Research Ethics Education in the STEM Disciplines: The Promises and Challenges of a Gaming Approach

While education in ethics and the responsible conduct of research (RCR) is widely acknowledged as an essential component of graduate education, particularly in the STEM disciplines (science, technology, engineering, and math), little consensus exists on how best to accomplish this goal. Recent years have witnessed a turn toward the use of games in this context. Drawing from two NSF-funded grants (one completed and one on-going), this paper takes a critical look at the use of games in ethics and RCR education. It does so by: (a) setting the development of research and engineering ethics games in wider historical and theoretical contexts, which highlights their promise to solve important pedagogical problems; (b) reporting on some initial results from our own efforts to develop a game; and (c) reflecting on the challenges that arise in using games for ethics education. In our discussion of the challenges, we draw out lessons to improve this nascent approach to ethics education in the STEM disciplines.     

Group Peer Disagreement

A popular view in mainstream social epistemology maintains that, in the face of a revealed peer disagreement over p, neither party should remain just as confident vis‐a‐vis p as she initially was. This ‘conciliatory’ insight has been defended with regard to individual epistemic peers. However, to the extent that (non‐summativist) groups are candidates for group knowledge and beliefs, we should expect groups (no less than individuals) to be in the market for disagreements. The aim here will be to carve out and explore an extension of the conciliatory insight from individual peer disagreement to group peer disagreement; in doing so, I'll raise and address three key problems that face any plausible defence of such a constraint.     

Test of visuospatial construction: Validity evidence in extremely low birth weight and late preterm children at early school age

The Test of Visuospatial Construction (TVSC), a measure of visuoconstruction that does not rely on upper extremity motor response or written production, was administered to extremely low birth weight (ELBW), late preterm (LPT), and term participants at preschool (n = 355) and kindergarten (n = 265) ages. TVSC showed statistically significant weak-to-moderate positive correlations (age 3: r = .118–.303; age 6: r = .138–.348) with Developmental VMI, Differential Ability Scales-II Copying, Matrices, and Pattern Construction subtests, Baron-Hopkins Board Test, and the Purdue Pegboard. One-way ANOVA indicated ELBW performed worse than Term (p = .044) on visuospatial construction at age 3 with a small-to-medium effect size (d = ?0.43). No other statistically significant differences were found at age 3 on the TVSC (ELBW/LPT: p = .608, d = ?0.17; LPT/Term: p = .116, d = ?0.31). At age 6, ELBW participants performed worse than LPT participants (p = .027) and Term participants (p = .012); LPT participants did not differ from Term participants. Small effect sizes at age 3 (ELBW < LPT, d = ?0.17; ELBW < Term, d = ?0.43) were notably larger at age 6 (ELBW < LPT, d = ?0.42; ELBW < Term, d = ?0.53). Important practical differences showing LPT participants performed below Term participants (d = ?0.31) at age 3 were no longer evident at age 6 (d = ?0.097). These findings provide preliminary evidence of TVSC validity supporting its use to detect neuropsychological impairment and to recommend appropriate interventions in young preterm children.     

A laboratory model for evaluating relapse of undesirable caregiver behavior

The success of behavioral treatments like functional communication training depends on their continued implementation outside of the clinical context, where failures in caregiver treatment adherence can lead to the relapse of destructive behavior. In the present study, we developed a laboratory model for evaluating the relapse of undesirable caregiver behavior that simulates two common sources of disruption (i.e., changes in context and in treatment efficacy) believed to affect caregiver treatment adherence using simulated confederate destructive behavior. In Phase 1, the caregiver's delivery of reinforcers for destructive behavior terminated confederate destructive behavior in a home‐like context. In Phase 2, the caregiver implemented functional communication training in a clinical context in which providing reinforcers for destructive or alternative behavior terminated confederate destructive behavior. In Phase 3, the caregiver returned to the home‐like context, and caregiver behavior produced no effect on confederate destructive or alternative behavior, simulating an inconsolable child. Undesirable caregiver behavior relapsed in three of four treatment‐adherence challenges.     

Stereotypes as justifications for prior intergroup discrimination: Studies of Scottish national stereotyping

Two studies provide support for the group‐justification approach to stereotyping (Tajfel, 1981 ; Huici, 1984 ). This approach contends that stereotypes not only serve cognitive functions for individuals but also provide a means of justifying prior intergroup discrimination. Study 1 investigated whether the content of the Scottish ingroup stereotype changes due to the prior expression of intergroup discrimination. Scottish students were primed with either a ‘differentiation’ or a ‘fairness’ ingroup norm and completed two intergroup judgement tasks. Other Scottish students were primed only with a ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm, while a control group received no prime or judgement tasks. Only participants who experienced the ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm prime and the intergroup judgement tasks changed the content of their ingroup stereotype as an attempt to justify their discriminatory behaviour. Study 2 examined whether Scottish students would use both positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotypes to rationalize intergroup discrimination. Students who experienced a ‘differentiation’ ingroup norm prime and intergroup judgement tasks showed the highest level of superior recall for positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotype‐consistent words compared to stereotype‐neutral words. This finding suggests that the expression of intergroup discrimination activates the use of both positive ingroup and negative outgroup stereotypes. Together the findings of these two studies provide empirical support for the notion that stereotypes serve social as well as cognitive functions. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.