CONTEXT IN ETHICAL DECISION MAKING 501 A more formal exposure of such a process is presented by Kitchener(1984) in a very influential article. She developed a hierarchy of justification for ethical judgments composed of two levels an immediate, intuitive level and a critical, evaluative level. The intuitive level corresponds to the set of personal beliefs and knowledge (including knowledge about ethics codes)that are applied in most situations when we need to make a moral judgment that does not involve a conflict between different principles. However, when such a conflict arises, or when we need to evaluate or justify decisions made on the basis of intuitive judgment, a more elaborated process for ethical judgment is needed. Here is when the evaluative level is required. This level is, in turn, composed of three tiers of moral justification, namely, ethical rules (including professional codes and laws), ethical principles, and ethical theory. These tiers are also hierarchically organized, so that we move to a more abstract tier when a given situation cannot be solved through the application of a previous tier(Kitchener, 1984) The importance of this model for the present discussion resides in two aspects that appear to be overlooked in most of the subsequent models of ethical decision making. First is the inclusion of m寸○ an immediate, intuitive level of justification that is conformed by personal values and general knowledge but is also influenced by formal training in ethics and personal reflection about every day practice. This level of justification is not a primitive or secondary aspect of ethical behavior that can be dismissed from further analysis On the contrary, it must be a central matter in our ethi- cal concerns, and we should take responsibility for the development of a good moral intuition This involves developing moral awareness and sensitivity, increasing the familiarity with ethics codes and laws and, as we insist here being aware of the relevant features of the contexts of work in order to develop a set of strategies to address potential conflicts before they emerge The second aspect of Kitchener's model to be highlighted here is that the constant application of the critical, evaluative level of moral judgment is assumed to improve our moral intuitions. Moreover, this application does not need an ethical dilemma to be exercised As Kitchener(1984) tated. Hopefully, by doing the best critical thinking possible when we are not pressed by the immediacy of a uation, we can build up an improved set of ethical rules and principles which will ultimately become part of our redefined intuitive sense. (p. 45) The suggestion made in this article is that"the best critical thinking possible"involves the ap- plication of ethical rules, ethical principles, and ethical theory to the particular context in which professionals work. There are several reasons for including the context in this process of critical thinking. First, the power of the context in influencing the decision-making process, which has been already exam- ined, requires psychologists to pay attention to those sources of interference. Also, although codes, laws, and principles are stated as universally applicable, the demands of an ethical dilemma occur in a very specific situation that sometimes makes the general norms inapplicable. Between the universality of the general norms and the specificity of the particular situation we can identify the context as the relatively stable place where some ethical problems are more or less likely to oc- cur. That is, the context is the natural field where proactive ethical judgment should be applied. If professionals are able to identify the features of their context of work that make the application of general norms more difficult, and use that identification as a starting point to think of potential sit uations of ethical conflicts, the moment in which those conflicts emerge will not be a moment ofA more formal exposure of such a process is presented by Kitchener (1984) in a very influential article. She developed a hierarchy of justification for ethical judgments composed of two levels: an immediate, intuitive level and a critical, evaluative level. The intuitive level corresponds to the set of personal beliefs and knowledge (including knowledge about ethics codes) that are applied in most situations when we need to make a moral judgment that does not involve a conflict between different principles. However, when such a conflict arises, or when we need to evaluate or justify decisions made on the basis of intuitive judgment, a more elaborated process for ethical judgment is needed. Here is when the evaluative level is required. This level is, in turn, composed of three tiers of moral justification, namely, ethical rules (including professional codes and laws), ethical principles, and ethical theory. These tiers are also hierarchically organized, so that we move to a more abstract tier when a given situation cannot be solved through the application of a previous tier (Kitchener, 1984). The importance of this model for the present discussion resides in two aspects that appear to be overlooked in most of the subsequent models of ethical decision making. First is the inclusion of an immediate, intuitive level of justification that is conformed by personal values and general knowledge but is also influenced by formal training in ethics and personal reflection about every￾day practice. This level of justification is not a primitive or secondary aspect of ethical behavior that can be dismissed from further analysis. On the contrary, it must be a central matter in our ethi￾cal concerns, and we should take responsibility for the development of a good moral intuition. This involves developing moral awareness and sensitivity, increasing the familiarity with ethics codes and laws and, as we insist here, being aware of the relevant features of the contexts of work in order to develop a set of strategies to address potential conflicts before they emerge. The second aspect of Kitchener’s model to be highlighted here is that the constant application of the critical, evaluative level of moral judgment is assumed to improve our moral intuitions. Moreover, this application does not need an ethical dilemma to be exercised. As Kitchener (1984) stated, Hopefully, by doing the best critical thinking possible when we are not pressed by the immediacy of a situation, we can build up an improved set of ethical rules and principles which will ultimately become part of our redefined intuitive sense. (p. 45) The suggestion made in this article is that “the best critical thinking possible” involves the ap￾plication of ethical rules, ethical principles, and ethical theory to the particular context in which professionals work. There are several reasons for including the context in this process of critical thinking. First, the power of the context in influencing the decision-making process, which has been already exam￾ined, requires psychologists to pay attention to those sources of interference. Also, although codes, laws, and principles are stated as universally applicable, the demands of an ethical dilemma occur in a very specific situation that sometimes makes the general norms inapplicable. Between the universality of the general norms and the specificity of the particular situation we can identify the context as the relatively stable place where some ethical problems are more or less likely to oc￾cur. That is, the context is the natural field where proactive ethical judgment should be applied. If professionals are able to identify the features of their context of work that make the application of general norms more difficult, and use that identification as a starting point to think of potential sit￾uations of ethical conflicts, the moment in which those conflicts emerge will not be a moment of CONTEXT IN ETHICAL DECISION MAKING 501 Downloaded by [Shanghai Jiaotong University] at 07:04 23 May 2012