Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 3–31 | Cite as

A Qualitative Approach to Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Training Development: Identification of Metacognitive Strategies

  • Vykinta Kligyte
  • Richard T. Marcy
  • Sydney T. Sevier
  • Elaine S. Godfrey
  • Michael D. Mumford
Original Paper


Although Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training is common in the sciences, the effectiveness of RCR training is open to question. Three key factors appear to be particularly important in ensuring the effectiveness of ethics education programs: (1) educational efforts should be tied to day-to-day practices in the field, (2) educational efforts should provide strategies for working through the ethical problems people are likely to encounter in day-to-day practice, and (3) educational efforts should be embedded in a broader program of on-going career development efforts. This article discusses a complex qualitative approach to RCR training development, based on a sensemaking model, which strives to address the afore-mentioned training concerns. Ethnographic observations and prior RCR training served the purpose of collecting information specific to a multi-disciplinary and multi-university research center with the goal of identifying metacognitive reasoning strategies that would facilitate ethical decision-making. The extensive qualitative analyses resulted in the identification of nine metacognitive reasoning strategies on which future RCR training will be developed. The implications of the findings for RCR training in the sciences are discussed.


Integrity Ethics Scientific misconduct Training Sensemaking Qualitative analysis 



We thank Dr. Dean F. Hougen for sharing his expertise in physical sciences which was essential in contextualizing the obtained qualitative information. We also thank Dr. Morris W. Foster for his input on the ethnographic information analyses. This research was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), contract No. SES 0529910.


  1. 1.
    Adolphson, D. L. (2004). A new perspective on ethics, ecology, and economics. Journal of Business Ethics, 54, 204–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Al-Jalahma, M., & Fakhroo, E. (2004). Teaching medical ethics: Implementation and evaluation of a new course during residency training in Bahrain. Education for Health: Change in Learning & Practice, 17, 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bebeau, M. J. (1993). Designing an outcome-based ethics curriculum for professional education: Strategies and evidence of effectiveness. Journal of Moral Education, 22(3), 313–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bebeau, M. J., & Brabeck, M. M. (1987). Integrating care and justice issues in professional moral education: A general perspective. Journal of Moral Education, 16, 189–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bebeau, M. J., & Thoma, S. J. (1994). The impact of a dental ethics curriculum on moral reasoning. Journal of Dental Education, 58, 684–692.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Berardi-Coletta, B., Buyer, L. S., Dominowski, R. L., & Rellinger, E. R. (1995). Metacognition and problem solving: A process-oriented approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 21, 205–223.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bourdieu, P. (1990). In other words: Essays towards a reflexive sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bowker, G. C., Star, S. L., Turner, W., & Gasser, L. (1997). Social science, technical systems, and cooperative work: Beyond the great divide. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brown, N., & Szeman, I. (2000). Pierre Bourdieu: fieldwork in culture. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Buller, P. F., Kohls, J. J., & Anderson, K. S. (1991). The challenge of global ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 10(10), 767–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Butler, A. R., Scherer, L. L., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2003). Effects of solution elicitation aids and need for cognition on the generation of solutions in ill-structured problems. Creativity Research Journal, 15, 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Carrero, V., Peiró, J. M., & Salanova, M. (2000). Studying radical innovation through grounded theory. European Journal on Work and Organizational Psychology, 9, 489–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cascio, W. F., & Aguinis, H. (2005). Applied psychology in human resource management (6th ed.). New Jersey: Upper Saddle River.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Charmaz, C. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen, F. W. (2003). A study of the adjustment of ethical recognition and ethical decision-making of managers-to-be across the Taiwan Strait before and after receiving a business ethics education. Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 291–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clapham, M. M. (1997). Ideational skills training: A key element in creativity training programs. Creativity Research Journal, 10, 33–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Clarkeburn, H., Downie, J. R., & Matthew, B. (2002). Impact of an ethics program in a life sciences curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 7, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Connelly, M. S., Helton-Fauth, W., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). A managerial in-basket study of the impact of trait emotions on ethical choice. Journal of Business Ethics, 51, 245–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Coughlin, S. S., Katz, W. H., & Mattison, D. R. (1999). Ethics instruction at schools of public health in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 89, 768–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Davis, M. (2003). The role of culture in research misconduct. Accountability in Research, 10, 189–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    De las Fuentes, C., Willmuth, M. E., & Yarrow, C. (2005). Competency training in ethics education and practice. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 36, 362–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Deutch C. E. (1996). A course in research ethics for graduate students. College Teaching, 44, 56–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dörner, D., & Schaub, H. (1994). Errors in planning and decision-making and the nature of human information processing. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 43, 433–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Drake, M. J., Griffin, P. M., Kirkman, R., & Swann, J. L. (2005). Engineering ethical curricula: Assessment and comparison of two approaches. Journal of Engineering Education, 94, 223–231.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Drazin, R., Glynn, M. A., & Kazarjain, R. K. (1999). Multi-level theorizing about creativity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 24, 286–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (revised edition). Cambridge, MA: Bradford books/MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1998). How to study thinking in everyday life: Contrasting think-aloud protocols with descriptions and explanations of thinking. Mind, Culture, & Activity, 5(3), 178–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ferrell, O. C., & Gresham, L. G. (1985). A contingency framework for understanding ethical decision making in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49(3), 87–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ford, R. C., & Richardson, W. D. (1994). Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 205–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fromm, E. (2003). The changing engineering educational paradigm. Journal of Engineering Education, 92, 113–121.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gawthrop, J. C., & Uhlemann, M. R. (1992). Effects of the problem-solving approach in ethics training. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 23, 38–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory analysis: Emergence vs. forcing. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Glaser, B.G. (1998). Doing grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Goldstein, I. L., & Ford, J. K. (2001). Training in organizations: Needs assessment, development, and evaluation (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Haig, B. D. (1996). Grounded theory as scientific method: Philosophy of Education 1995: Current issues (pp. 281–290). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hammond, K. J. (1990). Case-based planning: A framework for planning from experience. Cognitive Science, 14, 385–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Harrington, S. (1997). A test of a person-issue contingent model of ethical decision making in organizations. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 363–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Jones, T. (1991). Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kalichman, M. W., & Friedman, P. J. (1992). A pilot study of biomedical trainees’ perceptions concerning research ethics. Academic Medicine, 67, 769–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kan, M. M., & Parry, K. W. (2004). Identifying paradox: A grounded theory of leadership in overcoming resistance to change. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 467–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Key, S. (1999). Organizational ethical culture: Real or imagined? Journal of Business Ethics, 20, 217–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kohlberg, L. (1969). Stage and sequence: The cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of socialization theory and research (pp. 347–480). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Kohlberg, L. (1984). The psychology of moral development: Moral stages and the life cycle. San Francisco: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lee, R. M. (1993). Doing research on sensitive topics. London, UK: Sage.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Loe, T. W., Ferrell, L., & Mansfield, P. (2000). A review of empirical studies assessing ethical decision making in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Machin, M. A. (2002). Planning, managing, and optimizing transfer of training. In K. Kraiger (Eds), Creating, implementing, and managing effective training and development (pp. 263–301). San Frcisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Macrina, F. L., Funk, C. L., & Barrett, K. (2004). Effectiveness of responsible conduct of research instruction: Initial findings. Journal of Research Administration, 35, 6–13.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Malek, J. I., Gellar, G., & Sugarman, J. (2000). Talking about cases in bioethics: The effect of an intensive course on health care professionals. Journal of Medical Ethics, 26(2), 131–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Martin, P. Y., & Turner, B. A. (1986). Grounded theory and organizational research. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22, 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists’ perceptions of working conditions and self-reported misbehavior. Paper presented at the 3rd research on research integrity conference, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Muijen, H. S. (2004). Corporate social responsibility starts at a university. Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mumford, M. D. (2006). Pathways to outstanding leadership: A comparative analysis of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders. Mahweh, New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mumford, M. D., Baughman, W. A., & Sager, C. E. (2003). Picking the right material: Cognitive processing skills and their role in creative thought. In M. A. Runco (Eds.), Critical creative processes (pp. 19–68). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. A., Waples, E. P., & Devenport, L. D. (2008). A sensemaking approach to ethics training for scientists: Preliminary evidence of training effectiveness. Ethics and Behavior, 18(2).Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mumford, M. D., & Gustafson, S. B. (1988). Creativity syndrome: Integration, application, and innovation. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Mumford, M. D., Reiter-Palmon, R., & Redmond, M. R. (1994). Problem construction and cognition: Applying problem representations in ill-defined domains. In M.A. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity (pp. 3–39). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    National Research Council. (2002). Integrity in scientific research: Creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Nebacker, C. (2004). A model to develop RCR curriculum targeting lay research staff. Paper presented at the 3rd research on research integrity conference, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    O`Fallon, M. J., & Butterfield, K. D. (2005). A review of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 1996–2003. Journal of Business Ethics, 59, 375–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Önkal, D., Yates, J. F., Simga-Mugan, C., & Öztin, Ş. (2003). Professional vs. amateur judgment accuracy: The case of foreign exchange rates. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 91, 169–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pandit, N. R. (1996). The creation of theory: A recent application of the grounded theory method. The Qualitative Report, 2(4). Available at–4/pandit.html
  65. 65.
    Powell, S., Allinson, M., & Kalichman, M. (2004). Effectiveness of RCR courses for medical student researchers. Paper presented at the 3rd research on research integrity conference, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Reidenbach, R. E., & Robin, D. P. (1988). Some initial steps toward improving the measurement of ethical evaluations of marketing activities. Journal of Business Ethics, 7, 871–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Resnick, D. R. (2003). From Baltimore to Bell Labs: Reflections on two decades of debate about scientific misconduct. Accountability in Research, 10, 123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Rest, J. R. (1986). An overview of the psychology of morality. In J. R. Rest (Ed.), Moral development and behavior: Theory, research, and social issues (pp. 133–175). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Scott, G. M., Leritz, L. E., & Mumford, M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: A meta-analysis. Creativity Research Journal, 16, 361–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Scott, G. M., Lonergan, D. C., & Mumford, M. D. (2005). Conceptual combination: Alternative knowledge structures, alternative heuristics. Creativity Research Journal, 17, 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sims, R. R. (2000). Changing an organization’s culture under new leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 19, 393–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Sims, R. L., & Keon, T. L. (1999). Determinants of ethical decision-making: The relationship of the perceived organizational environment. Journal of Business Ethics, 19, 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. (2002). The affect heuristic. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 397–420). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Steneck, N. K. (2004). Opening remarks. Paper presented at the 3rd research on research integrity conference, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 273–285). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Tannenbaum, S. I. (2002). A strategic view of organizational training and learning. In K. Kraiger (Ed.), Creating, implementing, and managing effective training and development (pp. 10–52). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Tereskerz, P. M. (2003). Research accountability and financial conflicts of interest in industry: Sponsored clinical research. Accountability in Research, 10, 137–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    The National Academies Press. (2002). Integrity in scientific research: Creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct. Available at
  80. 80.
    Titus, S. (2004). Descriptive study: Research integrity measures used in biomedical laboratories. Paper presented at the 3rd research on research integrity conference, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Tracey, J. B., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Kavanagh, M. J. (1995). Applying trained skills on the job: The importance of work environment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 239–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Trevino, L. K. (1986). Ethical decision-making in organizations: A person-situation interactionist model. Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Turner, B. A. (1983). The use of grounded theory for the qualitative analysis of organizational behavior. Journal of Management Studies, 20, 333–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995). Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review, 102(2), 269–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Walsh, J. P. (1989). Doing a deal: Merger and acquisition: Negotiations and their impact upon target company top management turnover. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 307–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). Affective events theory: A theoretical discussion of the structure, causes and consequences of affective experiences at work. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior: An annual series of analytical essays and critical reviews (Vol. 18, pp. 1–74). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Werhane, P. H. (2002). Moral imagination and systems thinking. Journal of Business Ethics, 38, 33–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Whitbeck, C. (2004). Authorship and mentoring concerns in faculty: Trainee discussions. Paper presented at the 3rd research on research integrity conference, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Wimbush, J. C. (1999). The effect of cognitive moral development and supervisory influence on subordinate’s ethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 18, 383–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vykinta Kligyte
    • 1
  • Richard T. Marcy
    • 1
  • Sydney T. Sevier
    • 2
  • Elaine S. Godfrey
    • 3
  • Michael D. Mumford
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA
  2. 2.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA
  3. 3.School of MeteorologyUniversity of OklahomaNormanUSA

Personalised recommendations