On the Ethics of Management Research: An Exploratory Investigation

Author(s): Douglas C. Frechtling and Soyoung Boo

Source: Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 106, No. 2 (March 2012), pp. 149-160
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41426663
Accessed: 03-08-2016 13:22 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41426663?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Business
Ethics

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
J Bus Ethics (2012) 106:149-160
DOI 10.1007/S10551-01 1-0986-7

On the Ethics of Management Research: An Exploratory

Investigation

Douglas C. Frechtling • Soyoung Boo

Received: 18 July 2011 /Accepted: 20 July 2011 /Published online: 7 August 2011
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Abstract While there is an abundant academic literature Introduction

on professional codes of ethics, there appears to be few

devoted to assessing the compliance of management There is abundance of corporate codes of ethics, and the
published
research with such codes. This article presents the results of research on them is plentiful (Fennell 2000;
applying the World Association for Public Opinion Kaptein and Schwartz 2008; Langlois and Schlegelmilch
Research (WAP OR) Code of Professional Ethics and 1990; Long and Driscoll 2008; Svensson and Wood 2008).
There is also a class of ethical codes developed by pro-
Practices to research articles based on probability sample
fessional associations to guide their members toward eth-
surveys in the top three academic journals covering tour-
ical behavior (Christian and Gumbus 2009; Coughlan
ism, hospitality, and related fields. Four research questions
2001;
are posed to focus application of the WAPOR Code to Gaumnitz and Lere 2002; Groves et al. 2006; Pater
and Van Gils 2003; Skubik and Sterling 2009; Wiley 2000).
nearly 200 articles published in three recent years. Content
Adopting
analysis of these articles, documented by a measure of from Pater and Van Gils (2003, p. 765), we
intercoder reliability, indicates that it is feasible for define
mul- "professional codes of ethics" as "written, distinct
and formal documents, issued by professional associations,
tiple coders to accurately apply the WAPOR Code to such
articles. None of the articles examined complied with that
all attempt to guide the professional behaviour of their
members." Skubik and Stening (2009) maintain that "the
WAPOR standards, and fewer than half of them complied
with half of the standards. Finally, we find that there is important role of a code is to explain the underlying
most
professional values and principles" to guide association
some difference among the three journals in compliance,
but this difference is relatively small. In sum, there is members
very (p. 520). They further note that these may be
little compliance with ethical standards in the field of
developed as "an aspirational guide and education tool for
management research studied here. members" (p. 515) and may include "enforceable stan-
dards" (p. 520).
Keywords Code of ethics • Management research •
Content analysis • Research ethics • Sample surveys •
Intercoder reliability Purpose

Motivated by Coughlan's (2001) recommendation that

"additional studies are needed that explore the relevance
and effectiveness of existing professional codes" (p. 157),
D. C. Frechtling (El) • S. Boo we focus here on the ethical guidance provided for the
Department of Tourism and Hospitality Management,
conduct of research for management. Chia (2002) distin-
School of Business, The George Washington University,
2201 G Street, N. W., Suite 301, Washington, DC 20052, USAguishes management research as dealing "fundamentally
e-mail: frechtli@gwu.edu with the production and legitimization of the various forms
S. Boo of knowledge associated with the practices of manage-
e-mail: soyoungb@gwu.edu ment" (p. 1). These practices of management include

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 150 D. С. Frechtling, S. Boo

human and publication of management

resource public opinion research worldwide,
(Rau and Kane 1999),
(d) promote research
international cooperation and exchange among
(Datar et al. academic and commercial
2010). We researchers, journalists and
adopt this
research in political actors,
this as well as between the representatives of
study.
We choose a the different scientific disciplines" (World
specific fieldAssociation for of m
identify a Public Opinion Research 2010, p. 1).
professional code of e
field. We The WAPOR Code "defines professional ethics and the
operationalize s
statements that
practices in the fieldcan be
of public opinion research" applie
(p. 1) and
academic journals to
explains that the standards indicate
within it are promulgated in c
ance with order
each. To shed light on
research, we compose four re
• "to advance the use of science in the field of public
identify nearly 200 articles pub
opinion research;
journals in that field (managem
• to protect the public from misrepresentation and
professional code to them. Fina
exploitation in the name of research;
the research • to
questions and
maintain confidence that researchers in this field are
st
ethics of management research.
bound by a set of sound and basic principles" (World
Association for Public Opinion Research 2010, p. 1).

Background on Management
The "instrument of public opinion" referred to here is
the scientific opinion poll defined by three characteristics:
Relatively little has been publis
1. Designed to measure the views of a specific group of
agement research. Rau and Kan
humans;
issues that can arise in marketi
2. Respondents are chosen according to explicit criteria
that the establishment of "code
in order to ensure representation of the group;
keting research practice" (p. 14
3. Survey questions are "worded in a balanced way"
ation. Payne (2000) explores
(ESOMAR 2008, p. 5).
ideologies, and other influences
business researchScientific opinionpractice,
polls, also called probability sample ofte
(2005) discusses duties
surveys, gather information for dealing withof a number ofscient
tourism research and concludes that researchers must act management issues, such as market segmentation, cus-
tomer satisfaction, and product planning (Groves et al.
with honesty and integrity while pursuing justice. Perdue
2009).
(1991) examines the field of visitor surveys to determine
the economic impact of tourists on a geographic area and
Structure of the WAPOR Code
provides a list of potential ethical problems. He suggests
that presenting results from a convenience sample of visi-
The WAPOR Code of Professional Ethics and Practices
tors as being the same as those derived from a probability
sample is unethical behavior. "prescribes principles of ethical practices for the guidance
of its members, and a framework of professional standards
Chia (2002) observes that management researchers are
"governed by a code of practice established by a com-that should be acceptable to users of research and to the
munity of scholars" (p. 4). While some such codes maypublic
be at large" (World Association for Public Opinion
implicitly understood, others take the form of formal Research
pro- 2010, p. 1). Employing the classification scheme
fessional codes of ethical conduct (Groves et al. 2009;
proposed by Gaumnitz and Lere (2004), the WAPOR Code
Korac-Kakabadse et al. 2002). contains 44 statements in five thematic areas:

One such formal professional code applicable to man-

1. Responsibilities of Researchers;
agement research is promulgated by the World Association
2. Responsibilities of Sponsor;
for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR) as the WAP OR
3. Rules of Practice Regarding Reports and Survey
Code of Professional Ethics and Practices. WAPOR was
Results (i.e., disclosure of methods);
founded in 1947 to "(a) promote in each country of the
4. Responsibility to Informants;
world the right to conduct and publish scientific research
5. Practice between Researchers.
on what the people and its groups think and how this
thinking is influenced by various factors, (b) promoteIn Gaumnitz/Lere terms, the WAPOR Code is a hori-
the knowledge and application of scientific methodszontal
in five-statement code. Its shape is 12, 5, 15, 7, 5,
this objective, (c) assist and promote the development
disclosure, responsibilities of researchers. In terms of tone,

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
On the Ethics of Management Research
it is overwhelmingly positive ("thou shalt" = 35 state-
ments) rather than negative ("thou shalt not" = 9 state-
ments). Finally, it appears to be aspirational rather than
legal since the words "enforceable" do not appear and no
mechanism is stated for reporting and investigating alleged
violations (in contrast to Skubik and Stening 2009 and
Academy of Management, n.d., p. 6).
WAPOR Code Article П, section C, specifies 14 "Rules
of Practice Regarding Reports and Survey Results," stat-
ing, "Every complete report on a survey should contain an
adequate explanation of the following relevant points"
(p. 3). These points are listed verbatim in Table 1.
The WAPOR Code specifies the ethical obligations of
survey researchers toward the public, including their cli-
ents. This appears to be congruent with one of the "two
broad aspects of ethical practice especially relevant for
survey research" that academic and professional survey
researchers recognize (Groves et al. 2009, p. 371). The
other aspect of ethical practice required from survey
Table 1 WAPOR Rules of Practice Regarding Reports and Survey
Results
Every complete report on a survey should contain an adequate
explanation of the following relevant points:
For whom the survey was conducted and by whom it was carried
out
The purpose of the study
The universe or population to which the results of the survey are
projected
The method by which the sample was selected, including both
the type of sample (probability, quota, etc.) and the specific
procedures by which it was selected
Steps taken to ensure that the sample design would actually be
carried out
The degree of success in actually carrying out the design,
including the rate
Of non-response and a comparison of the size and characteristics
of the actual and anticipated samples
A full description of the estimating procedure used for all results
that are reported, including the sample size on which it was
based and weighting procedures used to adjust raw data
A full description of the method employed in the survey
The time at which the survey, if any, was done, and the time span
covered in collecting data
The findings obtained
(Where the nature and the research demands it) the
characteristics of those employed as interviewers and coders
and the methods of their training and supervision
A copy of the interview schedule or questionnaire and
instructions
Which results are based on parts of the sample, rather than the
whole sample
A description of the precision of the findings, including,
if applicable, estimates of sampling error
Source World Association for Public Opinion Research (2010)
This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
151
researchers - procedures directly affecting survey respon-
dents - is not addressed here. Researchers' ethical obliga-
tions to respondents are often embodied in law
(Institutional Review Boards and other procedures) and
deal with minimizing potential harm to respondents and
maximizing benefits to them, including respect for persons
and informed consent of respondents before their
participation.
Groves et al. (2009) maintain that a broad aspect of
ethical practice in survey research regards general stan-
dards of scientific conduct. These standards include fol-
lowing procedures that yield valid conclusions, as well as
avoiding "plagiarism, falsification or fabrication in pro-
posing, performing, reviewing research or on reporting
research results" (p. 372). This area of ethical survey
practice also requires disclosure of certain information
about a survey and its conduct when the findings are
publicly released.
The overall objective of this ethical practice is to
encourage transparency in survey research, that is, com-
plete disclosure of survey methods. This objective derives
from what biologist Glass (1965) calls "the ought of sci-
ence": "a full and true report is the hallmark of the sci-
entist, a report as accurate and faithful as he can make it in
every detail. The process of verification depends upon the
ability of another scientist who wishes to repeat a proce-
dure and to confirm an observation" (p. 83). It is note-
worthy that the Academy of Management Code of Ethics
"Professional Principles" for research and publications
state similar objectives (Academy of Management, n.d.,
p. 4). Moreover, Michalos (1991, p. 416), in a different
context, proposes eight characteristics that publishers of
results of public opinion polls of the electorate during
election campaigns should provide so as "to maintain and
even increase the benefits of public opinion polling while
significantly reducing the costs."
To provide a focus for our research, and to build upon
the knowledge of a distinct field of management that we
have acquired, we focus on sample surveys as management
research in tourism, hospitality, recreation, and related
fields. We investigate compliance with the WAPOR rules
of a set of articles published in specific academic journals
in these fields in recent years. We do so by defining
Research Questions that indicate compliance with the
WAPOR rules and applying them to the set of articles
through content. After careful consideration of the con-
sensus of the content coders, we determine whether and
how the articles comply with the WAPOR principles. We
draw conclusions from these findings and recommend
approaches that can improve the compliance of manage-
ment research articles and reports with ethical principles.
"Compliance" relating to codes of ethics includes
auditing, verification, and enforceability (Kolk and van
Ô Springer
 152 D. С. Frechtiing, S. Boo

Tulder 2002; Research Question 3: Are most of the WAPOR rules

referenced in F
p. 77). Examples
widely observed inof effective
the articles while a few are not?
published This question addresses Specific Compliance
literature are with the unav
authors. WAPOR
However, rules. If we find there are
as several principles
at least
compliance that are widely ignored in published management
procedures in a pro
Academy of research, but that many of the others are generally Code
Management
"Technical observed, then we can conclude that
Standards non-compliance
[that] set
conduct for is limited to a few specific
AOM standards. We could then
members" (
n.d., p. 1). conclude that while management research is ethical
To be effective,
in general, there are a codes
few areas of research ethics, of co
investigations which
of need tocompliance
be observed for management research and
of to completely comply with ethicaldefined
non-compliance, standards for
conform to management
the sample survey research. Conversely, we
prescriptions in
and Malloy might find that most p.
2007, of the standards
15). are widely Wile
without an ignored, while only a few are generally followed,
enforcement mech
degenerate suggestingpublic
into that management research is ethical only
relations
with regard to a few rules.
Research Questions
Research Question 4: Does the degree of compliance
with the WAPOR Code differ significantly among the
We do not journals providing the articles?
believe there This last question is en
ment and addresses Publication Compliance.empirica
concomitant How it is
senting answered indicates
formal how widely management research
hypotheses h
Rather, we ethics is observed among
propose the journals. If we find that Rese
several
published only one journal
survey is the source of a majority of the
research for m
Our findings non-compliance, then we cannot fairlythese
regarding conclude that Qu
hypotheses management
that may research is unethical,
be only tested
that lack of i
compliance is centered in one source. The other
Research Question 1: Is it pra
journals can then be labeled sources of ethical man-
compliance of published manag
agement research.
vey articles with WAPOR ru
degree of reliability? This ques
pliance Assessment Feasibility:
coding Method
experience consistent
published journal articles? If th
among coders as
Content to
Analysis whether in
ply with individual standards, t
in trying to apply
Content the
analysis is a method of codifying WAP
the content of a
published articles
selection of writingon
into variousprobabilit
categories depending on
the other specified criteria if
hand, (Weber 1990).
codersHolsti (1969) offers a ev
agreement, then
broad definition we
of content analysis
can as any technique
conclu for
apply making inferences by
WAPOR the objectively and systematically
standards to
ascertain compliance with
identifying specified characteristics of messages. Although et
management the
research.
term "content analysis" was first used in the field of
Research Question 2:of such
communication, the practice Do a has
methodology majo
been
comply with most of the WAPOR rules? This widely employed in exploratory research, theory develop-
addresses General Compliance of authors of man- ment, hypothesis testing and applied research (Smith
agement research articles with the WAPOR stan- 2000).
dards. If we find that most articles comply with most Krippendorff (2004) viewed content analysis as a
of the WAPOR standards, then we can fairly affirm research technique for making replicable and valid infer-
that management research is ethical. On the other ences from data according to their context. Content anal-
hand, if most of the articles fail to comply with most ysis entails a systematic recording of a body of units,
of the principles, then we can fairly deduce that images, and symbolic matter, though not necessarily from
management research is not ethical. the author's perspective. The overall goal of content

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
On the Ethics of Management Research 153

analysis is to identify and record

reliability. relatively
Tinsley ob
and Weis
characteristics of messages (Stemler
of intercoder 2001). Tuck
agreement in
(1999) and Gaumnitz that
and interpretations
Lere of the
(2002) apply this tecd
to the analysis without
of
professional a measure
codes of U.S. of con
associa
Hayes and (1991)
Krippendorff also
(2007) emphasize
maintain thatthe im
gene
data may take the formcoder reliability,
of judgments of indicatin
kind (in
category the unit among
belongs), of judges suggest
magnitude (howweakn
pro
an attribute is intercoder
within a reliability
unit), or of frequency is con
(ho
something occurs). of content
We apply analysis,
content and
analysis the
for th
purpose in this article. ment of the opinions found
In general, manifest (Hayes and
content Krippendorff
analysis 20
(i.e., surface
ments that are Although a number of mea
physically present) and latent conte
ysis (i.e., coders' have been
subjective proposed, ther
interpretations) are
distinguishable areas agreed-upon
central single measu
in the application of
analysis. Initially, 2007;
content Holsti 1969;
analysis dealt Lombard
with quan
descriptions of the that researchers
manifest content ofselect an in
communic
(Krippendorff 2004). based
Its on research
application assumptio
has been later
ded to include the study of latent
the data content
(e.g., the level anal
of m
quantitative measures Among
in the
various various
fields indicest
including
management (Choi et al. 2007; Malloy and we
posed by researchers, Fennch
Murphy 2001; Pan et al. 2007)
kappa and business
to provide the measue
(Gaumnitz and Lere 2002; Stohl etanalysis.
in a content al. 2009).
Latent content analysis
Oneis subjective
widely and com
used method o
because the coders' own mental
pairs schema intervene
of observations is the (
(Stohl
and Levine-Donnerstein et al.
1999). 2009).to
Owing However,
this po
into account
difficulty, a more systematic the likelihood
coding scheme
required. On the other coders that we would
hand, manifest expec
content ana
simple and direct, and were unrelated
can provide more(Grayson
objective
mation. offered
Inferences about latent kappa to correct
meanings of messa f
comparing
therefore permitted (Holsti the
1969). Asobserved
recomme p
Holsti (1969), our studycoders to theblended
employs amount of agr
manif
latent content analysis entirely
and reliesby
on chance. We
observers' e
jud
regarding article
interpretation of to indicate
textual the amou
matter (Ha
Krippendorff to tercoder
2007) agreement
achieve our exceeds
purposes.
expected by chance alone, d
Intercoder Reliability this difference could be. Sp

^ (Pa-Pc)
"Intercoder reliability"
(1 is
"Pc) the term widely used
extent to which independent coders evaluating a c
teristic of a where к is Cohen's
message reach the kappa, /?a is the proportion
same of agreed on
conclusion (Ko
judgments, and pc(2002)
Burnett 1991). Neuendorf is the proportion suggests
of agreement one that
would expect
human coders are used inby content
chance. analysis, int
reliability quantifies the Although Cohen's kappa has drawbacks,
amount it is considered
of agreement am
or more coders. Although intercoder of
to be one of the most reliable and useful measures in-
reliability
perceived as a standardtercoder reliability by researchers
measure of (Lombard
researchet al. 2002; quality
Neuendorf 2002).
and Burnett 1991), researchers have noted Kappa is generally used only for mea- that mo
suring intercoder
cles using content analysis do reliability
not for nominal
provide level variables informa
(Lombard et al. 2002).
intercoder reliability clearly or We have
inchosen to use Cohen's
significant deta
and Freitag 1997). kappa as a measure of agreement because the content to
which codinghave
Nevertheless, researchers was applied consists of nominally scaled
emphasized the im
tance of measuring variables (i.e., compliance
intercoder or non-compliance within
reliability the conten
sis. For example, WAPOR standards, or non-applicability)
Neuendorf (2002) and it notes
is designed that
analysis exercises to measure
are the agreement of a pairing
useless without of coders. Kappa a mea

â Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 154 D. С. Frechtling, S. Boo

coefficients will
for produce
this study few
wer
tistical Package for
atively the Socia
inexperie
Our intent is to
Coding ance,
Categories "the assessm
other stated cri
Creating Through
categories is a content
core fe
Categories Regarding
may be Repor
thought of a
content units"Code
areof Professional Ethics and Practices" (World
placed. Holsti
inition of Association for Public Opinion Research
categories requires2010) to identify t
the elements compliance the
of and non-compliance of specific articles pub-
investigato
evant to the lished in the top threecan
study academic journals
be in the fields
classi
categories in related to tourism and hospitality. Table 2 shows
conjunction withhow w

Table 2 WAPOR "Rules of Practice Regarding Reports and Survey Results" and criteria for coders

Coding categories from WAPOR "Rules of Practice Regarding Criteria for coders
Reports and Survey Results": reports must state

(a) For whom the survey was conducted and by whom it was carried (a.l) Compliance = names of those who carried out the survey
out are stated

(a.2) Non-compliance = states that the survey was conducted for

(b) The purpose of the study
(c) The universe or population to which the results of the survey are
projected
(d) The method by which the sample was selected, including both
the type of sample (probability, quota, etc.) and the specific
procedures by which it was selected
(e) Steps taken to ensure that the sample design would actually be
carried out
(f) The degree of success in actually carrying out the design,
including the rate of non-response and a comparison of the size and
characteristics of the actual and anticipated samples
or funded by an unidentified sponsor or client; otherwise Not
Applicable
(b) Compliance = purpose and/or objectives are stated
(c) Compliance = target population is defined
(d.i.) Compliance = sampling frame is specified
(d.2.) Compliance = how sample was selected from the
population is stated
(e) Not applied because this statement is an intent prior to survey
conduct that is better expressed by (f) below
(f.l.) Non-compliance = statement is made that conduct of the
survey differed from the survey plan without explanation of
differences

(f.2.) Compliance = final response rate is stated or both the

(g) A full description of the estimating procedure used for all results
that are reported, including the sample size on which it was based
and weighting procedures used to adjust raw data
(h) A full description of the method employed in the survey
(i) The time at which the survey, if any, was done, and the time span
covered in collecting data
(j) The findings obtained
(k) (Where the nature and the research demands it) the
characteristics of those employed as interviewers and coders and the
methods of their training and supervision
(1) A copy of the interview schedule or questionnaire and
instructions
(m) Which results are based on parts of the sample, rather than the
whole sample
(n) A description of the precision of the findings, including, if
applicable, estimates of sampling error
initial sample size and the effective sample size are reported,
allowing response rate to be computed
(g) Non-compliance = statement is made that responses were
weighted prior to analysis but weighting procedures are not
explained
(h) Not applied because items d, f, g, and i are considered to
comprise this method
(i) Compliance = when respondents were first contacted and
when researchers ceased collecting data from them are specified
(j) Compliance = one or more tables, charts OR graphs of the
results is/are presented, OR the text reports salient findings
(k) Compliance = survey conducted face-to-face or by telephone
AND the interviewers are identified and how they were trained is
stated; otherwise Not Applicable
(1) Compliance = Invitation and verbatim questions are stated
OR data collection instrument is presented OR a web URL is
presented where this instrument can be reviewed
(m) Not applied due to difficulty finding this in a survey article
that highlights results
(n) Compliance = sampling error for at least one significant
question is stated

Sources World Association for Public Opinion Research (2010), and authors

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 On the Ethics of Management Research 155

eleven of the 14 rules were

In this study, wedefined for articles
consider only full research applic
journal articles presenting survey
published in these results
three journals from in ou
2007 through 2009.
field. Two of the rulesEditorials,
(e and researchh
notes,
in andTable
book reviews 2)
are excluded
were n
from this analysis.
as they were deemed covered byBetween 2007 and 2009
other inclusive, One
rules.
rules (m) was not applied because
Annals of Tourism of
Research published a totalthe diff
of 126 full
determining if resultsresearch articles, and Journal
reported were of Travel Research published
"based on pa
sample, rather than 123. Onwhole
the the other hand, Tourism Management
sample." published
Unless an
explicitly states that results analyzed
284 full research articles were
during this period, based
more than the
part of the entire number ofwe
sample, research articles published
would not by the
knowother two thi
compliance with this journals combined.
standard can never be dispr
For most rules in The2,
Table articles
the examined in this study were
criterion of obtained
compli
be clearly stated and, through
if not complete
met enumeration.
by All the 533journal
the articles pub- art
non-compliance is lished byfor
recorded the three selected rule.
that journals during
In 2007-2009
other w
most rules there are were read independently
only two possible,by three coders to identify
mutuallythose
states: compliance or articles that presented research using a In
non-compliance. probability
three sample ca
a.2., f. 1 . and g.), the survey methodology.
criterion isOfonly
the 533 articles, 200 (36% of the und
applicable
conditions. If the condition for such a criterion is met in a total) were found to use a probability sample survey
study, then compliance or non-compliance can be deter- methodology. Among these, 13 were found to address non-
mined. Otherwise, such assessment cannot be made. management issues, such as student satisfaction, curricu-
lum design, and sociological issues. These were deleted
Therefore, three states are defined for these three specific
from our population, as being not part of management
rules: compliance, non-compliance (i.e., information is
research. The final sample of management-related articles
provided indicating the rule does apply, but the requirements
employing probability sample surveys consists of 187
of the rule are not satisfied) and not applicable because the
articles published in the Annals of Tourism Research
required condition is not met and compliance or non-com-
pliance cannot be determined. Finally, the reader should(n = 36), Journal of Travel Research (n = 54), and
Tourism Management (n = 97) from 2007 through 2009.
note that rules (a), (d), and (f) actually contain two criteria
each that can be applied to the articles. Consequently, we
have defined 14 criteria from the 14 WAPOR rules for Coding Procedures
application here.
Two graduate students plus one author of the current study
Data Collection applied the coding process to the 187 articles. The two
graduate students had completed a graduate course on
There are more than 80 English language academic journals probability sample survey research, but had little prior
coding experience in content analysis. Since previous
devoted to tourism, hospitality, and related fields, including
recreation, sport management, meeting management, studies and stress the importance of coder training (Holsti
event management (Frechtling 2010). Despite the large 1969; Krippendorff 2004; Lombard et al. 2002; Neuendorf
2002), the authors conducted specific training sessions for
number of journals covering these fields, there has been
the student coders. This training session familiarized all
considerable agreement about the three leading English-
coders with the purpose of this research and the content to
language tourism and hospitality journals over the years
among academics (Howey et al. 1999; Marketing in be coded, as well as coding procedures and their applica-
Asia
Group 2009; McKercher et al. 2006; Pechlaner et al. 2004)tion. This training included practice coding of a small
and practitioners (Frechtling 2004). These three journalsnumber
are of articles not selected for this study. Each coder
read, all the articles and coded each according to the rules in
the Annals of Tourism Research , Journal of Travel Research
Table 2 independently and without consultation from
and Tourism Management. All these three journals employ
March 15 to April 30, 2010.
double-blind peer review processes. All three have been
published continuously for more than 30 years. Two of them
are published in the United States, while Tourism Manage-
ment is published in the United Kingdom. We think it isResults
fair
to conclude that these three journals provide a reasonably
Main Findings
representative sample of probability sample survey research
articles published in all journals covering tourism, hospital-
Table 3 arrays the WAPOR Rules of Practice in descend-
ity, and related fields, and may even demand higher standards
ing order of percentage of compliance found in the articles.
for publishing research than the other journals in the field.

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 156 D. С. Frechtling, S. Boo

Table 3 Table 4 Intercoder and

Compliance reliability in assessing
non-compcompliance and non-
WAPOR Rules compliance
of of journal articles to WAPOR
Practice Rules of Practice
Regarding
2006-2009 Regarding Reports and Survey Results, 2006-2009

Coding criteria from "Rules Compliance Non- Not Coding criteria from Cohen's kappa between
of Practice Regarding compliance applicable "Rules of Practice Regarding coders
Reports and Survey Reports and Survey Results"
A and A and В and
Results"
В С С

a.l. States who carried out 100% 0% -

the survey
a.l. States who carried out the survey 1.00 1.00 1.00

b. Purpose of the study is 100 0 - b. Purpose of the study is specified 1.00 1.00 1.00
specified j. Findings obtained are shown 1.00 1.00 1.00
j. Findings obtained are 100 0 - a.2. Sponsor or client indicated but not 1.00 1.00 1.00
shown identified

a.2. Sponsor or client - - 100% g. Weighting procedures to adjust 1.00 1.00 1.00
indicated but not identified raw data explained
g. Weighting procedures to - - 100 f.l. Survey conduct differs from survey plan 1.00 1.00 1.00
adjust raw data explained c. Target population is specified 0.604 0.823 0.454
f.l. Survey conduct differs - - 100 d.i. Sampling frame is defined 0.817 0.602 0.532
from survey plan
f.2. Response rate or initial 0.862 0.632 0.749
c. Target population is 87 13 - and effective sample sizes is presented
specified
i. Time period of the survey is stated 0.955 0.865 0.821
d.i. Sampling frame is 75 25 -
defined
d.2. Sampling selection method is identified 0.794 0.645 0.460
k. Interviewer characteristics, training, 0.788 0.775 0.773
f.2. Response rate or initial 66 34 -
and supervision are presented
and effective sample sizes
is presented n. Estimates of sampling error are presented 0.890 0.743 0.709
i. Time period of the survey 61 39 - 1. Copy of the data collection 0.786 0.841 0.637
is stated instrument and instructions
are presented or web
d.2. Sampling selection 45 56 -
method is identified
source provided

k. Interviewer 39* 61* 59

characteristics, training,
and supervision are
presented conducted. At the extreme non-compliance end of the
n. Estimates of sampling 16 85 - scale, only about one in ten of the articles presented esti-
error are presented mates of sampling error or presented the data collection
1. Copy of the data 12 88 - instrument questions and instructions.
collection instrument and
instructions are presented
Results for the Research Questions
or web source provided

Sources Table 1 and authors

Research Question 1: Is it practicable to determine com-
* Proportions based on articles where this rule is applicable
pliance of published management research survey articles
with WAPOR rules at an acceptable degree of reliability
(addresses Compliance Assessment Feasibility )1 In order
All of the 187 articles analyzed in this study complied with
specifying who carried out the survey (rule a.l), the pur-
to address this question, we examine Cohen's kappa mea-
pose of the study (rule b), and the survey findings (rule j). of intercoder reliability for applying the 14 criteria to
sures
Three of the rules were not applicable to any of these the 187 articles by the three coders.
articles (a.2, g, and f.l), leaving eleven criteria as being
Table 4 displays the kappa measures among the three
applicable to the articles. coders for each of the WAPOR standards. While there is no
Overall, the content analysis results demonstrate thatobjective
the standard indicating acceptable levels of inter-
articles reviewed comply universally with some criteria coder agreement for Cohen's kappa, Landis and Koch
(1977) suggest that values greater than 0.75 indicate
regarding study description and findings, while few comply
with sampling- and survey-related standards. More than excellent agreement, while values between 0.40 and 0.75
indicate fair-to-good agreement.
three-quarters of the articles specified the target population
and sampling frame. About three-fifths of the articles As shown in Table 4, Cohen's kappas for the coder A-
specified the response rate and time period the survey coder
was В pair were higher than those of other pairs

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 On the Ethics of Management Research 157

(i.e., coder A-coder C, or coder B-coder C). Table 4 the precision of the survey results in describing the target
indicates that for the 42 possible kappas, 73% exceeded population (Dillman et al. 2009). Without this informa-
0.75, the threshold for excellent agreement. The other 37% tion, survey precision cannot be assessed. Only one in
of the kappa scores all exceeded 0.40, placing in the fair to eight articles displayed the data collection instrument or
good agreement range. Therefore, we conclude that this provided an address where it could be examined. While
study indicates that the answer to Research Question 1 is not all the journals may be able to devote space to pre-
yes, it is practicable to determine compliance of published senting data collection instruments, some do (Byrd et al.
management research survey articles with WAPOR rules to 2009). As an alternative, when space is unavailable, an
an acceptable degree of reliability. article may report the URL for a website displaying the
Before discussing the results regarding Research Ques- instrument.
tions 2, 3, and 4, we note that wherever intercoder dis- In sum, we note that there is a substantial degree of
agreement was found in this study regarding a particular Specific Compliance for five of the WAPOR rules but less
WAPOR criteria in a particular journal article, we jointly than two-thirds compliance with six of them. We find that
examined the disagreement and jointly settled on a single the answer to Research Question 2 is yes, there is a sub-
code for the instance. Therefore, the following discussion stantial variety of compliance among the WAPOR rules.
covers all the 187 articles assessed on all the 14 WAPOR Some are widely recognized and reported, while others
criteria without disagreement. appear unknown among the majority of authors.
Research Question 2: Do a majority of these articles Research Question 4: Does the degree of compliance
address all of the WAPOR rules (addresses General differ significantly among the three journals (addresses
Compliance )1 None of the 187 articles examined adhered Publication Compliance To examine differences in
to all the eleven of the WAPOR standards examined here, compliance across the journals, chi-square tests were
indicating there is no General Compliance with the conducted. The chi-square test is useful for determining if
WAPOR standards in this population. Therefore, the there is a statistical difference between groups of nominal
answer to Research Question 2 is an unconditional nega- variables (Easterby-Smith et al. 2002). The critical level of
tive. Indeed, there is no evidence that the authors or journal statistical significance was set at 0.05, and the statistical
editors have any familiarity with WAPOR' s rules or any test was two-tailed. This test found significant differences
set of standards regarding presentation of probability for only three out of the 14 rules:
sample survey methodologies.
• d.2. Sampling selection method is identified
Research Question 3: Are there some WAPOR rules that
(x2 = 6.729, df = 2 ,p< .05);
are widely observed in the articles while others are not
• i. Time period of the survey is stated {y2 = 6.216,
(addresses Specific Compliance )? As indicated in Table 4,
df = 2, p < .05);
all the 187 probability sample survey articles analyzed
• n. Estimates of sampling error are presented
observed three of the WAPOR rules: who carried out the
О2 = 18.470, df = 2, p < .0001).
survey, the purpose of the survey, and presentation of
Among the three rules, "Estimates of sampling error are
findings. Eighty-seven percent defined the target popula-
presented" shows the largest difference in compliance
tion. Failure to do so prevents generalization of the survey
findings to a known population. Three-quarters ofacross the the three journals. In each case Annals of Tourism
Research showed a significantly higher degree of compli-
articles defined the sampling frame, the list of all members
of the survey population, or rules for simulating such ance
a list.than Journal of Travel Research or Tourism Man-
agement. Between the latter two, the Journal of Travel
Definition of the sampling frame is essential for assessing
Research
survey coverage error, that is, to what extent, members of shows compliance statistically greater than
Tourism
the target population were excluded from being selected for Management on two of these three, while falling
the survey (Dillman et al. 2009). behind Tourism Management on one.
We conclude that this study answers Research Question
Nearly two-thirds of the articles reported response rates
4 with
or the information necessary to compute response rates, or a qualified affirmative. There is weak evidence that
Annals of Tourism Research shows significantly higher
designated the time period of the survey. A low response
compliance in applying the WAPOR rules, but only for
rate suggests the presence of nonresponse bias in survey
results (Groves et al. 2009). Almost as many articlesthree of the 1 1 criteria applied. From our studies, we cannot
reported the time period the survey was carried out. conclude that this difference is because of to a conscious
Nearly one half of the studies reported the sample policy on the part of the editors of that journal. Rather, this
difference may be due to randomness in the amount of
selection method for the survey. A minority of articles
survey information authors chose to submit with their
reported interviewer characteristics and training or repor-
articles in our sample.
ted estimates of sampling error. Sampling error indicates

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 158 D. С. Frechtling, S. Boo

Discussion and Conclusions content analysis, and participant observation (Easterby-

Smith et al. 2002), which were not examined in this study.
This study attempts to shed light on a research topic in In addition, this study examined articles published in
threeis
business ethics that has received relatively little attention: academic journals focused on tourism, hospitality,
and related fields. There are many other journals on other
management research ethical? We focused on a particular
subject areas, which publish management research. The
type of management research: articles based on probability
study period was limited to 2007-2009, leaving other
sample surveys published in the three top peer-reviewed
periods unexplored. Finally, the study applied a single code
journals in tourism and hospitality fields. We investigated
compliance with a specific professional code of ethics,
of ethics when there might be others that could be applied
another area lacking significant research attention. equally as well. Indeed, there may be ways of judging the
In order to focus our analysis, we examined four ethics of management research other than applying pro-
fessional codes.
Research Questions. We concluded that journal articles'
These limitations suggest fruitful areas of further
compliance with specific ethical standards for management
research employing probability sample surveys can research.
be Focusing on the probability sample survey
methodology, are there any among the 80 journals now
ascertained through content analysis by two or more coders
(Research Question 1). We further found that a majoritypublished
of in tourism, hospitality, and related fields , which
do conform to the WAPOR Code or other similar code? If
these articles do not comply with relevant ethical standards
so, how instructive can their review procedures be for other
(Research Question 2). Indeed, very few of the standards
journals in these fields? How well do studies in manage-
are addressed in even a minority of the articles (Research
Question 3). Finally, we found this lack of compliance ment
with fields outside of tourism, hospitality, and related
fields comply? Looking forward, will the journals singled
ethical standards characterizes all the three journals serving
as sources of the articles (Research Question 4). out for analysis in this study require higher standards of
Overall, we conclude that published research for the
compliance with the WAPOR standards in the future? If so,
what costs and benefits can be discerned and documented
distinct area that we have investigated, tourism manage-
for
ment research utilizing probability sample surveys, is researchers and research users? In a broader context,
not
ethical. This finding applies to both the authors and what
the are the ethical standards for management research
editors of the journals examined. Both groups need to methodologies
seek other than probability sample surveys? How
out ethical standards such as the WAPOR Code and ensure do such management studies comply with these standards?
that their published studies abide by them. What can be done to encourage compliance with published
ethical standards for management research? Addressing
However, our findings have another implication, as well.
The WAPOR Code of Professional Ethics and Practice is and other pertinent research topics can enhance our
these
not effective in securing compliance with standardsoverall
of understanding of the degree of ethical compliance
ethical practice in at least one area of managementin management research and suggest improvements.
research. While it states, "Adherence to this code is
deemed necessary to maintaining confidence that
researchers in this field are bound by a set of sound and
References
basic principles," (World Association of Public Opinion
Researchers, n.d., p. 1), this code incorporates no
Academy of Management, (n.d.). Code of ethics. Accessed April 26,
enforcement mechanism. This might be as simple as an 2010 from http://www.aomonline.org/aomPrint.asp?ID=268&
annual report of compliance in various fields such as we page_ID=240.
have done here for a branch of management research, or Adams, J. S., Tashchian, A., & Shore, T. H. (2001). Codes of ethics as
signals for ethical behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 29(3),
aggressive condemnation of noncompliance as practiced by 199-211.
the American Association for Public Opinion Research Bohannon, J. (2009). Author of Iraqi deaths study sanctioned.
(Bohannon 2009). Science , 323 , 1278.
This study of the ethics of management research has a Byrd, E. T., Bosley, H. E., & Dronberger, M. G. (2009). Comparisons
of stakeholder perceptions of tourism impacts in rural eastern
number of limitations. It focused on articles published in
North Carolina. Tourism Management, 30(5), 693-703.
academic journals, while there are other significant outlets Chia, R. (2002). the production of management knowledge: Philo-
for management research, such as books, reports, and sophical underpinnings of research design. In D. Partington
postings on internet websites. It examined only articles (Ed.), Essential skills for management research (pp. 1-19).
London, UK: Sage Publications.
based on probability sample surveys. Management research
Choi, S., Lehto, X., & Morrison, A. (2007). Destination image
also employs qualitative research techniques, such as representation on the web: Content analysis of Macau travel
convenience sample surveys, focus group interviews, related websites. Tourism Management, 28(1), 118-129.

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 On the Ethics of Management Research 159

Christian, V., & Gumbus, Kaptein, M.,A. (2009).

& Schwartz, M. (2008). TheShades of gr
effectiveness of business
professional codes of ethics codes: A critical
to examination
workplace of existing studies and the
dilemmas.
tional Management Journal, development 6of , an 178-199.
integrated research model. Journal of
Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient Business Ethics, 77(2),
of 111-127.
agreement for n
Educational and Psychological Kolbe, R. H., & Burnett, M. S. (1991). Content-analysis research:
Measurement , 20(1), An
Coughlan, R. (2001). An analysis examination of applications with directives for improving
of professional codes
the hospitality industry. research reliability and objectivity. Journal
International Journal of Consumerof H
Management, 20(2), 147-162. Research, 18(2), 243-250.
Crompton, J. L., Lee, Kolk, S., A., && Shuster,
van Tulder, T. codes
R. (2002). International J. of(2001).
conduct:
undertaking economic impact Trends, sectors, studies:
issues and effectiveness.
The Accessed October 4,
Springfes
Journal of Travel Research, 40(1), 79-87.
2009 from http://www.ib-sm.org/internationalcodesconduct.pdf.
Datar, S. M., Garvin, D.Kolk, A.,A., van&Tulder, R., & Welters, C. P.
Cullen, (2007). G.
International
(2010).codes of R
MBA. Boston, MA: Harvard Business
conduct and Press.
corporate social responsibility: Can transnational
Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. corporations
D., regulate themselves? In A. CraneL.
& Christian, & D. Matten
M. (20
mail, and mixed-mode surveys: (Eds.), Corporate Thesocial responsibility.
tailored 2: Managing
design and m
ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. implementing corporate social responsibility. Thousand Oaks,
Easterby-Smith, Thorpe, CA: M.
Sage Publications.
R., & Lowe, A. (2002).
research: An introduction Korac-Kakabadse,
(2nd N., Kakabadse,
ed.). A., & Kouzmin,
Newbury A. (2002). EthicalPark
Publications. considerations in management research. In D. Partington (Ed.),
European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (ESOMAR). Essential skills for management research (pp. 20-44). London,
(2008). ESOMAR/WAPOR guide to opinion polls including the UK: Sage Publications.
ESOMAR international code of practice for the publication of Krippendorff, К. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its
public opinion poll results. Accessed February 11, 2010 from methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
http://www.esomar.org/uploads/pdf/ESOMAR_Codes&Guidelines__ Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer
OpinionPolling_v5 .pdf. agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159-174.
Fennell, D. A. (2000). Tourism and applied ethics. Tourism Recre-Langlois, C. C., & Schlegelmilch, В. В. (1990). Do corporate codes of
ation Research, 25(1), 59-69. ethics reflect national character? Evidence from Europe and the
Fennell, D. A., & Malloy, D. С. (2007). Codes of ethics in tourism: United States. Journal of International Business Studies, 27(4),
Practice, theory, synthesis. Clevedon, UK: Channel View 519-539.
Publications. Lombard, M., Snyder-Duch, J., & Bracken, С. C. (2002). Content analysis
Frechtling, D. C. (2004). Assessment of tourism/hospitality journals' in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder
role in knowledge transfer: An exploratory study. Journal of reliability. Human Communication Research, 28(4), 587-604.
Travel Research, 43(2), 100-107. Long, В., & Driscoll, C. (2008). Codes of ethics and the pursuit of
Frechtling, D. C. (2010). List of active, peer-reviewed journals in organizational legitimacy: Theoretical and empirical contribu-
tourism, hospitality, sport and event subject areas. Accessed tions. Journal of Business Ethics, 77(2), 173-189.
June 10, 2010 from http://home.gwu.edu/~frechtli/resources. Malloy, D. С., & Fennell, D. A. (1998). Codes of ethics and tourism:
html. An exploratory content analysis. Tourism Management, 19(5),
Gaumnitz, B. R., & Lere, J. C. (2002). Contents of codes of ethics of 453-461.

professional business organizations in the United States. Journal Marketing in Asia Group. (2009). The MAG scholar journal ranking
of Business Ethics, 35(1), 35-49. list 2009. Accessed September 9, 2009 from http://www.mag
Gaumnitz, B. R., & Lere, J. C. (2004). A classification scheme for scholar.com/news.htm.
codes of business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(4), McKercher, В., Law, R., & Lam, T. (2006). Rating tourism and
329-335. hospitality journals. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1235-1252.
Glass, B. (1965). Science and ethical values. Chapel Hill, NC: Michalos, A. C. (1991). Ethical considerations regarding public
University of North Carolina Press. opinion polling during election campaigns. Journal of Business
Grayson, K., & Rust, R. (2001). Interrater reliability. Journal of Ethics, 10, 403-422.
Consumer Psychology, 10( 1&2), 71-73. Murphy, L. (2001). Exploring social interactions of backpackers.
Groves, R. M., Fowler, F. J., Jr., Couper, M. P., Lepkowski, J. M., Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), 50-67.
Singer, E., & Tourangeau, R. (2009). Survey methodology (2nd Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand
ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Groves, B. W., Kucharewski, R., & Longsdorf, E. L. (2006). EthicalPan, В., MacLaurin, T., & Crotts, J. C. (2007). Travel blogs and the
issues in recreation research as perceived by recreation, park implications for destination marketing. Journal of Travel
resources, and leisure services faculty. In J. G. Peden & R. Research, 46(1), 35-45.
M. Schuster (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2005 northeastern Pater, A., & Van Gils, A. (2003). Stimulating ethical decision-making
recreation research symposium (pp. 120-129). Newtown Square, in a business context: Effects of ethical and professional codes.
PA: U.S. Forest Service. European Management Journal, 21(6), 762-772.
Hayes, A. F., & Krippendorff, К. (2007). Answering the callPayne,
for S.
a L. (2000). Challenges for research ethics and moral
standard reliability measure for coding data. Communication knowledge construction in the applied social sciences. Journal of
Methods and Measures, 1 , 77-89. Business Ethics, 26(4), 307-318.
Pechlaner,
Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and H., Zehrer, A., Matzler, K., & Abfalter, D. (2004). A
humanities. Menlo Park, CA: Addison Wesley. ranking of international tourism and hospitality journals. Journal
Howey, M., Savage, K. S., Verbeeten, M. J., & Van Hoof, H. of B.
Travel Research, 42(4), 328-332.
Perdue, R. R. (1991). Ethical issues in tourism accountability
(1999). Tourism and hospitality research journals: Cross-cita-
tions among research communities. Tourism Management, 20(1),research: Some case studies. In Proceedings of the travel and
133-139. tourism research association twenty-first annual conference,

â Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 160 D. С. Frechtling, S. Boo

June 10-13, Stohl,

1990 C., Stohl, M., & Popova,
(pp. L. (2009). A 311-314
new generation of
Fairmont Hotel. corporate codes of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(4),
Potter, W. J., & Levine-Donnerstein, D. (1999). Rethinking validity 601-622.
and reliability in content analysis. Journal of Applied Commu-Svensson, G., & Wood, G. (2008). International standards of business
nication Research , 27(3), 258-284. conduct: Framework and illustration. European Business
Rau, P., & Kane, D. (1999). Marketing research ethics. In S. Review, 20(3), 260-274.
K. Chakraborty & S. R. Chatteijee (Eds.), Applied ethics in Tinsley, H. E. A., & Weiss, D. J. (2000). Interrater reliability and
management : Towards new perspectives. New York, NY: agreement. In H. E. A. Tinsley & S. D. Brown (Eds.), Handbook
Springer-Verlag. of applied multivariate statistics and mathematical modeling
Riffe, D., & Freitag, A. A. (1997). A content analysis of content (pp. 95-124). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
analyses: Twenty-five years of journalism quarterly. JournalismTseng, H., Duan, C., Tung, H., & Kung, H. (2010). Modern business
& Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(4), 873-882. ethics research: Concepts, theories, and relationships. Journal of
Ryan, C. (2005). Ethics in tourism research: Objectivities and Business Ethics, 91(4), 587-597.
personal perspectives. In B. W. Ritchie & P. Burns (Eds.),Tucker, L. R., Stathakopolous, V., & Patti, С. H. (1999). A
Tourism research methods : Integrating theory with practice (pp. multidimensional assessment of ethical codes: The professional
9-19). Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing. business association perspective. Journal of Business Ethics,
Skubik, D. W., & Stening, B. W. (2009). What's in a credo? A 19(3), 287-300.
critique of the academy of management's code of ethical conductWeber, R. P. (1990). Basic content analysis (2nd ed.). London, UK:
and code of ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(4), 515-525. Sage Publications.
Smith, C. P. (2000). Content analysis and narrative analysis. In H.Wiley, C. (2000). Ethical standards for human resource management
T. Reis & С. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in professionals: A comparative analysis of five major codes.
social and personality psychology (pp. 313-335). Cambridge, Journal of Business Ethics, 25(2), 93-114.
UK: Cambridge University Press. World Association for Public Opinion Research. (2010). Constitution
Somers, M. J. (2001). Ethical codes of conduct and organizational of the World Association for Public Opinion Research. Accessed
context: A study of the relationship between codes of conduct, February 11, 2010 from http://www.unl.edu/wapor/constitution.
employee behavior and organizational values. Journal of Busi- html.
ness Ethics, 30(2), 185-195. World Association of Public Opinion Researchers, (n.d.). Accessed
Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical January 19, 2010 from http://www.unl.edu/wapor/ethics.html.
Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17). Accessed June 28,
2010 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=17.

Ô Springer

This content downloaded from 132.174.255.223 on Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:22:01 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms