↓ Skip to main content

How should we foster the professional integrity of engineers in Japan? A pride-based approach.

Overview of attention for article published in Science & Engineering Ethics, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
How should we foster the professional integrity of engineers in Japan? A pride-based approach.
Published in
Science & Engineering Ethics, June 2008
DOI 10.1007/s11948-007-9039-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iseda, Tetsuji

Abstract

I discuss the predicament that engineering-ethics education in Japan now faces and propose a solution to this. The predicament is professional motivation, i.e., the problem of how to motivate engineering students to maintain their professional integrity. The special professional responsibilities of engineers are often explained either as an implicit social contract between the profession and society (the "social-contract" view), or as requirements for membership in the profession (the "membership-requirement" view). However, there are empirical data that suggest that such views will not do in Japan, and this is the predicament that confronts us. In this country, the profession of engineering did not exist 10 years ago and is still quite underdeveloped. Engineers in this country do not have privileges, high income, or high social status. Under such conditions, neither the social-contract view nor the membership-requirement view is convincing. As an alternative approach that might work in Japan, I propose a pride-based view. The notion of pride has been analyzed in the virtue-ethics literature, but the full potential of this notion has not been explored. Unlike other kinds of pride, professional pride can directly benefit the general public by motivating engineers to do excellent work even without social rewards, since being proud of themselves is already a reward. My proposal is to foster a particular kind of professional pride associated with the importance of professional services in society, as the motivational basis for professional integrity. There is evidence to suggest that this model works.

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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 7%
Unknown 14 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 27%
Other 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Researcher 2 13%
Other 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 33%
Social Sciences 4 27%
Unspecified 3 20%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 7%
Other 1 7%

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 11 October 2011.
All research outputs
#3,107,894
of 4,506,214 outputs
Outputs from Science & Engineering Ethics
#219
of 283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,396
of 67,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science & Engineering Ethics
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,506,214 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 67,245 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.