Suresh sent along this item from Eric Schwitzgebel:
Ethics books are more likely to be stolen than non-ethics books in philosophy (looking at a large sample of recent ethics and non-ethics books from leading academic libraries). Missing books as a percentage of those off shelf were 8.7% for ethics, 6.9% for non-ethics, for an odds ratio of 1.25 to 1. [followed by analyses of various subsets of the data that confirm this result]
I’d like to see some data on how often these books are checked out before being stolen (or lost), but setting such statistical questions aside, I have to say that I’ve always been suspicious about ethics classes, in that I think it’s natural for them to focus on the tough cases (true ethical dilemmas) rather than on the easier calls which people nonetheless get wrong. I’m not speaking with any expertise here, but my impression is that the most common ethical errors are clear-cut, where people do something they know (or should know) is unethical, but they think they won’t get caught.
P.S. Here are my some of my more considered thoughts on ethics and statistics. (Also see Section 10.5 of my book with Deb.)
Aren't the most common errors ones where people know they're wrong, but feel that they won't suffer consequences?
Procrastinators rationalize that they will get fundamentally the same results if they start later than if they start earlier. A gossip rationalizes that the rumor won't blemish the gossip's reputation, harm the subject in an important way, or get back to the subject. A person who decides to take a risk believes that they won't suffer the feared consequence of the risk that one time. Some lottery ticket buyers believe they have an above-average chance of winning.