(2) (a) Decision-making
(b) Heuristics, Cognitive Processes
(3) American Psychologist Association
(4) Nonrational Processes in Ethical Decision Making. Volume 66 no. 7
(5) Mark D. Rogerson, Michael C. Gottlieb, Mitchell M. Handelsman, Samuel Knapp, Jeffrey Younggren. (2011). American Psychological Association. Nonrational Processes in Ethical Decision Making, 66(7), 614 – 623.
(6) The purpose of this study is to find a way for ethical decision making to improve by psychologist and/or the decision makers to take the time to realize that their decisions could possibly be wrong and that they should ask themselves certain questions and complete assignments before deciding on a final decision to eliminate the negative factors in their decision making. This study also explains how many different factors can affect an ethical decision.
(7) The participants in this study psychologist and other fellow ethical decision makers, such as teachers and doctors. Their specific cases were observed and then told how they would make their own everyday ethical decisons, followed by the factors that made the decisions much more difficult, and the many ways in which they could improve with their decisions.
(8) I believe that there are multiple methods used during this study. Such as, naturalistic observation method, experimental method, descriptive research methods, and a case study.
(9) To my knowledge the hypothesis to this study was supported. The study resulted in many ways in which an ethical decision maker can make and accurate decision without multiple factors getting in the way. The results of this study could be used by the psyhcologist and other decision makers by following through with the information that this journal has provided and change their ways of making ethical decisions. They could conduct their own surveys collecting information whether the right decision was made or not and experiment with new ways...