This module is designed to help you understand how ethical issues arise daily in the field of statistics. You will examine everyday scenarios or decision points and respond in terms of the ethical issues that arise. Below are frameworks that describe how to test your decisions and solutions in terms of their ethics.
- Gather Information: Many disagreements can be resolved by gathering more information. Because this is the easiest and least painful way of reaching consensus, it is almost always best to start here. Gathering information may not be possible because of different constraints: there may not be enough time, the facts may be too expensive to gather, or the information required goes beyond scientific or technical knowledge. Sometimes gathering more information does not solve the problem but allows for a new, more fruitful formulation of the problem. Harris, Pritchard, and Rabins in Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases show how solving a factual disagreement allows a more profound conceptual disagreement to emerge.
- Nolo Contendere. Nolo Contendere is latin for not opposing or contending. Your interests may conflict with your supervisor but he or she may be too powerful to reason with or oppose. So your only choice here is to give in to his or her interests. The problem with nolo contendere is that non-opposition is often taken as agreement. You may need to document (e.g., through memos) that you disagree with a course of action and that your choosing not to oppose does not indicate agreement.
- Negotiate. Good communication and diplomatic skills may make it possible to negotiate a solution that respects the different interests. Value integrative solutions are designed to integrate conflicting values. Compromises allow for partial realization of the conflicting interests. (See the module, The Ethics of Team Work, for compromise strategies such as logrolling or bridging.) Sometimes it may be necessary to set aside one's interests for the present with the understanding that these will be taken care of at a later time. This requires trust.
- Oppose. If nolo contendere and negotiation are not possible, then opposition may be necessary. Opposition requires marshalling evidence to document one's position persuasively and impartially. It makes use of strategies such as leading an "organizational charge" or "blowing the whistle." For more on whistle-blowing consult the discussion of whistle blowing in the Hughes case that can be found at computing cases.
- Exit. Opposition may not be possible if one lacks organizational power or documented evidence. Nolo contendere will not suffice if non-opposition implicates one in wrongdoing. Negotiation will not succeed without a necessary basis of trust or a serious value integrative solution. As a last resort, one may have to exit from the situation by asking for reassignment or resigning.
There are three steps to complete the module.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- Describe the unethical behavior.
- Describe the consequences of this behavior.
- Suggest possible positive changes to the unethical behavior.
- REVERSIBILITY: Would I think this a good choice if I were among those affected by it?
- PUBLICITY: Would I want this action published in the newspaper?
- HARM: Does this action do less harm than any available alternative?
- FEASIBILITY: Can this solution be implemented given resource, interest, and technical constraints?
Reflection helps us successfully to close the act of learning. Module activities are designed to give us feedback on our decisions and problem solving. How did your group, your class, and your teacher react to your conclusions and arguments? What can you learn from these reactions?
- The glossary available through Online Ethics provides concise and relatively
noncontroversial definitions of terms important to ethics
- The link to Computing Cases provides a general orientation to the ethics tests
used in the pre-test and gray matters exercises. Computing Cases also contains
materials from six extensive case study analyses that have been prepared with
funds from the NSF.
- Gary Comstock's NSF-funded project, Langure, provides browsers with several
modules on research ethics that can be combined into different courses. Comstock
has prepared an excellent introduction to the ethical theories of utilitarianism,
deontology, and virtue ethics. This is useful for teachers who want to take a
more theoretical approach to teaching their ethics module.
- Ethics Updates, a website developed and maintained by Larry Hinman from the
University of California, San Diego, provides excellent materials and links in
areas such as applied ethics, theoretical ethics, and ethics across the curriculum.
The theoretical ethics section has links to several classical philosophical texts
in ethics that are publicly available online.
- The EAC Module Collection, the last link, draws together resources available
on Connexions for developing, assessing, and disseminating EAC modules.