HOW PEOPLE MAKE SENSE OF ETHICAL

EVENTS

Jay Caughron

University of Oklahoma

2009 Conference on Research Integrity

May 17th, 2009

Background: What do we know?

Ethical events Complex, ambiguous, socially relevant

Cognitive reasoning strategies known to enhance EDM Anticipating consequences Recognizing circumstances Considering others

Lingering questions Why are these strategies effective for

promoting EDM? Why are the strategies used in some situations

but not in others? Mumford, Connelly, Brown, Murphy, Hill, Antes, Waples, & Devenport (2008)

Background: What don’t we know?

Sensemaking Prompted by novel, unusual, ambiguous

circumstances The process by which an individual creates a

meaningful and actionable representation of a situation in their mind

Situational Influences How does the situation a person is in influence

the cognitive process of ethical decision-making? Weick (1995)

Hypotheses

H1: Better sensemaking will result in decisions of higher ethicality

H2: The use of cognitive reasoning strategies will enhance sensemaking

H3: Situational conditions will influence the degree to which an individual will use cognitive reasoning strategies

Situational Conditions

Cognitive

Reasoning

Strategies

Ethicality of

Decisions

Sensemaking

Method

2x2x2 Manipulations: Situational Variables

Sample: 163 undergraduates Scenario based task

Decision-maker in an organization Provide solutions to problems that are

presented Based on EDM Taxonomy

Covariate Control Measures Content Coded Responses

Manipulations: Situational Variables Cause of Ethical Event

Personal Cause Situational Cause

Outcome Focus Personal Organizational

Outcome Valence Positive Negative

Content Coding

Cognition variables rated by expert judges Ethicality of decisions Sensemaking variables

No. Issues No. Issue Types Info Integration

Strategy use variables Anticipating Consequences Recognizing Circumstances Considering Others

Results: Hypothesis 1

Effective Sensemaking will be related to higher Ethicality

β R2 ∆R2

Block 1 .055*

N Cognition .087

Cynicism .129†

Block 2 .228** .197**

# Issues .103

# Issue Types .151†

Info Integration .265* † = p<.10 * = p<.05**= p<.01

Results Summary: Hypothesis 1

↑ No. of Issue Types

↑ Information Integration

↑ Ethicality

Hypothesis 1: Higher quality sensemaking results in more ethical decisions

No. of Issues

= Significant at p < .10 = Significant at p < .05

Results: Hypothesis 2

Reasoning Strategies will be related to the # of Issues Identified

β R2 ∆R2

Block 1 .086**

N Cognition .055

Planning .031

Block 2 .707** .620*

Antic. Conseq. .171†

Recog. Circum. .515*

Consid. Others. .169†† = p<.10 * = p<.05**= p<.01

Results: Hypothesis 2

Reasoning Strategies will be related to the # Issue Types Identified

β R2 ∆R2

Block 1 .059**

N Cognition .064

Planning .036

Block 2 .446** .386**

Antic. Conseq. .214

Recog. Circum. .178

Consid. Others. .286** = p<.05**= p<.01

Results: Hypothesis 2

Reasoning Strategies will be related to the Information Integration

β R2 ∆R2

Block 1 .090**

N Cognition .023

Planning .053

Block 2 .818** .728**

Antic. Conseq. .155†

Recog. Circum. .558*

Consid. Others. .213*† = p<.10 * = p<.05**= p<.01

Results Summary: Hypothesis 2

↑ Anticipating Consequences

↑ Considering Others

↑ Recognizing Circumstances

↑ Types of Issues

↑ Info. Integration

Hypothesis 2: Greater use of reasoning strategies will promote sensemaking

↑ No. of Issues

= Significant at p < .10 = Significant at p < .05

Results: Hypothesis 3

Situational Factors Influence on Reasoning Strategies (MANCOVA)

F df η2

Covariates

N Cognition 3.65** 3, 152 .07

Main Effects

Cause of Event 2.05 3, 152 .04

Outcome Focus 3.16* 3, 152 .06

Outcome Valence 0.91 3, 152 .02

Interactions

No Significant Interactions

* = p<.05 ** = p<.01

Results: Hypothesis 3

Note: Personal condition significantly lower at the p<.01 level for all strategiesMeasured on a 5-point scale

Outcome Focus Manipulation Results

H3: Situational conditions will influence the degree to which an individual will use cognitive reasoning strategies

Results Summary: Hypothesis 3

Outcome Focus

(Org./Personal)

Anticipating Consequence

s

Considering Others

Recognizing Circumstance

s

Cause of Ethical Event

(Personal/Situational

Outcome Valence

(Positive/Negative)

= Significant at p < .01

Limitations

Undergrad sample

Low fidelity simulation

Low to moderate levels of co-linearity

Method bias

Overall Summary

Organizational focus on outcomes increased strategy use

Strategy use associated with more effective sensemaking

Better sensemaking associated with ethicality of decisions

Implications

Take a broad perspective concerning ethical events

Organizational focus better than personal focus

Personalizing things could back-fire Not just about active cognition

Variety of issue types better than a lot of issues Integrating information into a coherent whole is

vital Role of considering others and recognizing

circumstances

Research Team

Hypothesis Summary

Situational Conditions

• Cause of event

• Focus of Outcome

• Outcome Valence

Reasoning

Strategies

• Anticipating Consequences• Recognizing Circumstances• Considering Others

Ethicality of

Decisions

Sensemaking

• No. of Issues

•Types of Issues

•Information Integration