When the untrained comparison group is omitted, the ethical context group exhibits higher moral reasoning than the accounting 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? In the two-group analysis, the ethical context group (mean = 3.41) showed a higher level of moral reasoning than the accounting context group (mean = 2.90, p = 0.048). → 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

Additional one-way ANOVA limited to the two trained groups (n = 111 hotline callers: 61 ethical context, 50 accounting context), omitting the comparison group because the authors' primary interest was the effect of context. Work experience remained significant (p = 0.012).

"the results indicate a significant difference between the means, with the ethical context group exhibiting a higher level of moral reasoning (mean = 3.41) than the accounting context group (mean = 2.90, p = 0.048)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Among hotline callers, the untrained comparison group exhibited higher moral reasoning than the accounting context group, with no difference involving the ethical context group — related
• Students in an ethics-framed educational process demonstrate greater ethical sensitivity than students in an accounting-framed process when evaluating an ambiguous scenario — related
• General work experience, not accounting-specific experience, was associated with higher levels of moral reasoning — related