IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/evarev/v24y2000i4p384-406.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

You Got a Problem With That?

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Morris

    (University of New Haven)

  • Lynette R. Jacobs

    (University of New Haven)

Abstract

A random sample of American Evaluation Association (AEA) members were surveyed for their reactions to three case scenarios—informed consent, impartial reporting, and stakeholder involvement—in which an evaluator acts in a way that could be deemed ethically problematic. Significant disagreement among respondents was found for each of the scenarios, in terms of respondents' views of whether the evaluator had behaved unethically. Respondents' explanations of their judgments support the notion that general guidelines for professional behavior (such as AEA's Guiding Principles for Evaluators) can encompass sharply conflicting interpretations of how evaluators should behave in specific situations. Respondents employed in private business/consulting were less likely than those in other settings to believe that the scenarios portrayed unethical behavior by the evaluator, a finding that underscores the importance of taking contextual variables into account when analyzing evaluators' ethical perceptions. The need for increased dialogue among evaluators who represent varied perspectives on ethical issues is addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Morris & Lynette R. Jacobs, 2000. "You Got a Problem With That?," Evaluation Review, , vol. 24(4), pages 384-406, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:24:y:2000:i:4:p:384-406
    DOI: 10.1177/0193841X0002400403
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0193841X0002400403
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0193841X0002400403?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:evarev:v:24:y:2000:i:4:p:384-406. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.