Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41680512›Full record

SynthesisScience and engineering ethics2026

Engineering Ethics Interventions and Assessments: A Systematic Literature Review.

Vandna Venkata Krishnan, Brady DeHoust, Glen Miller, Michael D Johnson, Bimal Nepal, Amarnath Banerjee

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Science and engineering ethics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Vandna Venkata KrishnanDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA.
Brady DeHoustDepartment of Philosophy, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA.
Glen MillerDepartment of Philosophy, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA.
Michael D JohnsonDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA.
Bimal NepalDepartment of Engineering Technology and Industrial Distribution, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA. nepal@tamu.edu.
Amarnath BanerjeeDepartment of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Engineers routinely face decisions with moral and ethical implications at the personal, professional, and societal levels. Recent events such as oil spills, product recalls, and infrastructure failures highlight the urgent need for stronger ethical standards in engineering education and practice. Although literature on science and engineering ethics continues to grow, much of it remains fragmented across disciplines and domains, making it difficult to assess the overall state of the field. This paper addresses this gap by conducting a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed studies on pedagogical approaches intended to contribute to ethical and responsible practice in engineering, published between 2013 and 2022. A total of 159 studies were analyzed and categorized according to whether they were interventions, assessments, or both, and, drawing from James R. Rest’s application of the component model of moral development to the professions, whether the desired learning outcome was moral awareness, ethical and professional knowledge, or moral reasoning. We also analyzed whether the research aimed to instill or measure ethical self-efficacy, confidence in one’s knowledge and skills related to ethical action, an attribute often considered in engineering education. The review provides an overview of the plurality of educational interventions and assessments and includes a brief description of each. Implications for educators, researchers, and practitioners are discussed, along with recommendations for future research and curriculum development.

Indexed as

EngineeringEthics, ProfessionalMoral DevelopmentDecision MakingHumansMoralsSelf EfficacyAssessment methodsEngineering ethicsEthical self-efficacyEthics interventionMoral reasoning

Identifiers

PMID41680512
PMCPMC12975833

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.