaire will ask you to rank the questions in terms of

importance. In the space below, the numbers 1 through 12, represent the item number. From top to bottom, you are asked to indicate the item in first importance (of those given you to choose from), then second most important, third most important, and fourth most important. Please indicate your top 4 choices. You might fill out this part as follows:

Rank which issue is the most important (item number). 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Most important item

2nd most important X

3rd most important X

4th most important X

Note that some of the items may seem irrelevant to you (as in item #3) or not

make sense to you. In that case rate the item as “No” importance and do not rank the item. Note that in the stories that follow, there will be 12 items for each story, not five. Please make sure to consider all 12 items (questions) that are printed after each story.

In addition, you will be asked to state your preference for what action to take in

the story. After the story, you will be asked to indicate the action you favor on a three- point scale (1 = strong favor some action, 2 = can’t decide, 3 = strongly oppose that action).

In short, read the story from this booklet and then fill out your answers on the

answer sheet. Please use a #2 pencil. If you change your mind about a response, erase the pencil mark cleanly and enter your new response.

[Notice the second part of this questionnaire, the Answer Sheet. The Identification

Number at the top of the answer sheet may already be filled in when you receive your

materials. If not, you will receive instructions about how to fill in the number. If you have

questions about the procedure, please ask now.

Please turn now to the Answer Sheet.]

Famine – (Story #1)

169

The small village in northern India has experienced shortages of food before, but

this year’s famine is worse than ever. Some families are even trying to feed themselves by making soup from tree bark. Mustaq Singh’s family is near starvation. He has heard that a rich man in his village has supplies of food stored away and is hoarding food while its price goes higher so that he can sell the food later at a huge profit Mustaq is desperate and thinks about stealing some food from the rich man’s warehouse. The small amount of food that he needs for his family probably wouldn’t even be missed.

[If at any time you would like to reread a story or the instructions, feel free to do

so. Now turn to the Answer Sheet, go to the 12 issues and rate and rank them in terms of

how important each issue seems to you.]

Reporter – (Story #2) Molly Dayton has been a news reporter for the Gazette newspaper for over a

decade. Almost by accident, she learned that one of the candidates for Lieutenant Governor for her state, Grover Thompson, had been arrested for shop-lifting 20 years earlier. Reporter Dayton found out that early in his life, Candidate Thompson had undergone a confused period and done things he later regretted, actions which would be very out-of-character now. His shop-lifting had been a minor offense and charges had been dropped by the department store. Thompson has not only straightened himself out since then, but built a distinguished record in helping many people and in leading constructive community projects. Now, Reporter Dayton regards Thompson as the best candidate in the field and likely to go on to important leadership positions in the state. Reporter Dayton wonders whether or not she should write the story about Thompson’s earlier troubles because in the upcoming close and heated election, she fears that such a news story could wreck Thompson’s chance to win.

[Now turn to the Answer Sheet, go to the 12 issues for this story, rate and rank

them in terms of how important each issue seems to you.]

School Board – (Story #3) Mr. Grant has been elected to the School Board District 190 and was chosen to be

Chairman. The district is bitterly divided over the closing of one of the high schools. One of the high schools has to be closed for financial reasons, but there is no agreement over which school to close. During his election to the school board, Mr. Grant had proposed a series of “Open Meetings” in which members of the community could voice their opinions. He hoped that dialogue would make the community realize the necessity of closing one high school. Also, he hoped that through open discussion, the difficulty of the decision would be appreciated, and that the community would ultimately support the school board decision. The first Open Meeting was a disaster. Passionate speeches dominated the microphones and threatened violence. The meeting barely closed without

170

fist-fights. Later in the week, school board members received threatening phone calls. Mr. Grant wonders if he ought to call off the next Open Meeting.

[Now turn to the Answer Sheet, go to the 12 issues for this story, rate and rank

them in terms of how important each issue seems to you.]

Cancer – (Story #4) Mrs. Bennett is 62 years old, and in the last phases of colon cancer. She is in

terrible pain and asks the doctor to give her more pain-killer medicine. The doctor has given her the maximum safe dose already and is reluctant to increase the dosage because it would probably hasten her death. In a clear and rational mental state, Mrs. Bennett says that she realizes this; but she wants to end her suffering even if it means ending her life. Should the doctor give her an increased dosage?

[Now turn to the Answer Sheet, go to the 12 issues for this story, rate and rank

them in terms of how important each issue seems to you.]

Demonstration – (Story #5) Political and economic instability in a South American country prompted the

President of the United States to send troops to “police” the area. Students at many campuses in the U.S.A. have protested that the United States is using its military might for economic advantage. There is widespread suspicion that big oil multinational companies are pressuring the President to safeguard a cheap oil supply even if it means loss of life. Students at one campus took to the streets, in demonstrations, tying up traffic and stopping regular business in the town. The president of the university demanded that the students stop their illegal demonstrations. Students then took over the college’s administration building, completely paralyzing the college. Are the students right to demonstrate in these ways?

[Now turn to the Answer Sheet, go to the 12 issues for this story, rate and rank

them in terms of how important each issue seems to you.]

171

Famine – (Story #1) (Mark one.)

Should take the

food Can’t decide

Should not take the food

What should Mustaq Singh do? Do you favor the action of taking the food?

Rate the following 12 issues in terms of importance (1-5).

Great

importance Much

importance Some

importance Little

importance No

importance

1. Is Mustaq Singh courageous enough to risk getting caught for stealing?

2. Isn’t it only natural for a loving father to care so much for his family that he would

steal?

3. Shouldn’t the community’s laws be upheld?

4. Does Mustaq Singh know a good recipe for preparing soup from tree bark?

5. Does the rich man have any legal right to store food when other people are starving?

6. Is the motive of Mustaq Singh to steal for himself or to steal for his family?

7. What values are going to be the basis for social cooperation?

8. Is the epitome of eating reconcilable with the culpability of stealing?

9. Does the rich man deserve to be robbed for being so greedy?

10. Isn’t private property an institution to enable the rich to exploit the poor?

11. Would stealing bring about more total good for everybody concerned or wouldn’t it?

12. Are laws getting in the way of the most basic claim of any member of a society?

Rank which issue is the most important (item number)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Most important item

2nd most important

3rd most important

4th most important

Now please return to the Instructions booklet for the next story.

172

Reporter – (Story #2) (Mark one.)

Should report

the story Can’t decide

Should not report the story

Do you favor the action of reporting the story?

Rate the following 12 issues in terms of importance (1-5).

Great

importance Much

importance Some

importance Little

importance No

importance

1. Doesn’t the public have the right to know all the facts about all the candidates for

office?

2. Would publishing the story help Reporter Dayton’s reputation for investigative

reporting?

3. If Dayton doesn’t publish the story wouldn’t another reporter get the story

anyway and get the credit for investigative reporting?

4. Since voting is such a joke anyway, does it make any difference what reporter

Dayton does?

5. Hasn’t Thompson shown in the past 20 years that he is a better person than his

earlier days as a shop-lifter?

6. What would best serve society?

7. If the story is true, how can it be wrong to report it?

8. How could reporter Dayton be so cruel and heartless as to report the damaging

story about candidate Thompson?

9. Does the right of “habeas corpus” apply in this case?

10. Would the election process be more fair with or without reporting the story?

11. Should Reporter Dayton treat all candidates for office in the same way by

reporting everything she learns about them, good and bad?

12. Isn’t it a reporter’s duty to report all the news regardless of the circumstances?

Rank which issue is the most important (item number)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Most important item

2nd most important

3rd most important

4th most important

Now please return to the Instructions booklet for the next story.

173

School Board – (Story #3) (Mark one.)

Should call off the next Open Meeting

Can’t decide Should not call off the

next Open Meeting

Do you favor calling off the next Open Meeting?

Rate the following 12 issues in terms of importance (1-5).

Great

importance Much

importance Some

importance Little

importance No

importance

1. Is Mr. Grant required by law to have Open Meetings on major school board decisions?

2. Would Mr. Grant be breaking his election campaign promises to the community by

discontinuing the Open Meetings?

3. Would the community be even angrier with Mr. Grant if he stopped the Open Meetings?

4. Would the change in plans prevent scientific assessment?

5. If the school board is threatened, does the chairman have the legal authority to protect

the Board by making decision in closed meetings?

6. Would the community regard Mr. Grant as a coward if he stopped the Open Meetings?

7. Does Mr. Grant have another procedure in mind for ensuring that divergent views are

heard?

8. Does Mr. Grant have the authority to expel troublemakers from the meetings or prevent

them from making long speeches?

9. Are some people deliberately undermining the school board process by playing some

sort of power game?

10. What effect would stopping the discussion have on the community’s ability to handle

controversial issues in the future?

11. Is the trouble coming from only a few hotheads, and is the community in general

really fair-minded and democratic?

12. What is the likelihood that a good decision could be made without open discussion from

the community?

Rank which issue is the most important (item number)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Most important item

2nd most important

3rd most important

4th most important

Now please return to the Instructions booklet for the next story.

174

Cancer – (Story #4) (Mark one.)

Should give Mrs. Bennett an increased

dosage to make her die. Can’t decide

Should give her an increased dosage

Do you favor the action of giving more medicine?

Rate the following 12 issues in terms of importance (1-5).

Great

importance Much

importance Some

importance Little

importance No

importance

1. Isn’t the doctor obligated by the same laws as everybody else if giving an overdose would be

the same as killing her?

2. Wouldn’t society be better off without so many laws about what doctors can and cannot do?

3. If Mrs. Bennett dies, would the doctor be legally responsible for malpractice?

4. Does the family of Mrs. Bennett agree that she should get more painkiller medicine?

5. Is the painkiller medicine an active heliotropic drug?

6. Does the state have the right to force continued existence on those who don’t want to live?

7. Is helping to end another’s life ever a responsible act of cooperation?

8. Would the doctor show more sympathy for Mrs. Bennett by giving the medicine or not?

9. Wouldn’t the doctor feel guilty from giving Mrs. Bennett so much drug that she died?

10. Should only God decide when a person’s life should end?

11. Shouldn’t society protect everyone against being killed?

12. Where should society draw the line between protecting life and allowing someone to die if the

person wants to?

Rank which issue is the most important (item number)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Most important item

2nd most important

3rd most important

4th most important

Now please return to the Instructions booklet for the next story.

175

Demonstration – (Story #5) (Mark one.)

Should continue

demonstrating in this way Can’t decide

Should not continue demonstrating in this way

Do you favor the action of demonstrating in this way?

Rate the following 12 issues in terms of importance (1-5).

Great

importance Much

importance Some

importance Little

importance No

importance

1. Do students have any right to take over property that doesn’t belong to them?

2. Do students realize that they might be arrested and fined, and even expelled from school?

3. Are the students serious about their cause or are they doing it just for fun?

4. If the university president is soft on students this time, will it lead to more disorder?

5. Will the public blame all students for the actions of a few student demonstrators?

6. Are the authorities to blame by giving in to the greed of the multinational oil companies?

7. Why should a few people like presidents and business leaders have more power than

ordinary people?

8. Does this student demonstration bring about more or less good in the long run to all people?

9. Can the students justify their civil disobedience?

10. Shouldn’t the authorities be respected by students?

11. Is taking over a building consistent with principles of justice?

12. Isn’t it everyone’s duty to obey the law, whether one likes it or not?

Rank which issue is the most important (item number)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Most important item

2nd most important

3rd most important

4th most important

Please provide the following information about yourself:

1. Age in years (shade in the correct numbers):

0 0

1 1

2 2

3 3

4 4

5 5

6 6

7 7

176

8 8

2. Sex (mark one):

Male

Female

3. Level of education (mark highest level of formal education attained, if you are currently working at that level.

Grades 1-6

Grade 7-9

Grade 10-12

Vocational/Technical School

Junior College

Freshman in a Bachelor’s Program

Sophomore in a Bachelor’s Program

Junior in a Bachelor’s Program

Senior in a Bachelor’s Program

Professional degree (MD, MBA, JD, RN)

Professional degree in Divinity

Master of Education (M.Ed.)

Master of Science in Nursing (MSN)

Doctor of Education (Ed.D.), Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP)

Doctoral of Philosophy (Ph.D.)

Other

4. In terms of your political views, how would you characterize yourself? Mark one:

Very Liberal

Somewhat Liberal Neither Liberal nor Conservative

Somewhat Conservative Very Conservative

5. Are you a citizen of the U.S.A.?

Yes

6. Is English your primary language?

Yes

THANK YOU.

177

Appendix F

IRB Approval Letter from Grand Canyon University

178

Appendix G

IRB Approval Letter from Target Organization

179

Appendix H

Permission from the Target Organization to Conduct Study

180

Appendix I

A priori Power Analysis, Spearman’s rho Correlation

181

Appendix J

Post-Hoc Power Analysis, Spearman’s rho Correlation

[1] -- Saturday, September 16, 2017 -- 20:17:48

Exact Exact Exact Exact ---- Correlation: Bivariate normal model

Options:Options:Options:Options: exact distribution

Analysis:Analysis:Analysis:Analysis: Post hoc: Compute achieved power

Input:Input:Input:Input: Tail(s) = One

Correlation ρ H1 = 0.3

α err prob = 0.05

Total sample size = 58

Correlation ρ H0 = 0

Output:Output:Output:Output: Lower critical r = 0.2181188

Upper critical r = 0.2181188

Power (1-β err prob) = 0.7499272

A Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was run to answer RQ1: To what extent, if any, is there a statistically significant relationship between number of completions of online ethics training and the level of ethical decision-making by workers at the North Texas campus of a private, for-profit university that specializes in healthcare degrees?

182

Appendix K

A Priori Power Analysis, Independent-Samples t-Test

[3] -- Saturday, February 10, 2018 -- 18:05:04

t tests t tests t tests t tests ---- Means: Difference between two independent means (two groups)

Analysis:Analysis:Analysis:Analysis: A priori: Compute required sample size

Input:Input:Input:Input: Tail(s) = One

Effect size d = 0.5

α err prob = 0.05

Power (1-β err prob) = 0.75

Allocation ratio N2/N1 = 1

Output:Output:Output:Output: Noncentrality parameter δ = 2.3452079

Critical t = 1.6627654

Df = 86

Sample size group 1 = 44

Sample size group 2 = 44

Total sample size = 88

Actual power = 0.7523300

183

Appendix L

Post-Hoc Power Analysis, Independent-Samples t-Test

Saturday, February 10, 2018 -- 10:32:08

t tests - Means: Difference between two independent means (two groups)

Analysis: Post hoc: Compute achieved power

Input: Tail(s) = One

Effect size d = 0.5

α err prob = 0.05

Sample size group 1 = 48

Sample size group 2 = 10

Output: Noncentrality parameter δ = 1.4383899

Critical t = 1.6725223

Df = 56

Power (1-β err prob) = 0.4114335

An independent-samples t-test was run to test for a difference in mean N2 scores between males and females. The RQ2 is: Is there a statistically significant difference in ethical decision-making between male and female workers as represented by mean N2 scores?