DECISION MAKING PROJECT

O v e r v i e w

In this course, you will complete a project on ethical decision making. The result will be in the form of a

presentation. This project is due in Module 8, so that students can share their presentation in the last class.

Rosenberg and Schwartz spearheaded the movement to a decision-making process that the 2022 Ethical

Code for Behavior Analysts adopted. As you move through the course, be thinking about how the topics

and codes may present a “gray” area to decipher when discerning between what is ethically right and

what is ethically wrong.

For this project, you will either:

• Report a real-life ethical dilemma you or a colle ague have experienced

• Create an original ethical dilemma

Use the Rosenberg and Schwartz article and address Steps 1 – 3 (see Figure 1). You will present this

process via a PPT presentation (or similar software, such as Keynote) in class. Those unable to present in

live class will be required to use the record function on PPT (or other desktop recording software) and

share with your instructor at least 24 hours before the Module 9 virtual class.

Dire c t ions:

Be sure to be familiar with the decision-making process. Although this assignment is presented at this time,

it is best to continue to draft ideas and scenarios until you are exposed to most of the content. Once you

feel prepared, write a clear and well-defined scenario. From there, you will follow the decision-making

process and create a PPT presentation with at least the following slides (you may add slides, if needed):

1. Title Slide

● Should include your name and general title of the discussion (e.g., Decision

Making Guide to conflicts of interest)

2. Scenario Slide

● While PPT slides should not typically contain excess verbiage, it will be necessary to paste

your entire scenario onto this slide. The scenario should present an obvious ethical

dilemma with specific contextual information, such as important characteristics of the

individual, setting, relevant relationships between individuals, etc. that will allow

adequate examination of the scenario.

DECISION MAKING PROJECT

● Example (used throughout the instructions):

● Parents ask their ABA provider, Arya, to coach their 6-year-old with down

syndrome to learn how to swim. The BCBA is a certified swimming instructor on

the weekends and has experience training individuals with varying intellectual

abilities. The family lives in Hawaii (mom is a professional surfer and the father

works for the local aquarium) and is concerned for their child’s lack of water

safety skills and a lack of providers in this context. The beach, animals, and

spending time with family are all highly preferred for the learner. Should Arya

enter the dual relationship?

3. Step 1: Why does this trigger your ethical radar?

● Be sure to follow the prompts in step 1, identifying the dilemma, the possible

guiding BACB code, and any personal values or biases you bring to the scenario.

● It is fine to use more than one slide, if necessary.

● Example:

● Despite being one of the most qualified swim instructors for this population,

the swim coach would be entering a dual relationship with the family (BACB

Code 1.11)

● Arya’s behavior analytic training and background has instilled adherence

to the Code and the BA verbal community has cautioned against multiple

relationships with the rationale that it could impair objectivity and blur

lines.

● Arya also wants to advance values, ethics, and principles of the

profession.

4. Step 2: Brainstorm Solutions

● Derive at least (2) different conclusions, one based solely on the code and

another based on the context of the situation

● Example:

● BACB Code 1.11

“. . . behavior analysts avoid entering into or creating

multiple relationships”

”“. . . seek to resolve the multiple relationship”

DECISION MAKING PROJECT

● Other solution

Honor the request under specific conditions designed for the protection of the

learner, the BCBA, and the profession (i.e., clear delineation and definition of

both roles, transparent and well-documented billing procedures).

Can still adhere to code 1.11 “behavior analysts develop appropriate safeguards

to identify and avoid conflicts of interest in compliance with the Code and

develop a plan to eventually resolve the multiple relationship. Behavior analysts

document all actions taken in this circumstance and the eventual outcomes. ”

5. Step 3: Evaluate the Solutions

● Compare and contrast your two solutions and highlight at least 3 – 5 pros and cons for

each solution. Consider any relevant variables listed in Figure 1, such as safety, dignity,

outcomes, relationships, culture, etc.

● Example:

● Dual relationship is avoided.

● Relationship with the parents may be harmed

● Missed opportunity to disseminate and expand profession’s reach

● Child still without skills to swim

● Dual relationship is entered

● Risk of impaired objectivity

● Role confusion

● Unethical billing possibilities

● Socially valid

● Opportunities for intersection of interventions addressing safety,

independence, and communication

6. Conclusion

● Select the outcome you chose, highlighting the key elements for your decision.

Presentation Requirements

Whether the presentation is recorded or live, it is expected that the presenter will speak clearly, so

that all words are audible. It is also expected that the presenter will be prepared and articulate the

information on the slides in a smooth and controlled manner (i.e., deliver pertinent information

without long pauses or repetition of filler words).

DECISION MAKING PROJECT

Criteria 20 Points 10 Points 0 Points Presentation Speaker was audible

and articulate.

Speaker was either

audible or

articulate, but not both.

Speaker was neither

audible or articulate.

If assignment was not

submitted in time for

live lecture, students

will receive a “0” in

this area.

Title Slide The section was

present and the

author included a

relevant title and

their name.

The section was

present, but the

author omitted

either the title or

name.

The section was not

present or the author

omitted all aspects of

the section.

Scenario Slide The scenario was well

defined, including all

contextual variables required.

The scenario was

defined, but some

contextual

variables were missing.

The scenario was not

well defined, missing

contextual variables

required to evaluate the situation.

Step 1 Slide The slide presented a

one-sentence

explanation of the

dilemma, identified

the relevant BACB

code, and conveyed

personal values or

biases related to the scenario.

The slide was present

but the author only

addressed 2/3

required elements.

The slide was either

not present or only

addressed 1/3

required elements.

Step 2 Slide The slide was present

and identified a BACB

Code related solution

and an alternative

solution.

The slide was

present, but was

missing 1/2 required

elements.

The slide was either not

present or did not

address any required

elements.

Step 3 Slide The slide was present

and listed at least 3 – 5

pros or cons to each solution.

The slide was

present, but only

listed 2 pros or cons

on one of the solutions.

The slide was either not

present or did not

provide pros or cons to

each solution.