Advertising professionals show a tendency not to employ "ethical reasoning" when considering which course of action to take, according to a book authored this year by Lee Wilkins, professor at the Missouri School of Journalism, and Renita Coleman, professor at the School of Mass Communications, Louisiana State University.

The two professors studied the ethical reasoning of journalists and ad people. They plan to do a similar test on PR pros if they can obtain a grant of $9,000-$10,000.

They used the "Issues Defining Test," a standard test that has been given to 30,000+ professionals over the past 30 years.

Renita Coleman, professor at the School of Mass Communications, Louisiana State University, and Lee Wilkins, professor at the Missouri School of Journalism.

The questionnaire was posted on the web and 65 completed surveys were obtained from ad professionals.

The section on their responses is in The Moral Media, published this year by Lawrence Erlbaum Assocs., Mahwah, N.J. ($19.95).

"Advertising practitioners think about immediate consequences when deciding how to act," says the book. "In other words, utilitarianism is most often used to resolve ethical problems."

Advertising professionals "do lack ethics, or at the very least choose not to exercise the ethical reasoning abilities they have," say the authors.

There was no immediate comment from Ron Berger, CEO of Euro RSCG Worldwide and elected chair of the American Assn. of Advertising Agencies, or Burtch Drake, president and CEO of the 4As.

Kipp Cheng, VP, director of PA, had been sent a copy of the chapter titled: "Advertising Practitioners Respond: The News Is Not Good." This chapter was authored by Anne Cunningham of Louisiana State University.

'Defining Issues Test' Was Used

The Defining Issues Test measures reactions to ethical dilemmas in which the test-taker must pick among several courses of action, none of which satisfy all the parties affected by the decision.

Ad people were asked what they would do if the best actor for an ad for a local car dealership was Chinese and the owner of the dealership was known to dislike Chinese.

Another problem was whether an ad agency owner known to dislike alcohol consumption should take a $150 million national beer account. The ad agency owner asks employees and friends what he should do and gets mixed answers.

Says the book: "The findings suggest that advertising practitioners are capable of reasoning at a higher stage of moral development, but when asked to do so in a professional setting, they suspend moral judgment to focus on the financial implications of their decisions, specifically the financial implications for themselves and the client."

The Moral Media is mostly about journalists. The DIT was given to 249 print and broadcast reporters across the U.S. and the 164-page book found that "journalism is one of the most morally developed professions, ranking only behind seminarians, physicians and medical students."

Investigative and civic journalists were found to be "better ethical thinkers."

Higher ethical marks go to those who think of the impact something might have on society at large and to those who have the "courage to act on one's moral convictions."

'Ethical Reasoning' Scores Given

The mean "P" scores, meaning employment of the highest level of "principled, ethical reasoning," are as follows for the various professions:

Seminarians/philosophers, 65.1.
Medical students, 50.2.
Practicing physicians, 49.2.
Journalists, 48.68.
Dental students, 47.6.
Nurses, 46.3.
Graduate students, 44.9.
Undergraduate students, 43.2.
Veterinary students, 42.2.
Navy enlisted personnel, 41.6.
Orthopedic surgeons, 41.
Adults in general, 41.
Business professionals, 38.13.
Accounting undergraduates, 34.8.
Accounting auditors, 32.5.
Advertising professionals, 31.64.
Business undergraduates, 31.35.
High school students, 31.
Prison inmates, 23.7.
Junior high students, 20.

Wilkins and Coleman concede their research is far from definitive and more research is needed in this area.
But they say that the results should not be "discarded or completely discounted" because they are consistent with the results of the DIT administered to other business professionals.

Said the two professors: "However, their import remains troubling, particularly for an industry that continues to sustain heavy criticism and for professionals who are searching for ways to improve performance."

Up until now, they say, no one had studied why advertising appears to be problematic, particularly whether ad professionals simply lack the ability to improve the ethics of the industry through better moral reasoning.

Additional research is needed, they say, "to understand why, and whether lack of moral reasoning translates into immoral behavior," and to find out "why advertisers choose to suspend moral judgment and how might they be motivated to do the right thing?