Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40167873›Full record

ArticleScience and engineering ethics2025

Towards a Psychologically Realist, Culturally Responsive Approach to Engineering Ethics in Global Contexts.

Rockwell F Clancy, Qin Zhu, Scott Streiner, Andrea Gammon, Ryan Thorpe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Perceived Stress and Society-Wide Moral Judgment.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2025
    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.

Rockwell F ClancyDepartment of Engineering Education, College of Engineering, Virginia Tech, 635 Prices Fork Rd, 345 Goodwin Hall (MC 0218), Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA. rfclancy@vt.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7797-7835
Qin ZhuDepartment of Engineering Education, College of Engineering, Virginia Tech, 635 Prices Fork Rd, 345 Goodwin Hall (MC 0218), Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA.
Scott StreinerDepartment of Industrial Engineering, Swanson School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
Andrea GammonDepartment of Values, Technology, and Innovation, Faculty of Technology, Policy, and Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.
Ryan ThorpeUniversity of Michigan-Shanghai Jiao Tong University Joint Institute, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences 2124984SBE Office of Multidisciplinary Activities 2316634
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper describes the motivations and some directions for bringing insights and methods from moral and cultural psychology to bear on how engineering ethics is conceived, taught, and assessed. Therefore, the audience for this paper is not only engineering ethics educators and researchers but also administrators and organizations concerned with ethical behaviors. Engineering ethics has typically been conceived and taught as a branch of professional and applied ethics with pedagogical aims, where students and practitioners learn about professional codes and/or Western ethical theories and then apply these resources to address issues presented in case studies about engineering and/or technology. As a result, accreditation and professional bodies have generally adopted ethical reasoning skills and/or moral knowledge as learning outcomes. However, this paper argues that such frameworks are psychologically "irrealist" and culturally biased: it is not clear that ethical judgments or behaviors are primarily the result of applying principles, or that ethical concerns captured in professional codes or Western ethical theories do or should reflect the engineering ethical concerns of global populations. Individuals from Western educated industrialized rich democratic cultures are outliers on various psychological and social constructs, including self-concepts, thought styles, and ethical concerns. However, engineering is more cross cultural and international than ever before, with engineers and technologies spanning multiple cultures and countries. For instance, different national regulations and cultural values can come into conflict while performing engineering work. Additionally, ethical judgments may also result from intuitions, closer to emotions than reflective thought, and behaviors can be affected by unconscious, social, and environmental factors. To address these issues, this paper surveys work in engineering ethics education and assessment to date, shortcomings within these approaches, and how insights and methods from moral and cultural psychology could be used to improve engineering ethics education and assessment, making them more culturally responsive and psychologically realist at the same time.

Indexed as

Cultural CompetencyCultureEngineeringEthics, ProfessionalInternationalityCodes of EthicsEthical TheoryHumansMoralsTechnologyCultureEthical reasoningGlobal engineering ethicsMoral intuitionsMoral psychologyWEIRD

Identifiers

PMID40167873
PMCPMC11961465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.