Understanding the relationship between moral judgment development and individual characteristics: The role of educational contexts.

Abstract

This study examines variation in moral judgment level as measured by the Defining Issues Test 2 (DIT-2; J. R. Rest & D. Narvaez, 1998), based on individual demographic information and educational contexts. Individual DIT-2 scores and demographic information were obtained from the archived data sets housed at the Center for the Study of Ethical Development. The information on educational contexts was obtained by surveying the researchers who initially gathered the data. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to analyze DIT-2 data from 7,642 individuals and 65 institutions. Findings indicate that average DIT-2 scores vary significantly among institutions. Further, the authors found that the strength of the relation of DIT-2 scores to gender and English language status is significant and consistent across contexts, whereas the strength of the relation to educational level and political identity varies across contexts. These findings indicate that information about the individuals' educational context as well as the broader regional contexts should be taken into account to understand variation in individual levels of moral judgment. The findings can also be used as an interpretive guide for DIT-2 users.

Assessing a Scaffolded, Interactive, and Reflective Analysis Framework for Developing Ethical Reasoning in Engineering Students

“…The interactivity attributes of the modules, including in-class and online discussions among peers, was a significant contributor to increasing ethical reasoning in participants, although the effects were mixed (both positive and negative contributors). Research has suggested that moral judgment can be influenced by exposure to rich social contexts 20 as well as curricular interventions 42 , and may develop best when individuals have the opportunity to engage in discourse (including argumentation) about moral dilemmas 39 . Similarly, Hartwell 29 has indicated that student-centered moral discourse is one of the most successful curricular strategies.…”

“…The DIT-2 instrument presents five ethical scenarios, each of which are followed by 12 statements of reasoning related to the ethical dilemma presented. Respondents are asked to rank these 12 statements in terms of their importance, and then select the four most important to making a decision 42 . The EERI instrument was developed to assess ethical reasoning in an engineering context 60,64 , and is structured similar to the DIT-2, but the scenarios are specific to engineering contexts.…”

“…Two variables from each test were compared: the P score, which reflects an individual's capacity for postconventional moral reasoning 42 , and the N2 score, which starts with the P score and then adjusts it based upon "participants' ability to discriminate between [postconventional] items and lower stage items [personal interest] items" 59 (p. 80). These scores provide quantitative measures of the level of moral judgment of respondents, and higher P and N2 scores reflect more sophisticated levels of complex ethical reasoning ability.…”

“…To simplify our modeling, we selected the outcome measure from the battery of assessments we conducted that was most significant, which was the EERI N2 score. Previous literature 42 indicates the N2 index is a more robust measure of ethical reasoning, and more likely to reflect changes in a short period of time. We also selected the EERI N2 score, rather than the DIT-2 N2, because the gains were significant in this assessment.…”

“…Important explanatory variables included gender 9,58 , GPA, primary language 8,42 , citizenship 23,62 , and satisfaction with prior ethics education 65 . A preliminary model was constructed containing all of these explanatory variables but it did not significantly fit the data.…”