BEHIND THE COMPUTER SCREEN: PERSPECTIVES ON INFORMATION ETHICS AMONG MUSIC EDUCATION STUDENTS

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.298151

Keywords:

Information Ethics, Ethical Attitudes, Internet Ethical Dilemmas, Music Education

Abstract

This study aims to understand the views and attitudes of students in the Music Education department at Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University Faculty of Education regarding informatics ethics. This research was conducted using a general survey model quantitative research design. The universe of the study comprised students in the Music Education department at Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University Faculty of Education. The selected sample, consisting of 73 students who volunteered to participate during the 2023-2024 Academic Year, was used for data collection. An information form created by the researchers and the "Real-Life Situation Scenarios with Informatics Ethics" (RLSSIE) Scale were employed in the data collection process. Overall, the students were found to have moderate views and attitudes toward information ethics. Demographic factors such as gender, age, and class level were observed to have a significant impact on ethical evaluations. Additionally, evaluations based on different scenarios revealed that participants were generally sensitive to ethical values. The influence of factors like residence and income perception on ethical views and attitudes was limited. Notably, participants who connected to the internet via mobile phones had higher ethical views and attitude scores compared to those using computers and tablets. However, the study observed that internet usage quotas did not have a significant impact on general ethical attitudes. The findings indicate that information ethics topics play a crucial role in overall ethical evaluations and suggest that individuals have a broad perspective.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Levent ÜNLÜ, Erzincan Binali Yildirim University

Assist. Prof. Dr., Department of Music Education

Recep ÖZ, Erzincan Binali Yildirim University

Assoc. Prof. Dr.,

Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technology

References

  1. Sims, R. L. (1999). The development of six ethical business dilemmas. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20(4), 189-197. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437739910276993
  2. Taggart, G., & Zenor, J. (2022). Evaluation as a moral practice: The case of virtue ethics. Evaluation and Program Planning, 94, 102140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102140
    |
  3. Taslak, S., & Çiftçi, B. (2016). Postmodern örgütlerde güncel davranışsal konular. İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayım.
  4. Tepe. H. (2016). Pratik Etik. Ankara. Bilgesu Yayınları.
  5. Tosun, N., Geçer, A., & Kaşıkçı , D. N. (2016). Examining the relationship between the Internet ethics perceptions of the pre-service teachers and their control focus perceptions. Açıköğretim Uygulamalarıve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(4), 82-103. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/articlefile/402135
  6. Tozdan, N., & Keleş, Özgül. (2022). Investigation of 7th and 8th Grade Middle School Students’ Environmental Ethics Attitude Levels in Relation to Different Variables. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 13(1), 1763–1775. https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.22.or064
  7. Tsalikis, J., Ortiz-Buonafina, M. (1990). Ethical beliefs' differences of males and females. J Bus Ethics, 9(6), 509–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00382844
  8. Whipple, T. W., & Swords, D. F. (1992). Business ethics judgments: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 11, 671-678. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01686347
  9. Adam, A. & Ofori-Amanfo, J. (2000). Does gender matter in computer ethics? Ethics and Information Technology, (2)1, 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1010012313068
  10. Akarsu. B. (1970). Ahlak Öğretileri-I Mutluluk Ahlakı (Eudaimonism). İÜEF Yay.. İstanbul.
  11. Arıkan. Y.D.. Duymaz. S.H. (2014). Gerçek Yaşam Durum Senaryolarıyla Bilişim Etiği Ölçeği’ni Türkçeye Uyarlama Çalışması. Ege Eğitim Dergisi. 15(1) . 318-337. https://doi.org/10.12984/eed.55518
  12. Banerjee. D.. Cronan. T. P.. & Jones. T. W. (1998). Modeling IT Ethics: A Study in Situational Ethics. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.2307/249677
  13. Baran, G., Taşlıbeyaz, E. & Kayalar, M. T. (2023). Öğretim Elemanlarının Teknoloji Öz Yeterlik Düzeylerine Göre Teknoloji ve Uzaktan Öğretim İhtiyaçlarının Belirlenmesi. Üniversite Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(3), 279-291. https://doi.org/10.32329/uad.1264747
  14. Bernardi, R. A., Bosco, S. M., & Columb, V. L. (2009). Does female representation on boards of directors associate with the ‘most ethical companies’ list?. Corporate Reputation Review, 12, 270-280. https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2009.15
  15. Betz, M., O'Connell, L., & Shepard, J. M. (1989). Gender differences in proclivity for unethical behavior. Journal of business ethics, 8, 321-324. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00381722
  16. Bayra, E., & Baysan, E. (2022). Gerçek yaşam durumu senaryolarıyla ortaöğretim öğrencilerinin bilişim etiği düzeylerinin bazı değişkenler açısından incelenmesi. Gazi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(1), 82-107. https://doi.org/10.30855/gjes.2022.08.01.006
  17. Borkowski, S.C. & Ugras, Y.J. (1992). The ethical attitudes of students as a function of age, sex and experience. J Bus Ethics, 11, 961–979. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871962
    |
  18. Buckinghan, W. (2012). Felsefe kitabı. (E. Lakşe, Çev.). İstanbul: Alfa Kitap.
  19. Bynum, T. (2000). The foundation of computer ethics. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 30(2), 6-13. https://doi.org/10.1145/572230.572231
  20. Çelen, F. K. (2012). Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin kullanımında ilköğretim öğrencilerinin etik olmayan davranışlara ilişkin görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  21. Çelen, F. K., & Seferoğlu, S. S. (2016). Bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin kullanımı ve etik olmayan davranışlar: Sorunlar, araştırmalar ve değerlendirmeler. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 4(8), 124-153.
  22. Cevizci, A. (2008). Etiğe Giriş. İstanbul: Paradigma Yayınları.
  23. Chonko, L. B., & Hunt, S. D. (1985). Ethics and Marketing Management: An Empirical Examination. Journal of Business Research, 13, 339-359. https://doi.org/10.1016/0148-2963(85)90006-2
    |
  24. Çörez, A. B. (2016). Öğretim teknolojileri ve etik. K. Çağıltay & Y. Göktaş. (Ed.), Öğretim teknolojilerinin temelleri teoriler, araştırmalar, eğilimler içinde (s. 437-453). Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  25. Chow, W. S. (2001). Ethical belief and behavior of managers using information technology for decision making in Hong Kong. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 16(4), 258–267. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940110392570
  26. Dedeoğlu, G. (2006). Bilişim Toplumu ve Etik Sorunlar. Bursa: Alfa Aktüel Yayınları.
  27. Dorantes, C. A., Hewitt, B., & Goles, T. (2006). Ethical Decision-Making in an IT Context: The Roles of Personal Moral Philosophies and Moral Intensity (p. 206c–206c). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2006.161
    |
  28. Duymaz, S. H. (2013). Ortaokul öğrencilerine yönelik “Bilişim Etiği Öğretim Programı” uygulaması. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ege Üniversitesi, İzmir.
  29. Erdem, Z. (2008). Öğretmen adaylarının bilişim teknolojilerini kullanımlarının etik açıdan değerlendirilmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir.
  30. Fritzsche, D. J. (1988). An examination of marketing ethics: Role of the decision maker, consequences of the decision, management position, and sex of the respondent. Journal of Macromarketing, 8(2), 29-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/027614678800800205
  31. Jacobson, F. (2010). Zippy Scenarios for Teaching Internet Ethics. https://www.library.illinois.edu/uni/computerlit/scenarios/
  32. Johnson, D. G. (2009). Computer Ethics (4th edition), New Jersey: Pearson Education
  33. Johnson, D., & Simpson, C. (2005). Are you the copy cop? Learning and leading with technology, 32(7), 14-20. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ697339
  34. Karasar. N. (2004). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi (15. Baskı). Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
  35. Leonard, L. N. K., & Cronan, T. P. (2001). Illegal, inappropriate, and unethical behavior in an information technology context: A study to explain influences. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1(12), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00012
  36. Loch, K. D., & Conger, S. (1996). Evaluating ethical decision making and computer use. Communications of the ACM, 39(7), 74–83. doi: 10.1145/233977.233999
    |
  37. Mason, R. O. (1986). Four ethical issues of information age. MIS Quarterly, 10 (1), 5-12. https://doi.org/10.2307/248873
    |
  38. Masrom, M., Ismail, Z., Anuar, R. N., Hussein, R. & Mohamed, N. (2010). Analyzing accuracy and accessibility in information and communication technology ethical scenario context. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, 3(2), 370-376. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajebasp.2011.370.376
  39. Massey, K., Burns, J. & Franz, A. (2021). Young People, Sexuality and the Age of Pornography. Sexuality & Culture, 25, 318–336 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12119-020-09771-z
    |
  40. McMillan, J. H. & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (7th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson.
  41. McNichols, C. W., & Zimmerer, T. W. (1985). Situational ethics: An empirical study of differentiators of student attitudes. Journal of business ethics, 4, 175-180. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00705616
    |
  42. Meeder, R. (2005). Access denied: Internet filtering software in K-12 classrooms. TechTrends, 49(6), 56- 58. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02763732
  43. Miesing, P., & Preble, J. F. (1985). A comparison of five business philosophies. Journal of business ethics, 4, 465-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00382609
    |
  44. Moor. J. H. (1985). What is computer ethics?. Journal of Metaphilosopy. 16 (4). 266-275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.1985.tb00173.x
    |
  45. Morgan, J., & Neal, G. (2011). Student assessments of information systems related ethical situations: Do gender and class level matter? Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 14(1), 113–130.
  46. Muir, S. T. & Reeder, W. G. (1929). Code of ethics of the national education association of the united states. Phi Delta Kappa International. 12(3), 69-71.
  47. Murphy, K.R., & Davidshofer, C.O. (1988). Psychological Testing: Principles and Applications. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
  48. Örs, F. (2010). Küresel medya ortamında yaşanan etik sorunlar ve uluslararası düzenlemeler. Yaşar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü e-dergisi, 5(20), 3443- 3452.
  49. Özlem. D. (2017). Etik. İstanbul. Notos Yayınları.
  50. Pieper. A. (1999). Etiğe Giriş. V.Atayman ve G. Sezer (Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
  51. Ruegger, D., King, E.W. (1992). A study of the effect of age and gender upon student business ethics. J Bus Ethics 11, 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871965
    |
  52. Çelik, İ., & Dağdeviren, İ. E. (2015). Muhasebe Meslek Mensuplarinin Etik Algilamalari ve Muhasebe Meslek Mensuplarini Etik Dişi Davranişlara Yönlendiren Faktörler: Göller Bölgesinde Bir Araştirma. Journal of Accounting and Taxation Studies, 8(1), 67-89. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/muvu/issue/59854/865036
  53. Dursun, S., & Mankolli, H. (2021). The value of nature: virtue ethics perspective. GNOSI: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Human Theory and Praxis, 4(1 (May)), 1-15. https://gnosijournal.com/index.php/gnosi/article/view/98
  54. Ford, R. C., & Richardson, W. D. (1994). Ethical decision making: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of business ethics, 13, 205-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02074820
    |
  55. Formosa, P., Wilson, M., & Richards, D. (2021). A principlist framework for cybersecurity ethics. Computers & Security, 109, 102382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2021.102382
    |
  56. Jamader, S. A. (2022). Relation between ethics of duty and ethics of virtue: a critical study (Doctoral dissertation), University of North Bengal.
  57. Karabayır, M. E., Öztürk, S. & Cengiz, S. (2018). Muhasebe Meslek Mensubu Adaylari ve Etik Ikilem. Journal of Accounting and Taxation Studies, 328-353. https://doi.org/10.29067/muvu.344768
  58. Keller, A. C., Smith, K. T., & Smith, L. M. (2007). Do gender, educational level, religiosity, and work experience affect the ethical decision-making of US accountants?. Critical perspectives on accounting, 18(3), 299-314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2006.01.006
  59. Khogali, H. O., & Mekid, S. (2023). The blended future of automation and AI: Examining some long-term societal and ethical impact features. Technology in Society, 73, 102232. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4239580
  60. Kidwell, J. M., Stevens, R. E., & Bethke, A. L. (1987). Differences in ethical perceptions between male and female managers: myth or reality? Journal of business ethics, 6, 489-493. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00383291
    |
  61. Lane, J. C. (1995). Ethics of business students: Some marketing perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 571-580. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00871985
    |
  62. Ling, R., & McEwen, R. (2010). Mobile communication and ethics: implications of everyday actions on social order. Etikk i praksis-Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, (2), 11-26. https://doi.org/10.5324/eip.v4i2.1760
  63. McCabe, D. L., Dukerich, J. M., & Dutton, J. E. (1991). Context, values and moral dilemmas: Comparing the choices of business and law school students. Journal of Business Ethics, 10, 951-960. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00383799
    |
  64. McDonald, G., & Pak, P. C. (1996). It's all fair in love, war, and business: Cognitive philosophies in ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 15, 973-996. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00705577
    |
  65. Nguyen, B., & Crossan, M. (2022). Character-infused ethical decision making. Journal of Business Ethics, 178(1), 171-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04790-8
    |
  66. Okoye, C. C., Ofodile, O. C., Tula, S. T., Nifise, A. O. A., Falaiye, T., Ejairu, E., & Addy, W. A. (2024). Risk management in international supply chains: A review with USA and African Cases. Magna Scientia Advanced Research and Reviews, 10(1), 256-264. https://doi.org/10.30574/msarr.2024.10.1.0024
  67. Patel, K. (2024). Ethical reflections on data-centric AI: balancing benefits and risks. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research and Development, 2(1), 1-17. https://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJAIRD?Volume=2&Issue=1
  68. Scarre, G., 2020. Utilitarianism. Routledge.
  69. Sharp, D., Pant, L. & Cohen, J. (1998). Are Women Held to a Higher Moral Standard Than Men? Gender Bias Among University Students. Teaching Business Ethics, 2, 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009797124068
  70. Sikula, A., Costa, A.D. (1994).Are women more ethical than men?. J Bus Ethics. 13(11), 859–871. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00871700
  71. Yıldız, G. (2010). Muhasebe Mesleğinde Meslek Etiği ve Kayseri İl Merkezinde Bir Uygulama. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi (36), 155-178.
  72. Yoon. C. (2011). Ethical decision-making in the Internet context: Development and test of an initial model based on moral philosophy. Computers in Human Behavior. (27). 2401–2409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.007
  73. Cevizci. A.(2008). Etiğe Giriş. İstanbul: Engin Yayıncılık.

Downloads

Published

2024-08-14

How to Cite

ÜNLÜ, L., & ÖZ, R. (2024). BEHIND THE COMPUTER SCREEN: PERSPECTIVES ON INFORMATION ETHICS AMONG MUSIC EDUCATION STUDENTS. Advanced Education, 12(24), 130–150. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.298151

Issue

2024: Issue 24

Section

ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Recep ÖZ, Levent ÜNLÜ

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).