Among hotline callers, the untrained comparison group exhibited higher moral reasoning than the accounting context group, with no difference involving the ethical context group¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2012 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? A significant overall group difference (p = 0.002) was driven by the comparison group (mean = 3.86) reasoning at a higher level than the accounting context group (mean = 2.90); the ethical context group (mean = 3.41) did not differ from either. → Mary Jo Billiot 2012

Evidence¶

Mary Jo Billiot 2012¶

Mary Jo Billiot, David Daniel, Sid Glandon, TerryAnn Glandon. (2012). Educational Context: Preparing Accounting Students To Identify Ethical Dilemmas. American Journal Of Business Education – May/June 2012 Volume 5, Number 3. https://clutejournals.com/index.php/AJBE

q2 · i? · causal · r1

One-way ANOVA on the 139 respondents (80.8 percent of the sample) who chose to call the company hotline, with moral reasoning coded on Kohlberg's levels 1 to 5. The article calls this result unexpected.

"results indicate a significant difference between groups (p = 0.002). However, the difference was between the comparison group (mean = 3.86) and the accounting context group (mean = 2.90)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• When the untrained comparison group is omitted, the ethical context group exhibits higher moral reasoning than the accounting context group — related
• General work experience, not accounting-specific experience, was associated with higher levels of moral reasoning — related