CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 137Ethics in Business and EducationPsychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentCybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies

Morality and Computers: Attitudes and Differences in Moral Judgments

Gattiker, Urs E., Kelley, Helen·1999·Information Systems Research
DOI 10.1287/isre.10.3.233
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Business ethics is an emerging area of research in many subfields of management, including information systems (IS). Empirical IS research has studied differences in users' attitudes and in moral judgments regarding ethical computer-related behavior. This study applied the “domains of morality” approach to determine how users felt about certain computer-related behaviors. Vignettes describing ethical dilemmas involving computer technology (e.g., uploading a computer virus on an electronic network/bulletin board system) were presented to a sample of Internet users. The research findings offered several interesting and, in some cases, unexpected results. The empirical results indicated that older computer users have a less permissive sense of what is right and wrong for an illegal game. When computers were used to test a banned game, men and women differed in their assessment of its appropriateness. A surprising finding was that participants were not likely to endorse civil liberties, and were more concerned about the harm to, and violations of, social norms when the scenario described a situation involving a computer virus. How users perceive, prejudge, and discriminate computer ethics and abusive computer actions raises numerous questions and implications for IS researchers, IS practitioners, and policy makers. The results of this study foster a better understanding of Internet users' moral categorization of specific computer behaviors and, hopefully, help to further reduce r…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/isre.10.3.233

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 53 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gattiker, U. E., & Kelley, H.
Affiliations
  • Department of Production, Aalborg University, Fibigerstraede 16, DK-9220 Aalborg, Denmark
  • University of Lethbridge (CA)
ORCID
Kelley, Helen
Venue
Information Systems Research
Publisher
Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Published
1999-09
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
233-254
ISSN
  • 1047-7047 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5536
DOI
10.1287/isre.10.3.233
OpenAlex
W2119350371
Cited by
137
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 9
FWCI
6.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Information Systems Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Ethics in Business and Education
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Cybercrime and Law Enforcement Studies
Keywords
computer ethics, moral judgment, internet users, gender differences, age differences, computer viruses, civil liberties, social norms, ethical dilemmas, business ethics, information systems ethics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review