The Psychology of Journalists’ Ethical Decision-Making
Michele Jones
Introduction
Research in the area of journalistic ethical decision-making includes many theoretical
frameworks and methods, but has focused primarily on:

Philosophical, normative theories (What long-dead thinkers said that people should do
when facing an ethical dilemma);

Psychological descriptive theories of moral development (What educational and
developmental psychologists said people actually do when facing an ethical dilemma,
depending on their stage of development);

Or sociological and organizational policies and practices (What observers found that
people should do or actually do within groups.)
The purpose of my paper is to explore areas of decision theory that are applicable to studying
journalists’ ethical decisions in order to expand the discussion of ethics within the field of journalism and
mass communication to involve examinations of psychological factors involved in individuals’
professional ethical choices. This summary illustrates how prospect theory of decision making under risk
is relevant when ethical dilemmas are framed as either gains or losses. Additionally, I’ll point out other
topics that are relevant to journalistic ethical decision-making.
Review of Selected Literature
In exploring this topic and gathering information for my paper, I examined literature from the
fields of psychology and business that dealt with prospect theory and framing effects. (Several studies in
the business field have incorporated relevant decision theory and applied it to ethical decision making.)
These studies include the following.

Kahneman and Tversky (1979, 1986, 2000) are the big names in prospect theory and must be
the starting place for any study that uses the theory and framing effects as a theoretical
framework. They asserted that people do not make choices that maximize utility (achieving
their goals for the decision) when the choices are posed in ways that make them appear to
result in either a gain or a loss. In general, people are more likely to take risks if there is a
potential loss than they are if there is a potential for gain.

A study of 81 MBA students first applied to ethical decision-making Kahneman and
Tversky’s prospect theory and the idea that framing options as losses or gains influences a
person’s choice. Students were asked to choose between two selling methods, one considered
unethical by industry norms and the other considered ethical. When framed as a loss (losing a
bigger sale) instead of a gain (getting the smaller sale), students were more likely to choose
the less ethical selling option, despite the fact that each choice had the same expected utility.
(Kellaris, Boyle, & Dahlstron, 1994)

Bateman, Fraedrich, and Iyer (2004) explored framing effects and ethical decision-making in
consumers and found that “rule-based moral reasoning” is likely to dominate decisionmaking regardless of frames, but framing effects are more likely to influence decisionmaking in situations with lesser ethical implications.
While other concepts are also relevant (and discussed below), I focused on prospect theory and
framing effects because ethical dilemmas in journalism often involve varying types and levels of risk. For
example, choosing to run a controversial story could result in harm to a source or opting to refuse to
reveal an anonymous source when subpoenaed could result in a reporter going to jail or being fined.
Framing such dilemmas as a loss instead of a gain (choice X involves a 30 percent chance of going to jail,
while choice Y involves a 70 percent chance of going unpunished) may affect a journalist’s decision to
violate normative ethical standards (never reveal an anonymous source.)
Research such as the two business ethics studies mentioned above can help inform research
questions and hypotheses regarding framing effects and ethical decision-making in journalism, but
research using this theoretical framework is needed in the field of media ethics to provide evidence as to
whether or not framing of an ethical dilemma affects journalists’ decisions.
Other related topics
Many topics discussed throughout the decision theory course are relevant to other aspects of
ethical decision-making in journalism. These include:

Utilitarianism and “trolley” dilemmas. Ethical dilemmas can often be described in terms of
maximizing good or benefits for the most people. The trolley dilemma posed at the beginning
of the course involved deciding between allowing three people to die, or taking action that
results in one person dying. Similarly, journalists are often faced with decisions that involve
choosing between harming one person (perhaps a source who would lose his job for
revealing information) in order to help more people.

Decision analysis. Careful examination of an ethical dilemma involving decomposing the
problem, recognizing frames that may affect perception of the problem, identifying relevant
values, and examining the dilemma from multiple angles can provide a useful way to make
decisions in journalism. Multi-attribute Utility Theory is one way to do this and involves
assigning weights to various considerations in a decision and quantifying values to reach a
conclusion.
References
Baron, J. (2008). Thinking and Deciding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bateman, C.R., Fraedrich, J.P. & Iyer, R. (2004). Framing effects within the ethical decision
process of consumers. Journal of Business Ethics 36 (1-2), 119-140.
making
Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica
47, 263-291.
Kahneman, A. & Tversky, A. Eds. (2000). Choices, Values and Frames. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation, University of Cambridge Press.
Kellaris, J.J., Boyle, B.A., & Dahlstron, R.F. (1994). Framing and situational ethics. Marketing Letters,
5(1). Pp. 69-75.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. The Journal of
Business, 59(4). Pp. S251-S278.