Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32240494›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2020

Guiding Engineering Student Teams' Ethics Discussions with Peer Advising.

Eun Ah Lee, Nicholas Gans, Magdalena Grohman, Marco Tacca, Matthew J Brown

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Eun Ah LeeThe University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Road, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA. EunAh.Lee@utdallas.edu.
Nicholas GansThe University of Texas at Arlington, 701 S Nedderman Dr, Arlington, TX, 76019, USA.
Magdalena GrohmanThe University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Road, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA.
Marco TaccaThe University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Road, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA.
Matthew J BrownThe University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Road, Richardson, TX, 75080, USA.
The University of Texas at Dallas · USThe University of Texas at Arlington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study explores how peer advising affects student project teams' discussions of engineering ethics. Peer ethics advisors from non-engineering disciplines are expected to provide diverse perspectives and to help engineering student teams engage and sustain ethics discussions. To investigate how peer advising helps engineering student teams' ethics discussions, three student teams in different peer advising conditions were closely observed: without any advisor, with a single volunteer advisor, and with an advising team working on the ethics advising project. Micro-scale discourse analysis based on cognitive ethnography was conducted to find each team's cultural model of understanding of engineering ethics. Cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) analysis was also conducted to see what influenced each team's cultural model. In cultural model, the engineering team with an ethics advising team showed broader understanding in social implications of engineering. The results of CHAT analysis indicated that differences in rules, community, and division of labor among three teams influenced the teams' cultural models. The CHAT analysis also indicated that the peer advisors working on the ethics advising project and the engineering team working on engineering design project created a collaborative environment. The findings indicated that collaborative environment supported peer ethics advising to facilitate team discussions of engineering ethics.

Indexed as

EngineeringStudentsHumansPeer GroupCognitive ethnographyCultural-historical activity theory (CHAT)Engineering ethicsPeer advising

Identifiers

PMID32240494
OpenAlexW3014896086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.