↓ Skip to main content

Improving Epistemological Beliefs and Moral Judgment Through an STS-Based Science Ethics Education Program

Overview of attention for article published in Science & Engineering Ethics, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Improving Epistemological Beliefs and Moral Judgment Through an STS-Based Science Ethics Education Program
Published in
Science & Engineering Ethics, January 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11948-013-9429-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hyemin Han, Changwoo Jeong

Abstract

This study develops a Science-Technology-Society (STS)-based science ethics education program for high school students majoring in or planning to major in science and engineering. Our education program includes the fields of philosophy, history, sociology and ethics of science and technology, and other STS-related theories. We expected our STS-based science ethics education program to promote students' epistemological beliefs and moral judgment development. These psychological constructs are needed to properly solve complicated moral and social dilemmas in the fields of science and engineering. We applied this program to a group of Korean high school science students gifted in science and engineering. To measure the effects of this program, we used an essay-based qualitative measurement. The results indicate that there was significant development in both epistemological beliefs and moral judgment. In closing, we briefly discuss the need to develop epistemological beliefs and moral judgment using an STS-based science ethics education program.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 2%
Greece 1 2%
Unknown 51 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 27%
Researcher 7 13%
Professor 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Other 16 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 26 47%
Engineering 4 7%
Unspecified 4 7%
Psychology 4 7%
Physics and Astronomy 3 5%
Other 14 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 September 2014.
All research outputs
#10,391,143
of 13,027,664 outputs
Outputs from Science & Engineering Ethics
#565
of 665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,344
of 200,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science & Engineering Ethics
#15
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,027,664 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 200,793 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.