MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976350712 · doi:10.15173/jpc.v3i1.137

Educating communication professionals: The case for ethics in the curriculum

2013· article· en· W1976350712 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Patricia Parsons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Professional Communication · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Relations and Crisis Communication
Canadian institutionsMount Saint Vincent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPremiseCurriculumInformation ethicsValue (mathematics)Engineering ethicsApplied ethicsMeta-ethicsPedagogyProfessional ethicsPublic relationsNursing ethicsSociologyProfessional communicationPolitical sciencePsychologyManagementEngineeringEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This commentary examines the value of teaching ethics as a part of public relations and communications management education. It centers on the premise that teaching ethics to public relations students cannot provide any degree of assurance to future employers, or society, that these individuals will actually behave in an ethical manner. The question of whether it is ethical to teach ethics to students in the professions is raised – the author muses as to whether public relations faculties would have a different view of what they teach to their students, how they teach it and who teaches it if they were held accountable for the moral decisions of their graduates. ©Journal of Professional Communication, all rights reserved.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.044
Scholarly communication0.0140.016
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0180.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.085
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.383 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Professional CommunicationSame topicPublic Relations and Crisis CommunicationFrench-language works237,207