Assessing the application of cognitive moral development theory to business ethics

Research Methods in Taxation Ethics: Developing the Defining Issues Test (DIT) for a Tax-Specific Scenario

“…However, Fraedrich et al (1994) consider it highly questionable to assume that ethical behaviour in a business context is identical to ethical behaviour in a personal or social scenario. Because the situational factors present differ, they called for more work to be done to investigate ethical reasoning in a business context.…”

“…1 However, while the DIT is ''a broad, general measure of moral reasoning'' (Fisher, 1997, p. 143), acceptable in dealing with personal issues in a social context (Fraedrich et al, 1994), concern has been expressed that it does not, and cannot, fairly represent the reasoning used when facing ethical dilemmas in a business context (see for example, Dellaportas et al, 2006;Elm and Nichols, 1993;Fraedrich et al, 1994;Trevino, 1986Trevino, , 1992Weber, 1990;Welton et al, 1994).…”

Agents or Stewards? Linking Managerial Behavior and Moral Development

“…Rest (1979Rest ( , 1986a described the Defining Issues Test (DIT) that can be used to measure cognitive moral development. While criticism exists as to the validity of this test (for a review see Fraedrich et al, 1994), it remains one of the standard accepted ways of measuring moral development.…”

Managerial Cognitive Moral Development and the Firm’s Owners’ Salience: Empirical Evidence

“…While tests of moral development and the underlying construct of CMD have been criticized in the literature (e.g. Fraedrich, Thorne, & Ferrell, 1994;Sachdeva, Singh, & Medin, 2011), DIT and similar tests remain the most frequently used instruments for assessing the CMD of individuals and are supported by insights from cognitive science (Narvaez & Bock, 2002). DIT does not exist in Russian.…”