Global Engineering Ethics: What? Why? How? and When?

Even though engineering programs, accreditation bodies, and multinational corporations have become increasingly interested in introducing global dimensions into professional engineering practice, little work in the existing literature provides an overview of questions fundamental to global engineering ethics, such as what global engineering ethics is, why it should be taught, how it should be taught, and when it should be introduced. This paper describes the what, why, how, and when of global engineering ethics – a form adopted from a 1996 article by Charles Harris, Michael Davis, Michael Pritchard, and Michael Rabins, which has influenced the development of engineering ethics for over twenty-five years. First, this paper describes global engineering ethics as a response to the increasingly cross-cultural, international characteristics of contemporary engineering, as well as four fundamental approaches to conceive and deliver this training (what). Next, it explains the motivations for global engineering ethics: Neither educators nor practitioners can necessarily assume a shared nationality or culture among students or between coworkers (why). Third, this paper discusses how global engineering ethics should be taught: One of the most prevalent approaches uses case studies with a cross-cultural and/or international dimension (how). Finally, it identifies spots within curricula for global engineering ethics: standalone courses, integrated modules, micro-insertions, competence-based training scenarios, and extracurricular activities (when). As the world becomes ever more cross-cultural and international, training in global ethics will be essential for both students and practicing engineers

Studies on Left‐Behind Children in China: Reviewing Paradigm Shifts

More than 60 million children have been left behind in rural China by parents going to work in cities. Given the effects of child–parent separation (CPS) on development, this phenomenon has drawn considerable governmental and academic attention in recent years. Outlining developments with reference to relevant studies, this review characterizes the perspectives used to explore and understand this phenomenon in terms of three major paradigms: (1) the diagnostic approach, which takes for granted the assumption that CPS would be the only cause of negative effects observed among left‐behind children (LBC), and has focused primarily on measuring psychological and behavioral disorders among these “problematic kids”; (2) the advanced diagnostic approach, which refines the previous approach by incorporating theories and techniques developed outside of China, elaborating on the early approach by bringing into consideration more factors and exploring the interactions between CPS and these factors, particularly social ones; (3) the sociologically oriented approach, which provides the research with a much broader framework in terms of how to orient the phenomenon of LBC, especially the transformation of China’s social and economic systems during the last 30 years of urbanization, where the reproduction of labor has been based on a “splitting family structure,” such that problems associated with the phenomenon of LBC cannot be solved without systematic social and economic changes. Based on these analyses, future directions for research on LBC in China are also discussed.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147833/1/cad20267_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147833/2/cad20267.pd

Why do we Need Norm Sensitive Design?:A WEIRD Critique of Value Sensitive Approaches to Design

The article argues that mainstream value-sensitive approaches to design have been based on narrow understandings of personhood and social dynamics, which are biased toward Western Educated Industrialized Rich and Democratic cultures and contradicted by empirical evidence. To respond to this weakness, the article suggests that design may benefit from focusing on user behaviours from the joint perspective of values and norms, especially across cultural contexts. As such, it proposes Norm Sensitive Design as a complement to value-sensitive approaches when designing and implementing new technologies. Versus values, norms serve as more accurate predictors or descriptors of behaviours and can thus support value-sensitive approaches to realize the aspiration of informing user behaviour via design. The article makes two key contributions. On the theoretical side, it promotes the consideration of norms in design. On the practical side, it offers designers and instructors prompts for reflecting on design ethics from the perspective of norms

Situational factors shape moral judgments in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern, and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample

Much research on moral judgment is centered on moral dilemmas in which deontological perspectives (i.e., emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with utilitarian judgements (i.e., following the greater good defined through consequences). A central finding of this field Greene et al. showed that psychological and situational factors (e.g., the intent of the agent, or physical contact between the agent and the victim) play an important role in people’s use of deontological versus utilitarian considerations when making moral decisions. As their study was conducted with US samples, our knowledge is limited concerning the universality of this effect, in general, and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors of moral judgments, in particular. Here, we empirically test the universality of deontological and utilitarian judgments by replicating Greene et al.’s experiments on a large (N = X,XXX) and diverse (WEIRD and non-WEIRD) sample across the world to explore the influence of culture on moral judgment. The relevance of this exploration to a broad range of policy-making problems is discussed

Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample.

From PubMed via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2019-04-15, accepted 2022-02-14Publication status: aheadofprintThe study of moral judgements often centres on moral dilemmas in which options consistent with deontological perspectives (that is, emphasizing rules, individual rights and duties) are in conflict with options consistent with utilitarian judgements (that is, following the greater good based on consequences). Greene et al. (2009) showed that psychological and situational factors (for example, the intent of the agent or the presence of physical contact between the agent and the victim) can play an important role in moral dilemma judgements (for example, the trolley problem). Our knowledge is limited concerning both the universality of these effects outside the United States and the impact of culture on the situational and psychological factors affecting moral judgements. Thus, we empirically tested the universality of the effects of intent and personal force on moral dilemma judgements by replicating the experiments of Greene et al. in 45 countries from all inhabited continents. We found that personal force and its interaction with intention exert influence on moral judgements in the US and Western cultural clusters, replicating and expanding the original findings. Moreover, the personal force effect was present in all cultural clusters, suggesting it is culturally universal. The evidence for the cultural universality of the interaction effect was inconclusive in the Eastern and Southern cultural clusters (depending on exclusion criteria). We found no strong association between collectivism/individualism and moral dilemma judgements. [Abstract copyright: © 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.

Publisher correction: Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample

Correction to: Nature Human Behaviour https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5, published online 14 April 2022

Publisher Correction: Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample.

From PubMed via Jisc Publications RouterPublication status: aheadofprin

Publisher correction:Situational factors shape moral judgements in the trolley dilemma in Eastern, Southern and Western countries in a culturally diverse sample

Correction to: Nature Human Behaviour https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01319-5, published online 14 April 2022