Header Logo

Connection

Michael Mumford to Decision Making

This is a "connection" page, showing publications Michael Mumford has written about Decision Making.
Connection Strength

4.776
  1. Self-Focused Emotions and Ethical Decision-Making: Comparing the Effects of Regulated and Unregulated Guilt, Shame, and Embarrassment. Sci Eng Ethics. 2020 02; 26(1):27-63.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.563
  2. To Whistleblow or Not to Whistleblow: Affective and Cognitive Differences in Reporting Peers and Advisors. Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 02; 25(1):171-210.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.515
  3. Professional Decision-Making in Research (PDR): The Validity of a New Measure. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Apr; 22(2):391-416.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.440
  4. Playing, sitting out, and observing the game: an investigation of faculty members' perspectives on political behavior in ethical decision making. Account Res. 2015; 22(5):284-300.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.426
  5. Perspectives on whistleblowing: faculty member viewpoints and suggestions for organizational change. Account Res. 2014; 21(3):159-75.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.398
  6. Case-based ethics instruction: the influence of contextual and individual factors in case content on ethical decision-making. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Sep; 19(3):1305-22.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.368
  7. Case-based knowledge and ethics education: improving learning and transfer through emotionally rich cases. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Mar; 19(1):265-86.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.342
  8. Consequences identification in forecasting and ethical decision-making. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2011 Mar; 6(1):25-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.327
  9. Mental models: an alternative evaluation of a sensemaking approach to ethics instruction. Sci Eng Ethics. 2008 Sep; 14(3):449-72.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.271
  10. A qualitative approach to Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training development: identification of metacognitive strategies. Sci Eng Ethics. 2008 Mar; 14(1):3-31.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.258
  11. Curricular Approaches in Research Ethics Education: Reflecting on More and Less Effective Practices in Instructional Content. Account Res. 2017; 24(5):269-296.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.123
  12. Differences in Biases and Compensatory Strategies Across Discipline, Rank, and Gender Among University Academics. Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Dec; 21(6):1551-79.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.106
  13. Biases in ethical decision making among university faculty. Account Res. 2014; 21(4):218-40.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.099
  14. Improving ethical knowledge and sensemaking from cases through elaborative interrogation and outcome valence. Account Res. 2014; 21(5):265-99.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.099
  15. Effects of alternative outcome scenarios and structured outcome evaluation on case-based ethics instruction. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Sep; 19(3):1283-303.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.091
  16. An investigation of case-based instructional strategies on learning, retention, and ethical decision-making. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Oct; 7(4):79-86.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.091
  17. Case-based ethics education: the impact of cause complexity and outcome favorability on ethicality. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2012 Jul; 7(3):63-77.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.090
  18. Evaluating the effects that existing instruction on responsible conduct of research has on ethical decision making. Acad Med. 2010 Mar; 85(3):519-26.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.076
  19. Application of a sensemaking approach to ethics training in the physical sciences and engineering. Sci Eng Ethics. 2008 Jun; 14(2):251-78.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.065
  20. A Comparison of the Effects of Ethics Training on International and US Students. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 08; 22(4):1217-1244.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.028
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.