OxTalks will soon be transitioning to Oxford Events (full details are available on the Staff Gateway). A two-week publishing freeze is expected in early Hilary to allow all events to be migrated to the new platform. During this period, you will not be able to submit or edit events on OxTalks. The exact freeze dates will be confirmed as soon as possible.
If you have any questions, please contact halo@digital.ox.ac.uk
There has been a recent rise in behavioural ethics research examining how to promote ethical decisions at work. Several of these studies have indicated that deliberative thinking or considering divergent views leads to less ethical decisions (Pierce, Kilduff, Galinsky, & Sivanathan, 2013; Moore & Tenbrunsel, 2014; Zhong, 2011). This position is in stark contrast to the philosophical literature on normative theories, which emphasises the importance of deliberation to ethical decisions.
In this paper, we note that many of these behavioural ethics studies have not focused on normative deliberation and we argue that normative deliberation (ie, considering or applying a normative theory) boosts ethical decision-making. Across several experiments, we examine the effects of non-normative deliberation (ie, calculations and writing tasks) and normative deliberation (ie, considering ethical obligations) to ethical decision making. We conclude that the type of deliberation matters.
