Journalism professors Lee Wilkins and Renita Coleman, who conducted in-person 60- to 90-minute interviews in recent months with 129 PR pros at PR firms from throughout the U.S., found they scored high in terms of ethical awareness.

The PR people were given the "Issues Defining Test" which has been taken by more than 30,000 professionals over the past 30 years.

The test confronts subjects with a choice between two "goods" or two "evils."

Coleman and Wilkins

Ad people were asked in previous research by Wilkins and Coleman whether they would take a multi-million dollar beer account even though they were against alcohol consumption.

Since most ad subjects answered yes to this and similar questions, they were ranked 16th from the top in ethical awareness.

The only groups lower than ad people were business graduates (No. 17), high school students, prison inmates and junior high students.

PR Pros Sixth in Ethical Sense

PR pros ranked sixth in ethical reasoning behind seminarians and philosophers, medical students, practicing physicians, journalists, and dental students.

Lower than them were nurses (No. 7), graduate students, undergraduate students, accounting students, veterinary students and Navy enlisted men.

At the bottom, ranking 15-19, were business professionals, business students, high school students, prison inmates and junior high students.

Seminarians/philosophers had a "P"or ethical reasoning score of 65.1 while PR pros registered 46.2 and prison inmates, 23.7.

"P" reflects the "relative importance the person gave to principled considerations."

Coleman, a Ph.D. at the University of Texas-Austin, described the results of the study to the 2006 conference of the Assn. for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication in San Francisco Aug. 2-5.

She and Wilkins, a Ph.D. at the University of Missouri, used as their database the 400 PR firms listed on odwyerpr.com.

A random sample of 5% of the firms was used. They then visited firms in cities such as New York, District of Columbia, Atlanta, St. Louis, Chicago and Seattle.

Funding the research was a $10,000 grant from the Arthur W. Page Center located at Pennsylvania State University. Lawrence G. Foster, Penn State alumnus and retired corporate VP for PR, Johnson & Johnson, provided a gift to the Center.

Cooperating PR pros were mostly interviewed during lunch, with the two professors supplying sandwiches or pizza. Eleven of the exams were tossed because the takers "highly rated too many meaningless statements" or for other "inconsistencies." Left were 118 test results. Eleven respondents were PRSA members.

Do Better on PR Issues; Codes Don't Help

PR pros were found to do better on ethical dilemmas that concerned PR than those that did not.

Scoring higher were those with "liberal" religious views while those with "fundamental" view scored lower.

Belonging to "fewer professional organizations" resulted in a "significant correlation" with "higher quality ethical reasoning." A job with a large organization also correlated with higher ethical reasoning.

Looking for external ethical guidance in the form of rules – whether in codes of ethics or employer-established standards – did not correlate significantly with strong ethical reasoning, the study found.

Said the study:

"As with journalists, reliance on externally imposed standards–whether in the form of religious teaching or other sorts of professional dogma–may, in fact, indicate a somewhat lower critical thinking ability among PR professionals. Since high-order ethical thinking is strongly related to cognitive development, reliance on external rules may, in fact, retard this cognitive growth process."

Average age in the sample was 34.5 years with a range from 21 to 64; 11% were journalists before coming into PR; 47% said they were Democrats and 35% said they were Republicans; 43% had always worked in PR; 60% were women, and 27 belonged to no professional PR group.

Dilemmas: School Closing & New Drug

In one dilemma given to the participants, a PR pro learned that a new over-the-counter herbal drug, when combined with another OTC drug, could produce a "high." His employer told him to withhold this information from medical experts who would be asked to endorse the new product.

The results were that 66% of the respondents said they would tell the experts about the potential abuses of the new product while 17% said they would not.

In the other dilemma, PR pro "Laurel Forbes" and high school principals at a meeting were told that a school with a largely minority student body may be closed. Forbes was asked to keep this secret. A reporter call the next day asking for confirmation that the closing was discussed. PR test-takers were asked what they would do.

The results were that 31% said they would confirm the story; 32% said they would deny it, and 37% couldn't decide.

One comment was: "I would recommend 'No comment.' She (the PR pro) needs to find out how this story got leaked. This reporter might not know much but Forbes shouldn't be the one to spill the beans. On the other hand, denying the story puts the board's credibility at risk. She has no comment until she learned more about what happened."

Resign, Says One Respondent

Another comment was: "I would argue to disclose – but not do it until given approval. If no approval, I would refuse to comment. I would not lie. If the board insisted, I would resign."

Some respondents noted that in a "politically charged atmosphere," secrets are difficult to keep.

Said one respondent: "You don't have to disclose EVERYTHING (capitals in original) immediately but appearing willing to work with a reporter is essential to things going as best as can be hoped."

"Many" respondents said they would lobby board members to come up with a more transparent strategy.

Said the study:

"Comments such as these indicated that the PR professional would rely on relationships–with the board, with the superintendent, with the reporter–to achieve the desired outcome, which, in almost all cases, included some level of public truthtelling.

"Such comments demonstrate both a practical knowledge of how the industry actually does work (which could be expected from those who averaged nine years in the industry) and concomitant concerns for multiple stakeholders and a principled outcome. This is characteristic of a `care' ethic."

The Code of PRSA says PR pros "adhere to the highest standards of accuracy and truth in advancing the interests of those we represent and in communicating with the public."

September is "Ethics Month" at PRSA.