Chapter 4

Framing Ethics Using a Liberal Arts Integrated Approach

The Master said, “I cannot enlighten a mind that is not already struggling to understand or provide the words to a tongue that is not already struggling to speak. If I hold up one corner of a problem and the student does not come back with the other three, I do not repeat the lesson.”

—Confucius¹

Keywords

Business education, higher education, professionalism, foundation in ethics, ethical leadership, moral sensitivity, moral judgment, moral motivation, moral action

Introduction

As pointed out in the prior chapter, the first element on the wheel of professionalism is a foundation in ethics, thus recognizing the importance of this element in developing future professionals. Business educators have struggled with approaches to improve the ethical practices of business students. On the one hand, the business discipline is already heavy with technical knowledge that students must attain in the various subjects such as accounting, finance, marketing, management, information technology, international business, business law, economics, basic writing, public speaking, and mathematics. On the other hand, developing “professionals,” as was discussed in prior chapters, is different from developing “experts.” Business subjects are critical for students to become employable and valuable in the job market. Thus, faculty may believe that adding an additional requirement to the major, such as ethics, would tip the business degree to unreasonable levels. Many business schools recommend a course in ethics, but do not require it. Because most employers do not expect this knowledge, the conventional wisdom is that it is more valuable to have a business applicant be well versed in accounting, finance, and information technology than ethical philosophies. What good would that knowledge do to an employer? We attempt to answer this question below.

As we have discussed, business education has been influenced by historical and ideological events. Another strong influence on business education is the main accrediting agency for business programs in the United States, namely, the AACSB. This agency has the most authoritative power to dictate requirements at business schools. In 2003, the AACSB included a recommendation that all business school curricula include content covering ethical practices as a requirement for accreditation; however, they did not specify how business schools should incorporate this requirement into current courses and/or course sequences.² Instead, the AACSB allowed business programs to decide how they would integrate ethical curriculum within their courses and did not require a single course on ethics for accreditation.³

Thus, the teaching of professional ethics in business coursework has been inconsistent.⁴ Many deans from business schools have claimed that ethics and professional training were integrated in several courses, such as marketing, finance, operations management, accounting, and strategic management. However, this fails to address the primary concern of including content specifically focused on ethical development, moral courage, and decision making. Swanson reported that a large number of business professors found it burdensome to include well-developed case points on ethics.⁵ Swanson further explained that the professors rationalized their decision based on the desire to cover the required material in the courses, as well as their lack of training in teaching these concepts effectively. This deficient training influences the moral development of business students. To address this deficit, we will discuss the benefits of and approaches to ethical training that can be used. Developing professionals is a responsibility of the educational institutions and not a choice; ignoring this responsibility will only lead to more of the same, namely business students who graduate without the commitment and skills to become socially responsible business managers.

As quoted above, Confucius said that if students are not ready to struggle with the subject matter, then it is futile to offer the lesson at all. Having a foundational course in business ethics allows the students to relate to cases from different business subjects (as suggested by the AACSB) that deal with ethical issues. Without this foundation, students learn the ethical cases, only to understand that one company followed the letter of the law, and another company did not. This is inadequate in terms of educating future professionals on how to become effective and autonomous business leaders who consider the consequences of their decisions and actions on communities and society.

Foundation in Ethics

Based on our review of the literature and the need to graduate professional students who are ready to make responsible managerial decisions, we are recommending a consistent approach of adopting a foundational course in ethics in all business programs. We recommend that this course be focused a bit more on the student or the individual rather than the stakeholders’ approach taken in many business ethics texts. Developing students’ ethical judgment should be the goal of the course, in addition to familiarizing them with corporate governance practices as required by the AACSB. The AACSB has four broad categories of emphasis:

• responsibility of business in society,
• ethical leadership,
• ethical decision making, and
• corporate governance (AACSB).

Our approach emphasizes the second and third components, assuming that coverage for business in society and corporate governance can take place in other business courses. Below, we detail our approach for this foundational course. We believe that the elements below should be the core of a foundational course on ethics, emphasizing moral development of the individual. Taking appropriate class time on these two areas cement learning the foundation for the other courses. We also sequenced the elements as shown in Figure 4.1 below attempting to build a foundation that leads to ethical action. This underscores that the overall approach should be based on the model developed by Rest, as described below.⁶

Figure 4.1 Foundational Course of Ethics—A Sequenced Model

Moral Judgment by Understanding the Components of Ethical Action

To show the process of ethical behavior, it is important to start with the components of ethical process as developed in the Rest model, and later explained by Narvaez et al. in the EthEx Series.⁷ The components “moral sensitivity,” “moral judgment,” “moral motivation,” and “moral action,” if taken in sequence, provide a good path for educators to stimulate “ethical action.”

Moral Sensitivity

This is the stage of recognizing that there is an ethical issue at play, as well as the feeling of conflict and uneasiness, if no action is taken. Stimulating ethical sensitivity requires taking a closer look at ethical situations, connecting and framing others’ points of view, and responding to diversity while controlling social bias.

Moral Judgment

This is the reasoning process that a person goes through before deciding on an appropriate action. This involves critical and creative thinking in identifying alternatives for action. Moral judgment requires a good foundation in ethics, including judgment criteria, understanding of consequences, and reflecting on outcomes.

Moral Motivation

This is the process of sorting through personal goals, values, loyalties, and motivation. It is also the phase of integrating the moral sensitivity and judgment to build the motivation for ethical action. In this phase, a person examines their loyalties to the different groups involved in the decision. Assuming a correct process of sensitivity and judgment has occurred, an individual is reasonably motivated to take the next step.

Moral Action

This is the implementation of the ethical choice and following through with the decision despite hardship. In this stage what is required is to cultivate courage and to assert concerns respectfully. In this chapter, we focus on the “ethical judgment” element by laying a foundation of knowledge about ethics, as well as the reasoning process one goes through when they encounter an ethical issue. This develops students’ ethical capacity. In the next chapter, we emphasize to educators the importance of developing students’ “moral sensitivity” and “moral motivation” before expecting “moral action.” Given that research shows that business students are less interested in social agency, it is pivotal that educators spend more time on teasing out the ethical components of sensitivity and motivation to develop students’ professionalism.

Once students understand this framework, the course can shift to the next theoretical framework explaining the stages of ethical development (e.g., preconventional, conventional, postconventional).

Moral Judgment by Understanding Stages of Ethical Development

Another critical aspect of this unit is that students learn how character follows a developmental pattern. Human beings advance in ethical reasoning based on an increase in sophistication and experiences. Classroom coverage of Kohlberg’s stages of moral development allows students to explore their own development of sophistication and cross-referencing in their reasoning, using the defined levels in the model: preconventional, conventional, and postconventional levels. Barger summarized Kohlberg’s levels and stages in Table 4.1.⁸

Table 4.1 Kohlberg’s Stages and Levels Summarized

Following up with a few schemas from Rest’s Defining Issues Test (DIT) can demonstrate to students that ethical reasoning is a journey and not a short trip, but that it is worth the cost of finding meaning as they develop their life paths.

Although Kohlberg’s theory of moral development has been critiqued by many scholars, it still remains one of the most relevant platforms for ethical development. Most of the criticisms of Kohlberg’s theory have centered around the validity of testing of subjects, as well as the use of “reasoning” as the strongest component of judging ethical development. Many scholars suggested using ethical behavior as the benchmark. Critics have questioned whether the capacity for reasoning, as suggested by Kohlberg, will consistently lead to ethical action.⁹ Although some scholars questioned Kohlberg’s hard stages of ethical development, there is supporting evidence to his assumption of a progression of moral development with age through a sequenced set of stages¹⁰.

For the most part, students are excited about learning the moral schemas and moral levels. Suddenly they begin to analyze situations and actors around them, framing them in a different light and cross-referencing behavior against the moral levels in ethical development.¹¹ Understanding degrees of sophistication (e.g., preconventional, conventional, postconventional) in decision making opens up a student’s view of life situations. They become more aware of people’s behavior, including friends, family members, business colleagues, decision makers, and educators. The experience in judging ethical situations helps build self-concept and autonomy, leading to advancement in their professional thinking.

Foundation in Ethical Philosophies

In his recent text on Organizational Ethics, Johnson devotes a full section to teaching the most relevant ethical philosophies.¹² He argues that “ethical theories are critical to personal and collective ethical practice.” These foundational theories are meant to show a student (especially a preprofessional) how to identify and define a problem, think systematically, view the issue from many different perspectives, and understand guidelines for decision making. All these skills are needed for appropriate ethical judgment, as noted by the Rest model.¹³ Asking students to judge on the facts of the case, without having a foundation in ethics, can lead students to make judgments based on the prescribed law in the situation. Using only the prescribed law often leads students to think at preconventional levels, which according to Kohlberg, results in conformity and mimicking others’ actions as the common standard.¹⁴ Rather, this comprehensive approach of starting with an ethical foundation allows students to differentiate between ethics and the law.

There are many ethical-philosophies that can be studied by students in such a course. The following are the most common frameworks that students should understand prior to approaching ethical situations. It is important for the educator to emphasize that these are theoretical frameworks for understanding situations rather than a prescription to address ethical ailments. Together they help students understand that multiple approaches can be used in ethical decision making.

• Utilitarianism: Do the greatest good for the greatest number of people evaluation. This is a helpful framework for students to understand, since many business conflicts are resolved based on this model. Once understood, students often refer to this framework to explain business case studies, or business situations they come across in their internships or daily life.
• Kant’s Categorical Imperative: Do what is right despite the consequences of evaluation. Students relate to this one based on personal or family experiences they have experienced. It is important that students understand that this framework represents a postconventional approach in the Kohlberg model. This allows them to elevate their thinking to seek higher ethical standards when judging situations.
• Rawl’s Justice as Fairness: Balance freedom and equality evaluation. This is beneficial for students to understand the advantages of societal equality, compensatory benefits, and the use of a nondiscriminatory process. Using this philosophy, students learn empathy and ethical sensitivity that are beyond the logical business flow they are used to when solving a business case.
• Aristotelian Ethics: Live well and do good evaluation. Using this philosophy, students search for their own higher purpose, which allows them to live well and achieve their potential while they are contributing positively to society.
• Confucianism: Build healthy relationships evaluation. Students learn that to build a better society, they have to foster loving and benevolent relationships with their families, friends, and their external communities.
• Altruism: Build concern for others: The ethics of care evaluation. Students’ awareness of this normative, and often feminist, philosophy allows them to respond differently to situations based on the circumstances and individuals involved, using a customized and caring approach. This is a contrasting philosophy to the earlier ones that emphasize the use of universal rules.

The intent of this chapter is to examine how business students can use these theories, and explain the many decisions made throughout history. They are great models for an educator to use with any case study and point to how a person, an organization, or a company may have arrived at the decision that they did. Having these different models allow students to reflect back on situations, try different models, and see which one best fits the scenario. Teaching ethics without teaching the different frameworks places the student in a maze without direction. Thus, a foundational course is necessary for students to engage in ethical decision making. This is also an opportune time to explain “theory and theoretical frameworks” to business students, since this topic is also important in developing professionals.

Moreover, these philosophies show students the reality of using more than one approach to a situation. Yet, often, after students learn the different philosophies, they feel a bit lost, given that any of these frameworks might justify the decision made. It is then that the educator needs to step in and help students understand why a selected framework may be more appropriate for the situation at hand. Many ethics courses do not do this. They may cover the different philosophies, but the priority or the fit of one framework over the other is not examined. This can lead students to think that as long as they pick their favorite philosophy, they must be on the correct path in solving an ethical dilemma. Therefore, educators should point out that the philosophies are theoretical frameworks to think about a situation, but certainly not the solution to it. Below, we discuss the components of ethical action and we define this model as the appropriate approach to guide students to sound decisions.¹⁵

One may argue that a business class is not the place to learn these philosophies and this is partly true, since these frameworks could be covered in a philosophy class. The problem is that when business students learn this in a philosophy class, they classify this knowledge as “general education” or material that is unnecessary for their professional development. They also frequently fail to see the connection between this knowledge and their future careers. Many of our students, who have taken a course on ethics, prior to taking a business ethics course, claim that they only made sense of the philosophies, and their application, in the business curriculum. This could be related to the repetition of learning this knowledge, but it may also reflect having to apply the material in a business context.

Self-exploration and Character Development

Another reason for offering a single course in the second or third year of a business student undergraduate program is the course’s connection to concepts of professionalism. Specifically, this course lends itself well to helping students strengthen self-concept, autonomy, and social agency. Students can begin the course by doing a realistic self-appraisal of their own professionalism, using the questionnaire listed in Table 2.2, as mentioned before.

From Johnson’s text Organizational Ethics, students use the section on self-appraisal, discovering vocation and calling, identifying personal values, developing character, creating a moral identity, and drawing on spiritual resources.¹⁶ Students take the journey to identify their personal gifts and interest and then map the results to educational and professional goals. One part of this module is on character development. Students begin to understand the difference between personal characteristics (e.g., strengths and weaknesses) and virtues. They discover the path to develop their own virtues and the rewards of having them. Students also learn about a positive path of character development and the reasons they should aspire to in-depth self-exploration and self-actualization.

This module can be covered in a few weeks and students really enjoy this personal development opportunity, as they find it meaningful and inspiring. Many students report that when selecting business as a major, they had not done a lot of thinking about their own personal gifts or their calling. Thus, having this opportunity of self-exploration encourages deeper thinking about their future profession and its connection to their self-development path.

Ethical Leadership and Different Styles

Leadership is another element that is important in developing professionals’ self-concept, and we devote an entire chapter later, attempting to integrate the subject into business education. But in business ethics, it is important to engage students in learning about the challenges of ethical leadership. Having completed some self-exploration, students are ready to look outside of themselves. Although this is not a course on leadership, ethical leadership is what we are seeking in future business managers. Thus, analyses of leadership styles helps prepare students for future business positions where they will be either leading and managing or being lead and managed. Therefore, an introduction of the different styles of good and bad leadership allows students to examine both historical and contemporary leaders. It is helpful to teach students the different styles of leadership, and sources such as Jean Lipman-Blumen and Barbara Kellerman have extensive discussions of good and bad styles.¹⁷ Additionally, students should explore normative leadership theories such as transformational, servant, authentic, and responsible leadership, attempting to discover their own natural styles. We consider this component as optional but helpful in an ethics class.

Moral Judgment by Understanding Decision-making Formats

Once students become familiar with the ethical philosophies, leadership styles, and the components of ethical behavior, they are in need of methodological tools that can help them make decisions. This assumes that students have framed the situation and its actors in a theoretical framework, such as Kidder’s ethical checkpoints, the SAD formula, and Nash’s 12 questions. These tools can be characterized as flowcharts, which can help students make better choices as they navigate through normal everyday conflicts in the work environment. Most of these tools require students to recognize the situation, gather details and analyze, and make the decision. Following is a quick schematic of Kidder’s Ethical Checkpoints¹⁸:

1. Checkpoint: Recognize that there is a moral issue
2. Checkpoint: Determine the actors in the situation
3. Checkpoint: Gather the relevant facts
4. Checkpoint: Test for right-versus-wrong issues, in order to evaluate correct and incorrect approaches to handle the situation
5. Checkpoint: Test for right-versus-right paradigms to understand the various possible alternatives available, while examining loyalties to self, communities, and overall society
6. Checkpoint: Apply ethical standards and perspectives
7. Checkpoint: Look for a third way to reconcile and create win–win solutions
8. Checkpoint: Make the decision
9. Checkpoint: Revisit and reflect on the decision

These formats allow students to use a step-by-step approach to ensure a carefully thought-out decision, thus avoiding ethical blunders. If students are able to learn a process to evaluate ethical dilemmas, they are much more likely to work through such situations more effectively.

Ethical Motivation: Develop Students’ Ability to Evaluate Consequences

Connecting decisions to their consequences is an important and difficult skill, even for experienced professionals. This skill requires thinking and anticipating short- and long-term consequences and considering all the individuals and stakeholders who may be affected by an action. The best approach to develop this skill with students is through case studies. Case studies permit students to review the case with hindsight ability. In the next chapter, we discuss the Bernie Madoff case, which has a focus on evaluating the consequences.

Reflection is a meta-cognitive skill involving the process of thinking about thinking or having the intention to set-aside time for thinking.¹⁹ Reflection is the process of thinking about one’s decision process and outcomes. In the Nixon case study (below), we use discussion questions that prompt students to reflect. We suggest that educators create opportunities that allow for reflection. Also, responding to case studies in writing encourages students to reflect. This phase highlights the essence of developing ethical motivation as referred to in the Rest Model.

Ethical Action and Courage

It is important that students understand the courage needed for ethical action. Mary Gentile in her book Giving Voice to Values lays an excellent foundation for working individuals to develop a plan of action, once a decision to act has been made. Educators can benefit from adopting her approach when teaching this section. Furthermore, educators need to remind students that ethical action takes hard work and perseverance but it does have rewards.

Sequenced Approach

In summary, we believe a foundational course in ethics should focus on the individual; in this case, the students. Additionally, the course should build a foundation in sequence based on student-readiness for the information. For example, students are not ready to learn about ethical philosophies until they have understood the Rest model and how the components of sensitivity, judgment, motivation, and action build on each other. In addition, students should only be taught ethical action and courage, after understanding sound ethical judgment, as well as reflection and evaluation of consequences. Finally, the course should include all the following components, in order for students to achieve improved ethical judgment skills:

1. Moral judgment by understanding the components of ethical action as explained above. The ethical components should be the compass for the faculty during the course, as students develop in their moral judgment. After explaining the model to students, educators should emphasize ethical sensitivity and tease out using one to two case studies.
2. Understanding stages of ethical development, in order to distinguish between low levels of ethical judgment at the preconventional levels and high levels of ethical judgment at the postconventional stages.
3. Understanding of ethical philosophies and their application in order to enhance ethical judgment.
4. Self-exploration and character development, in order for the course to have a student-focused approach.
5. Understanding different leadership styles in order to assess future work environment and its players.
6. Develop students’ ability to focus on consequences and to reflect in order to reach ethical motivation stage.
7. Moral judgment by understanding decision-making formats.
8. Ethical action and courage.

Above is a graph summarizing our approach to teaching a foundational course on ethics (Figure 4.1). This graph sequences the theoretical material as we envision it to be taught in the classroom. We find this as an effective approach to learn the concepts and apply them to cases. Keep in mind, we stress that educators should use the case-study approach to have students think and experience every phase. We also encourage the use of nonbusiness cases as we discuss below.

Integrating Examples from Disciplines Other than Business

A course in business ethics also provides the opportunity for faculty to use case studies that are not taken from business. Given that this course is meant to be a foundational one on business ethics, it may be best to draw cases from other disciplines such as history and political science (and this can also reintroduce important events). We urge educators to reduce the use of business or leadership cases that may bias students against the business world. Students can apply their analytical skills to business situations in the future. Additionally, using examples from other fields allows students to view ethical conflicts objectively without infusing their own business biases onto the situation.

An example of a successful case that we used in this course is about Richard Nixon as a leader. The case study, readings, and questions were developed by Professor of History, Dr. Laura McEnaney, in collaboration with assigned readings on leadership. While the readings show different “sides” of Nixon, the focus of the case is on the lack of ethical reasoning and judgment. Scenes from the film Frost/Nixon were used to highlight President Nixon’s leadership style and ethical reasoning. Toward the end, one scene shows his deep regret for the decisions he made during Watergate. Yet, his deepest regret is how he may have influenced young people’s views about the political process. This invites students to engage in deep reflection and long-term thinking. From the readings, they see that President Nixon abused his power by trying to control all the actors and events around him. Rather than think of the consequences of his actions, he only thought of power and control. While he may have been a strong leader, who was credited with many good decisions and changes during the presidency, he still was unable to weigh the consequences of having his schemes discovered and the influence of that on the American people and the country. Below is our approach to presenting the case study and for the discussion with students:

Case Study Readings: President Richard Nixon and His leadership

In addition to a Brief Timeline of Events for Watergate (from the ­Washington Post^a), students read:

• Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Harvard Business Press, Chapters 1–3
• Patterson, J. T. (1996). Grand Expectations: The United States, 1945–1974. Oxford University Press, 771–782

Students are asked to reflect on the following questions:

• Richard Nixon was a leader of both a nation and a political party. What does this handling of Watergate suggest about the leadership in partisan politics?
• How would you characterize Nixon’s leadership style using some of the types listed in Kellerman: incompetent, rigid, corrupt, or insular?
• Kellerman analyzes the role of followers when leaders go astray. What is your assessment of the why some of “the president’s men” engineered the break-in and participated in the cover-up? How do you assess their responsibility in this scandal? Did they have alternatives?
• Historian Stanley Kutler argues that Richard Nixon destroyed the presidency to save the president. Do you agree with this analysis of Nixon’s leadership?
• President Ford, Nixon’s successor, said in 1984 that Nixon owed the nation an apology. Should leaders apologize after such scandal? Would that have helped in any way? What is the function of an apology in modern politics?
• What does Watergate suggest to you about the perils and possibilities of leadership? What are the cautionary tales in this episode for your generation—as either leaders or followers?
• Richard Nixon is the most famous graduate of Whittier College. How can or should Whittier use the history of Nixon to teach leadership? Should we lean into what his presidency can teach us, or should we keep a healthy distance from this history? Could you advise Whittier College’s President about how to use Nixon’s legacy for our school?

Additional Questions by Co-instructor:

• Using the Kohlberg model, what stage of moral development was President Nixon utilizing during Watergate? How would you help President Nixon advance his ethical reasoning during the Watergate Scandal?
• Using Rest’s model of ethical behavior (i.e., ethical sensitivity, ethical judgment, ethical motivation, ethical action), which component did Nixon fail to exercise?²⁰
• In hindsight, had President Nixon thought of the consequences or had followers who had the courage to warn him of the consequences, would he have acted in the same manner? Why or why not?

Other cases and modules:

While there are many excellent nonbusiness leadership cases and modules that can be used in a foundational business ethics class, we mention a few below that have been used successfully in coordination with Professor John Bak, who teaches documentary film:

• Robert McNamara, American business executive and the eighth Secretary of Defense, serving from 1961 to 1968 under Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. This case can be used along with the documentary Fog of War, where Robert McNamara reflects on 11 lessons he learned through his career, most notably on decisions made that resolved the Cuban missile crisis and prolonged the Vietnam War.
• Leadership analysis of Adolph Hitler. This case can be used with filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will documentary that shows Hitler consolidating power in 1934, and gaining a tremendous followership in Germany prior to and during the Holocaust. In this leadership analysis, students struggle to see Hitler as a widely followed leader who appealed to the nationalistic feelings of his followers. Once he was elected, he created institutions to support his power, and eventually used fear-of-the-other, threats, and execution/murder to maintain his power, especially during the Holocaust. Students learn how leadership can change over time and become not just toxic but evil. Ethical leadership analysis can include lessons on balance of power, toxic leadership, and the ability to discern when leaders move from healthy, strong leadership to toxic leadership.

Link to Professionalism and Readiness for the AACSB Integrated Model

Developing an ethical approach to business situations can be a daunting task. The AACSB selected an integrated approach to ethics education, in order for students to see ethical principles applied in various business subjects such as marketing, finance, accounting, and international business. This approach is also a valuable approach since students would be exposed to enough repetition of the concepts to memorize and internalize them. However, the AACSB method is deficient, since it does not take into account that students have not learned the principles to be able to apply them. Students need to advance in moral development prior to being exposed to the integration described by the AACSB. Building a foundation using the process of ethical judgment with all the other steps suggested above, and then using the AACSB integrated model in all business courses helps students internalize the foundation.²¹ Then, repeating the process they have learned in different sub-disciplines, such as marketing, accounting, finance, and management, allows for reexamination of concepts and reflections. In the next chapter, we show how educators can use the “repeat process” to integrate ethics in all business offerings, after students have completed a foundational course.

Notes

  1.  Legge (2009).

  2.  Miles, Hazeldine, and Munilla (2004).

  3.  Miles, Hazeldine, and Munilla (2004); Swanson and Frederick (2003).

  4.  Miles, Hazeldine, and Munilla (2004); Swanson and Frederick (2001).

  5.  Swanson (2004).

  6.  Rest (1984).

  7.  Rest (1984); Narvaez and Endicott (2009c); Navaraez and Lies (2009a); Navaraez (2009b)

  8.  Barger (2000).

  9.  Rest, Bebeau, Thoma, and Bebeau (1999).

10.  Kohlberg (1976).

11.  Rest (1984, 1986).

12.  Johnson (2016).

13.  Rest (1984, 1986).

14.  Kohlberg (1973).

15.  Rest (1984, 1986).

16.  Johnson (2016).

17.  Lipman-Blumen (2000); Kellerman (2004).

18.  Johnson (2013), Chapter 7

19.  Narvaez and Bock (2009).

20.  Rest (1984).

21.  Rest (1984).

^aThe Timeline of Events can be obtained online using the following link: http://watergate.info/chronology/brief-timeline-of-events