Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Measuring Sensitivity to Conflicts of Interest: A Preliminary Test of Method

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study presents and develops test methods for assessing sensitivity to conflict of interest (COIsen). We are aware of no study assessing COIsen, but note that some popular methods for assessing ethical sensitivity and related constructs (which include COIsen) are flawed in that their presentation of stimulus material to subjects actually guides subjects to attend to ethical (or related) issues. The method tested here was designed to avoid this flaw. Using adaptations of two existing cases, a quota sample of 12 students was interviewed. Our method used funnel-sequenced, open-ended interviews that were audiotaped and transcribed, then subjected to a form of cognitive mapping. These maps revealed the presence of “indicators” of COIsen. We found that COIsen can be measured and that the global COIsen score generated by our method is able to reveal much variation across subjects, making it a worthwhile candidate for further consideration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Many university and research institution COI policies refer to the management, reduction, or elimination of the conflict. The concept is also included in the federal regulations guiding such COI policies. See the revised COI policy for research funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (2011).

  2. The relationship between ethical sensitivity and COI sensitivity is that of a fairly close analog, sharing not only the same conceptual foundation but also a concern with matters of ethics/morality. Although COI sensitivity does have some conceptual overlap with some other constructs such as social sensitivity (Rothenberg 1970), rhetorical sensitivity (Hart et al. 1980), and rhetorical listening (Tompkins 2009) COIsen does not map as fully onto those constructs as it does to ethical sensitivity.

References

  • Arnaud, A. (2010). Conceptualizing and measuring ethical work climate: Development and validation of the ethical climate index. Business and Society, 49(2), 345–358. doi:10.1177/0007650310362865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Axelrod, R. M. (Ed.). (1976). Structure of decision. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baab, D. A., & Bebeau, M. J. (1990). The effect of instruction on ethical sensitivity. Journal of Dental Education, 54, 44–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bebeau, M. J., Rest, J. R., & Yamoor, C. (1985). Measuring dental students’ ethical sensitivity. Journal of Dental Education, 49(4), 225–235.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blodgett, J. G., Lu, L.-C., Rose, G. M., & Vitell, S. J. (2001). Ethical sensitivity to stakeholder interests: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 29(2), 190–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (1991). Responding to the screen: Reception and reaction processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchan, H. F. (2005). Ethical decision making in the public accounting profession: An extension of Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(2), 165–181. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-0277-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkeburn, H. (2002). A test for ethical sensitivity in science. Journal of Moral Education, 31(4), 439–453. doi:10.1080/0305724022000029662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Pant, L., & Sharp, D. (1993). A validation and extension of a multidimensional ethics scale. Journal of Business Ethics, 12(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council On Governmental Relations. (2002). Consulting scenario I.A. Recognizing and managing personal financial conflicts of interest (p. 7), Retrieved from: http://www.cogr.edu/Pubs_Conflicts.cfm.

  • Department of Health and Human Services (2011). 42 CFR Part 50 & 45 CFR Part 94. Responsibility of applicants for promoting objectivity in research for which public health service funding is sought and responsible prospective contractors. Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 165. August 25, 2011, 53256–52393.

  • Fowler, S. R., Zeidler, D. L., & Sadler, T. D. (2009). Moral sensitivity in the context of socioscientific issues in high school science students. International Journal of Science Education, 31(2), 279–296. doi:10.1080/09500690701787909.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gegez, A. E., Inks, S. A., & Avila, R. A. (2005). A comparison of Turkish buyers’ and sellers’ perceptions of ethical behaviors within the buyer-seller dyad. Journal of Euromarketing, 15(2), 27–50. doi:10.1300/J037v15n02_0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, R. S. (1992). A multidimensional scale for measuring business ethics: A purification and refinement. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(7), 523–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, R., Carlson, R., & Eadie, W. (1980). Attitudes toward communication and the assessment of rhetorical sensitivity. Communication Monographs, 47, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inks, S., Avila, R., & Chapman, J. (2004). A comparison of buyers’ and sellers’ perceptions of ethical behaviors within the buyer-seller dyad. Marketing Management Journal, 14(1), 117–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A. (1993). Viewer response to ethical issues in television news. Journalism Monographs, 142, 1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A. (1995). How can TV news be improved? Viewer perceptions of quality and responsibility. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 39(3), 360–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A. (1997). Ethical sensitivity in viewer evaluations of a TV news investigative report. Human Communication Research, 23(4), 535–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A., & Lepper, T. S. (2007). Sensitivity to research misconduct: A conceptual model. Medicine and Law, 26(3), 585–599.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A., & Rarick, D. L. (1992). Public attention toward ethical issues in TV programming: Multiple viewer orientations. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 7(3), 133–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A., & Rarick, D. L. (1994). The concept of ethical sensitivity in the study of communications ethics: Issues in definition, measurement, and application. In J. A. Jaksa (Ed.), In Proceedings of the third National Communication Ethics Conference (pp. 370–381). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A., & Rarick, D. L. (1995). Assessing ethical sensitivity in television news viewers: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 10(2), 69–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A., & Rarick, D. L. (1999). Viewer sensitivity to ethical issues in TV coverage of the Clinton-Flowers scandal. Political Communication, 16(2), 169–181. doi:10.1080/105846099198712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A., Rarick, D. L., & Ibrahim, B. (1996). A demonstration of ethical sensitivity assessment in a college media ethics course. Paper presented to the National Communication Ethics Conference. Gull Lake, MI.

  • Lind, R. A., Rarick, D. L., & Swenson-Lepper, T. R. (1997). Cognitive maps assess news viewer ethical sensitivity. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 42(4), 133–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, R. A., Swenson-Lepper, T., & Rarick, D. L. (1998). Identifying patterns of ethical sensitivity in TV news viewers: An assessment of some critical viewing skills. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42(4), 507–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, G., Derryberry, W. P., King, A., & Vendetti, M. (2006). Moral developmental consistency? Investigating differences and relationships among academic majors. Ethics and Behavior, 16(3), 265–287. doi:10.1207/s15327019eb1603_6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, K. R., Worthley, J. S., Testerman, J. K., & Mahoney, M. L. (2006). Defining features of moral sensitivity and moral motivation: Pathways to moral reasoning in medical students. Journal of Moral Education, 35(3), 387–406. doi:10.1080/03057240600874653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myyry, L., & Helkama, K. (2002). The role of value priorities and professional ethics training in moral sensitivity. Journal of Moral Education, 31(1), 36–50. doi:10.1080/03057240120111427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academies. (2002). Integrity in scientific research: Creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct. Report of the committee on assessing integrity in research environments. Institute of Medicine, National Research Council of the National Academies. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

  • Owhoso, V. (2002). Mitigating gender-specific superior ethical sensitivity when assessing likelihood of fraud risk. Journal of Managerial Issues, 14(3), 360–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozdogan, F. B., & Eser, Z. (2007). Ethical sensitivity of college students in a developing country: Do demographic factors matter? Journal of Teaching in International Business, 19(1), 83–99. doi:10.1300/J066v19n01_05.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rarick, D. L., Lind, R. A., & Swenson-Lepper, T. (1995). Using cognitive maps to assess ethical sensitivity in TV news viewers: A case study. A convention paper for the Commission on Communication Ethics for the 1995 SCA Convention. San Antonio, TX.

  • Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1990). Toward the development of a multidimensional scale for improving evaluations of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(8), 639–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. R. (1983). Morality. In P. H. Mussen, J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.) Handbook of child psychology: Cognitive development (4th ed., Vol 3, pp. 556–629). NY: Wiley.

  • Rest, J. R. (1986a). Moral development: Advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. R. (1986b). Morality. In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Cognitive development (4th ed., Vol. 3, pp. 556–629). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rest, J. R. (1988). Can ethics be taught in professional schools? The psychological research. The Psychological Research in Ethics: Easier Said Than Done, 1(1), 22–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothenberg, B. B. (1970). Children’s social sensitivity and the relationship to interpersonal competence, intrapersonal comfort, and intellectual level. Developmental Psychology, 2(3), 335–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders, S., & Hoffman, K. (2010). Ethics education in social work: Comparing outcomes of graduate social work students. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(1), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlacter, P. J. (1990). Organizational influences on individual ethical behavior in public accounting. Journal of Business Ethics, 9(11), 839–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shawver, T. J., & Sennetti, J. T. (2009). Measuring ethical sensitivity and evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(4), 663–678. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9973-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simga-Mugan, C., Daly, B. A., Onkal, D., & Kavut, L. (2005). The influence of nationality and gender on ethical sensitivity: An application of the issue-contingent model. Journal of Business Ethics, 57(2), 139–159. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-4601-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer, M., Mitchell, S., & Turner, J. (1998). Consideration of moral intensity in ethicality judgments: Its relationship with whistle-blowing and need-for-cognition. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(5), 527–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirin, S. R., Brabeck, M. M., Satiani, A., & Rogers-Serin, L. (2003). Validation of a measure of ethical sensitivity and examination of the effects of previous multicultural and ethics courses on ethical sensitivity. Ethics and Behavior, 13(3), 221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steneck, N. H. (2007). Introduction to the responsible conduct of research. Washington, DC: Office of Research Integrity (DHHS).

    Google Scholar 

  • Swenson-Lepper, T. (2005). Ethical sensitivity for organizational communication issues: Examining organizational differences. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(3), 205–231. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-0006-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tirri, K., & Nokelainen, P. (2007). Comparison of academically average and gifted students’ self-rated ethical sensitivity. Educational Research and Evaluation, 13(6), 587–601. doi:10.1080/13803610701786053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tompkins, P. S. (2009). Rhetorical listening and moral sensitivity. International Journal of Listening, 23(1), 60–79. doi:10.1080/10904010802591912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. (2005). Research conflicts of interest training course. Retrievedfrom https://apache.hsc.uth.tmc.edu/rcoi/.

  • Walsh, J. P. (1995). Managerial and organizational cognition: Notes from a trip down memory lane. Organizational Science, 6, 280–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodall, W. G., Davis, D. K., & Sahin, H. (1983). From the boob tube to the black box: Television news comprehension from an information processing perspective. Journal of Broadcasting, 27(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wrightson, M. T. (1976). The documentary coding method. In R. M. Axelrod (Ed.), Structure of decision: The cognitive maps of political elites (pp. 291–332). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication (m/c 132), University of Illinois at Chicago, 1007 W. Harrison Street, Room 1140, Chicago, IL, 60607-7137, USA

    Rebecca Ann Lind

  2. Department of Communication Studies, Winona State University, PAC 204, Winona, MN, 55987, USA

    Tammy Swenson-Lepper

Authors
  1. Rebecca Ann Lind
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tammy Swenson-Lepper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca Ann Lind.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lind, R.A., Swenson-Lepper, T. Measuring Sensitivity to Conflicts of Interest: A Preliminary Test of Method. Sci Eng Ethics 19, 43–62 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9319-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9319-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation