Psychology Help

 

Complete the Ethics Awareness Inventory.

Write a 700- to 1,400-word summary that interprets the results of your survey. Apply the results to your personal and professional development. Include the following:

• Interpret the results of your survey. Use the information provided in your survey results to describe your ethics style and what your style means to you.
• Explain the results of your survey. Were you surprised by your results? Do you agree or disagree with the outcome? Explain why.
• Evaluate the role and importance of personal ethics in the field of psychology, the development of principles, and the code of conduct.
• Identify how your ethics style affects how you will apply psychological principles to personal, spiritual, social, and organizational issues.
• Discuss how ethics affect psychological knowledge and principles related to personal growth, health, and development.
• Analyze the advantages of choosing to pursue a degree in psychology. How do ethics play a role in your decision? Provide examples.

Include an introduction, conclusion, and references page. 

Include two to three references. You must use the survey as one of your references. 

For more information on The Williams Institute: www.ethics-twi.org info@ethics-twi.org 480-517-1891

CORE Scoring Graphs EAI

Understanding Your Scores Compared To Others

The purpose of these two EAI CORE scoring graphs is to help you achieve greater awareness about
how you and others use different ethical reasoning for deciding and explaining ethical choices. The
more you understand the range of ethical perspectives you are able to apply when analyzing a situation
to determine the best ethical outcome, and the more that you accept that range in others, the more
effective you will be in resolving professional and personal ethical issues.

Interpreting the Line Graph

The Line Graph’s upper and lower blue lines represent the range of responses for “most likely” and
“least likely” made for each CORE perspective in a sample size of 965 adults. The red line is the mean
of total responses for each CORE perspective, based on the sample. The green line indicates your
response totals for each CORE perspective as compared to the mean and extremes of the sample
scores.

Interpreting the graph indicates two things about you:

1) the extent to which you are “most likely” to rely upon using a particular ethical perspective in
your reasoning for decisions in multiple contexts, and

2) the extent to which you are “least likely” to use other ethical perspectives because you disagree
with, or do not accept as an ethical alternative, that reasoning.

Interpreting “Most Likely” Positive Scores

A high positive score in one CORE perspective, with subsequent low scores in the others, indicates that
you depend on the reasoning of that CORE perspective for most, if not all, of your ethical decisions.
The higher the score, the more exclusively you use that CORE perspective. Though consistency is a
good thing, restricting yourself to viewing all ethical situations from one ethical perspective limits your
ability to solve ethical dilemmas, as well as limits your ability to dialogue with others when working to
solve ethically related problems collectively.

Scores that are more evenly distributed among the CORE perspectives indicate you probably can
understand and apply other CORE perspectives when appropriate and can communicate that
reasoning for your ethical choices, depending on the information you have and how you prioritize your
values in unique ethical contexts. In addition, you may be more open to accept the ethical reasoning
of others when different from yours in various decision making contexts.

These scores may indicate that you realize people have different ethical perspectives as they analyze
an ethical issue, because they may have different information and/or prioritize their personal and
organizational values differently. With this understanding, you can seek a common solution to
differences by determining what underlying values you share, and then use those shared values to
resolve differences in approach to finding the best ethical decision.

Whether your scores are more distinct or more evenly distributed, the importance of Awareness and
understanding is to avoid being caught up in pointlessly arguing about whose ethical perspective is
“right,” rather than then focusing on reaching the best ethical decision. The most effective and relevant
resolution of an ethical issue will flow out of constructive dialogue that considers multiple ethical
perspectives.

For more information on The Williams Institute: www.ethics-twi.org info@ethics-twi.org 480-517-1891
CORE Scoring Graphs EAI

Interpreting “Least Likely” Negative Scores

The greater the negative score of a CORE perspective, the less likely you are to accept the reasoning
of that ethical perspective when working with others to resolve ethical concerns. In some cases, you
may not even accept another person’s reasoning as ethical at all, let alone as a legitimate alternative.
This can lead to arguments about who is or is not being ethical, rather than working to find a common
solution to an ethical issue. Thus, working to gain greater awareness about other perspectives will
make you a better communicator and problem solver.

The lesser the negative score of a CORE perspective, the more accepting you are of others’
approaches to ethical decision making, and the greater the opportunity for you to have open dialogue
and positive conclusions to disagreements about how to resolve ethical concerns.

Interpreting the Bar Graph

The Bar Graph shows the twelve combinations of “most likely” and “least likely” use of the four CORE
perspectives. The checkmark shows your combination of CORE scores and how your combination
compares to the others.

For more information on The Williams Institute: www.ethics-twi.org info@ethics-twi.org 480-517-1891

(O) OBLIGATION EAI

Ethics Awareness Inventory – Gain New Insight Into Your Ethical Perspective

Your Ethical Perspective

You tend to base your ethical perspective on an individual’s duty or obligation to do what is morally
right—principles that represent what rational persons ought morally to do. You believe that ethical
conduct appeals to “conscience.” In judging whether a person’s actions are ethical, you look to the
intent behind his/her actions, rather than focusing on results. In other words, to be considered ethical,
you believe that we must choose how we act and what rules we are willing to follow. From your
perspective, ethical principles must be: (a) appropriate under any circumstances (universalizable); (b)
respectful of human dignity; and (c) committed to promoting individual freedom and autonomy. Human
beings must never be treated simply as “means” to the accomplishment of some defined “end.” The
end does not justify the means. For additional research: This category is most closely aligned in
philosophy with a deontological theory (See Immanuel Kant and John Rawls).

Remember to review the BLENDED CATEGORIES section if your second highest score is within one
or two points of your highest score.

Your Ethical Style

You believe that human beings have intrinsic value—we have a right to individual respect. Therefore,
you cannot support social traditions and policies aimed at “the best interests of society as a whole” if
any individual is denied the opportunities to which she/he is entitled as a human being. Your approach
to ethics requires that, within legal and humane limits, people should be allowed to make their own
choices. Acting in response to impulse, instinct, or rules worked out by others for us to obey does not
constitute ethical conduct on our part. You believe that fostering personal growth takes precedence
over achieving efficiency through organizational and social structures that tend to “dehumanize” ethical
decision making. For this reason, you advocate policies intended to ensure equal respect and
opportunities for all. Moral decisions must reflect the free choice of individuals if we ever expect to hold
them personally responsible. You are guided by a desire to be in accord with established standards of
right and wrong.

Frustrations You Face in Addressing Ethical Dilemmas

What you determine to be the right choice may not appear to be the most beneficial choice
for the organization you support. The right choice does not necessarily benefit the decision
maker.

You believe that cost-benefit analysis (weighing the cost versus benefit of a specific

decision) is inappropriate for addressing issues with ethical considerations, even though this
is the preferred decision making tool for many organizations. For example, some of the
things that you hold most dear are not easily measured, e.g., right and wrong; good and evil;
and the value of a human life.

Your belief that we have a moral duty or obligation to do what is right leaves little room for

compromise when ethical principles are being violated.

You are frustrated to discover how various individuals define right and wrong, how conflicts
are sometimes resolved in an organizational setting, and who resolves them.

For more information on The Williams Institute: www.ethics-twi.org info@ethics-twi.org 480-517-1891
(O) OBLIGATION EAI

The people you work with may argue that certain factions of society are not capable of acting
in their own best interests. You consider this a faulty argument that was once used to deny
equitable treatment to women and minorities.

Defending your ethical perspective may result in economic hardship, e.g., a lost promotion

or termination

ARTICULATION—A Guide to Communicating Your Perspective

Your increased Awareness will assist you as you move to the next step of the A3 process—Articulation.
The words you use to explain your ethical position have a profound impact on your effectiveness. How
well you are able to accomplish your tasks, build relationships and support your decisions will depend
on your ability to express the basis for your position and to justify your decision making process.

Obligation-based perspectives are based on a sense of duty to do what is right. People who score
highest on this perspective value an explanation for the rationale or intent behind a person’s actions.
They want to see an indication that decisions are based on a commitment to basic universal principles
of respect that govern a strong commitment to the best interests of all individuals involved.

Examples of Obligation-based comments:

“We are clearly in violation of our professional standards.”
“We have a duty to do the right thing for our clients.”

Articulation of Your Perspective

Perspectives Key Concepts

Obligation — People are always an end in themselves,
never a means to an end. The Golden Rule is non-
negotiable.

Personal Attributes: Consistent, Committed, Dependable,
Respectful, “Straight arrow”

Duty
Intent
Code of Conduct
Ethical Principles
Human Dignity
Individual Freedom
Autonomy

Key Phrases Individual Style

“We owe it to them…”

“We have a duty to…”

“They deserve better…”

“They have a right to…”

Committed to…

Principle-oriented decisions
A moral compass
Ethics training
Equal opportunity for all
Professional standards
Respect for humane treatment
Rules of order

For more information on The Williams Institute: www.ethics-twi.org info@ethics-twi.org 480-517-1891

BLENDED CATEGORIES EAI

Ethics Awareness Inventory – Gain New Insight Into Your Ethical Perspective

C-O-R-E Categories:

C – CHARACTER
O – OBLIGATION
R – RESULTS
E – EQUITY

Ethical Beliefs in Multiple Categories

It is possible to have ethical beliefs that are represented in more than one category. Most individuals
agree with at least some characteristics in all four categories, and the relationship between these
categories form your unique ethical style. Therefore, these categories should be viewed as broad
descriptions of typical patterns. The purpose of the Ethics Awareness Inventory is to strengthen your
understanding of your own belief system. The idea of blended categories takes your Awareness a step
further.

If your second largest positive score is within one or two points of your largest, you will want to consider
the compatibility of the two scores. You may want to consider whether (a) you are experiencing an
internal conflict in attempting to function in two distinguishable moral environments, or (b) your ethical
style is simply a unique blend of two categories. For example, a blended C and O (within one or two
points of each other) is likely to support the idea that ethical principles without goodness are powerless
and goodness without some standards or principles of right and wrong is ineffective. The two
categories can be supportive of one another. However, a blended O and R may reflect some internal
conflicts between a feeling of moral obligation to individuals, on the one hand, while attempting to
produce specific results for some group or organization on the other. A careful examination of these
blended categories to identify possible internal conflicts is recommended.

External Conflicts May Influence Your Beliefs

If your Ethics Awareness Profile reflects blended categories, you may also want to consider whether
you are being challenged by situations in which people are asking you to do things that conflict with
your personal ethical beliefs. You may feel pressured in some situations to reject your own standards of
right and wrong, causing a feeling of internal conflict. Until you are able to explain your sincere beliefs
and consistently act in accordance with those beliefs without compromise, you will continue to
experience internal moral conflict. This will create discomfort for you, and it will be difficult to make
ethical decisions that you can stand behind.

Keep in mind that these descriptive categories represent only four recognized categories of ethical
philosophy and theory. Other schools of thought may be more closely related to your ethical belief
system. However, these common descriptions should provide insight into some of the significant
differences of opinion that may arise when you are trying to reach an ethical decision, especially when
working with others. A better understanding of the conflicts that arise between you and others regarding
what is the right thing to do will be helpful. Hopefully, you will be encouraged to explore other
resources and try to understand different ethical styles. Awareness of your ethical perspective is the
first step toward making ethics a central part of your daily life and developing a better working
relationship with others.

For more information on The Williams Institute: www.ethics-twi.org info@ethics-twi.org 480-517-1891

Articulation of Perspectives EAI

Ethics Awareness Inventory – Gain New Insight Into Your Ethical Perspective

ARTICULATION—Your Ethics Awareness Profile

Now that you have reviewed your Ethics Awareness Profile, you have begun to explore how an
Awareness of your ethical perspectives are reflected in the language you use. The second step in the

A
3
process—Articulation—is how we communicate our perspectives to others. Communication is

important to giving successful voice to your ethical perspective and opinions. However, your ability to
identify the perspectives of others through recognizing the language they use will further assist you in
understanding and speaking to the needs and values of others. In addition, using the language of
another’s perspectives to better communicate your own perspective will help others understand your
position more clearly, leading to greater success.

The next few pages provide you with additional insight into how ethical perspectives differ. On the
Review Menu page, you can click on each individual perspective — Character, Obligation, Results,
Equity — to read more about the perspectives of others.

Perspectives Key Concepts Key Phrases Individual Style

Character

Good people do good actions.
Good intent based on good
character is more important
than good outcomes.

Personal Attributes:
Trustworthy, Genuine,
Transparent, Compassionate,
Honorable

Integrity
Excellence
Honesty
Honor
Justice
Compassion
Wisdom

“We need to protect our
reputation…”

“Based on good
conscience…”

“It’s the right thing to do.”

“It’s only fair to…”

Committed to …

Good judgment
Equal opportunity
Quality performance
Moral excellence
Exemplary role modeling
Sincerity
Strong personal values

Obligation

People are always an end in
themselves, never a means to
an end. The Golden Rule is
non-negotiable.

Personal Attributes:
Consistent, Committed,
Dependable, Respectful,
“Straight arrow”

Duty
Intent
Code of Conduct
Ethical Principles
Human Dignity
Individual Freedom
Autonomy

“We owe it to them…”

“We have a duty to…”

“They deserve better…”

“They have a right to…”

Committed to …

Principle-oriented
decisions
A moral compass
Ethics training
Equal opportunity for all
Professional standards
Respect for humane
treatment
Rules of order

For more information on The Williams Institute: www.ethics-twi.org info@ethics-twi.org 480-517-1891
Articulation of Perspectives EAI

Perspectives Key Concepts Key Phrases Individual Style

Results

Outcomes that demonstrate
the “greatest good,” based on
sound assessments of facts
and process, are good
decisions.

Personal Attributes:
Productive, Goal-oriented,
Global thinker, Systematic,
Analytical

Consequences
Greatest Good
Improvement
Effectiveness
Efficiency
Goals
Productivity

“We need to focus on the
bottom line…”

“The best approach is a
systemic approach…”

“Keep the big picture in
mind…”

“Remember why we’re
here…”

Committed to …

Measurable results
Impact studies
Cost benefit analysis
Getting the job done
Protecting group
interests
Betterment of society
Accomplishment

Equity

Absolutes are overrated.
What counts is common
agreement about that which
positively affects the future of
society.

Personal Attributes:
Practical, Equitable,
Sensitive, Advocate, Mediator

Pragmatism
Experience
Cultural Sensitivity
Long-term Impact
Alternative Views
Critical Thinking
Diffusion of Power

“Let’s be practical…”

“We need to hear from the
powerless…”

“Diversity is important…”

“We need to work to
change bad rules…”

Committed to …

Frequent review of
policies
Fairness to all involved
Wider sense of
community
Extensive broad input
Respect for diversity
Tolerance
Consensus