Defining Issues Test

Last updated

The Defining Issues Test is a component model of moral development devised by James Rest in 1974. [1] The University of Minnesota formally established the Center for the Study of Ethical Development [2] as a vehicle for research around this test in 1982. The Center relocated to larger premises within the University of Alabama and is now located in Capital Hall; for more information, visit the center website. Because it is not possible to score DIT-1 and DIT-2 personally, the Center of Ethical Development at the University of Alabama offers scoring to scholars and researchers worldwide (Information about the center is available via the center website: https://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/). 'We are pleased to inform DIT users, scholars, and researchers worldwide that the normative information for the DIT2-test (2023) has been updated after 14 years.Moral reasoning development: norms for Defining Issue Test-2 (DIT2) Access through Journal of Ethics & Behavior' The normative information for the DIT2-test (2023) has been updated after 14 years. [3]

The Defining Issues Test is a proprietary self-report measure [4] which uses a Likert-type scale to give quantitative ratings and rankings to issues surrounding five different moral dilemmas, or stories. Specifically, respondents rate 12 issues in terms of their importance to the corresponding dilemma and then rank the four most important issues. The issue statements that respondents respond to are not fully developed stances which fall on one side or another of the presented dilemma. Rather, they are conceptualized as fragments of reasoning, to which respondents must project meaning. Meaning is projected by means of moral reasoning schemas (each of which is explained below). A schema is a mental representation of stimuli that has previously been encountered, which allows one to make sense of newly experienced, but related, stimuli. So, when a respondent reads an issue statement that both makes sense to them, as well as triggers a preferred schema, that statement is given a high rating and ranking. Conversely, when a respondent reads an issue statement that is either construed as nonsensical or overly simplistic, the item receives a low rating. Patterns of ratings and rankings reveal information about three specific schemas of moral reasoning: the Personal Interests Schema, the Maintaining Norms Schema and the Postconventional Schema.

The personal interests schema is regarded as the least developmentally advanced level of moral reasoning. In operating primarily at the Personal Interests level, the respondent takes into consideration what the protagonist of the story, or those close to the protagonist, has to gain or lose. The Maintaining Norms Schema is considered more advanced than the Personal Interests Schema, as it emphasizes more than the individual.

At the maintaining norms reasoning level, law and authority are important, as each of these helps to uphold social order, which is paramount to this schema. So, a respondent who is predominantly using this schema will take into consideration what needs to be done in order to be compliant with the social order of society. Finally, the Postconventional Schema is regarded as the most developmentally advanced.

At the post-conventional reasoning level, laws are not simply blindly accepted (as with the maintaining norms schema) but are scrutinized in order to ensure society-wide benefit. So, a respondent who is primarily using this schema will focus on what is best for society as a whole. For example, the civil rights movement was a product of postconventional reasoning, as followers were most concerned with the society-wide effects of inequality.

Though an individual may rely more heavily on one of the aforementioned schemas, moral reasoning is typically informed, to varying degrees, by each of the schemas. [5] [6]

One of the Defining Issues Test's original purposes was to assess the transition of moral development from adolescence to adulthood. In 1999 the test was revised in the DIT-2 for brevity, clarity and more powerful validity criteria. [7] [8]

The Defining Issues Test has been dubbed "Neo-Kohlbergian" by its constituents as it emphasizes cognition, personal construction, development and postconventional moral thinking - reflective of the work by Lawrence Kohlberg and his stages of moral development. [9] [10]

Also, the center provides the Intermediate Concepts Measures (ICM) A new kind of measure has been developed as part of the Intermediate Concept Approach which, unlike DIT, allows bespoke measure development in specific contextual settings. For example, researchers in a law school might want to work with the Center to develop a measure incorporating dilemmas relevant to the law profession to assess ethical aspects of a course of study. However, a growing number of measures are also available ‘off-the-shelf’ for certain populations such as adolescents, dentists, or Army officers for example. Unlike DIT, Intermediate Concept Measures, or ICMs, do not directly assess bedrock moral schemas because so-called intermediate concepts are located at a level between bedrock moral schemas and specific contextual norms (e.g. professional codes) and are specific to daily life and similar to virtue-based concepts such as honesty or courage. ICM Examples US Version of Adolescent ICM UK Version of Adolescent ICM Military ICM Please visit the links below for examples of DITs and ICMs:

Related Research Articles

Integrity is the practice of being honest and showing a consistent and uncompromising adherence to strong moral and ethical principles and values. In ethics, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or earnestness of one's actions. Integrity can stand in opposition to hypocrisy. It regards internal consistency as a virtue, and suggests that people who hold apparently conflicting values should account for the discrepancy or alter those values.

Lawrence Kohlberg was an American psychologist best known for his theory of stages of moral development.

This index of ethics articles puts articles relevant to well-known ethical debates and decisions in one place - including practical problems long known in philosophy, and the more abstract subjects in law, politics, and some professions and sciences. It lists also those core concepts essential to understanding ethics as applied in various religions, some movements derived from religions, and religions discussed as if they were a theory of ethics making no special claim to divine status.

Moral reasoning is the study of how people think about right and wrong and how they acquire and apply moral rules. It is a subdiscipline of moral psychology that overlaps with moral philosophy, and is the foundation of descriptive ethics.

Moral psychology is a field of study in both philosophy and psychology. Historically, the term "moral psychology" was used relatively narrowly to refer to the study of moral development. Moral psychology eventually came to refer more broadly to various topics at the intersection of ethics, psychology, and philosophy of mind. Some of the main topics of the field are moral judgment, moral reasoning, moral sensitivity, moral responsibility, moral motivation, moral identity, moral action, moral development, moral diversity, moral character, altruism, psychological egoism, moral luck, moral forecasting, moral emotion, affective forecasting, and moral disagreement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Piaget's theory of cognitive development</span> Theory that discusses human intelligence from an epistemological perspective

Piaget's theory of cognitive development is a comprehensive theory about the nature and development of human intelligence. It was originated by the Swiss developmental psychologist Jean Piaget (1896–1980). The theory deals with the nature of knowledge itself and how humans gradually come to acquire, construct, and use it. Piaget's theory is mainly known as a developmental stage theory.

Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development constitute an adaptation of a psychological theory originally conceived by the Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget. Kohlberg began work on this topic as a psychology graduate student at the University of Chicago in 1958 and expanded upon the theory throughout his life.

Media ethics is the subdivision dealing with the specific ethical principles and standards of media, including broadcast media, film, theatre, the arts, print media and the internet. The field covers many varied and highly controversial topics, ranging from war journalism to Benetton ad campaigns.

<i>In a Different Voice</i> 1982 book by Carol Gilligan

In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development is a book on gender studies by American professor Carol Gilligan, published in 1982, which Harvard University Press calls "the little book that started a revolution".

James Rest was an American psychologist specializing in moral psychology and development. Together with his Minnesota Group of colleagues, including Darcia Narvaez, Muriel Bebeau, and Stephen Thoma, Rest extended Kohlberg's approach to researching moral reasoning.

The model of hierarchical complexity (MHC) is a framework for scoring how complex a behavior is, such as verbal reasoning or other cognitive tasks. It quantifies the order of hierarchical complexity of a task based on mathematical principles of how the information is organized, in terms of information science. This model was developed by Michael Commons and Francis Richards in the early 1980s.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to ethics.

Moral development focuses on the emergence, change, and understanding of morality from infancy through adulthood. The theory states that morality develops across a lifespan in a variety of ways and is influenced by an individual's experiences and behavior when faced with moral issues through different periods of physical and cognitive development. Morality concerns an individual's reforming sense of what is right and wrong; it is for this reason that young children have different moral judgment and character than that of a grown adult. Morality in itself is often a synonym for "rightness" or "goodness." It also refers to a specific code of conduct that is derived from one's culture, religion, or personal philosophy that guides one's actions, behaviors, and thoughts.

Behavioural ethics is a new field of social scientific research that seeks to understand how people actually behave when confronted with ethical dilemmas. It refers to behaviour that is judged according to generally accepted norms of behaviour.

Socioscientific Issues (SSI) are controversial social issues which relate to science. They are ill-structured, open-ended problems which have multiple solutions.

Darcia Narvaez is a Professor of Psychology Emerita at the University of Notre Dame who has written extensively on issues of character, moral development, and human flourishing.

Morality refers to “the ability to distinguish right from wrong, to act on this distinction and to experience pride when we do the right things and guilt or shame when we do not.” Both Piaget and Kohlberg made significant contributions to this area of study. Experts in developmental psychology have categorized morality into three key facets: the emotional aspect, the cognitive aspect, and the action-oriented aspect.

Moral blindness, also known as ethical blindness, is defined as a person's temporary inability to see the ethical aspect of a decision they are making. It is often caused by external factors due to which an individual is unable to see the immoral aspect of their behavior in that particular situation.

Moral progress refers to improvement in concepts such as moral beliefs and practices experienced on a societal scale. Michele Moody-Adams noted that "moral progress in belief involves deepening our grasp of existing moral concepts, while moral progress in practices involves realizing deepened moral understandings in behavior or social institutions".

Moral identity is a concept within moral psychology concerning the importance of morality to a person’s identity, typically construed as either a trait-like individual difference, or set of chronically accessible schemas.

References

  1. ↑ Rest, James (1979). Development in Judging Moral Issues. University of Minnesota Press. ISBN   978-0-8166-0891-1.
  2. ↑
  3. ↑ Moral reasoning development: norms for Defining Issue Test-2 (DIT2). Access through Journal of Ethics & Behavior ()
  4. ↑ "Measures of Ethical Development". Center for the Study of Ethical Development.
  5. ↑ Narvaez, Darcia; Bock, T. (2002). "Moral schemas and tacit judgment or how the Defining Issues Test is supported by cognitive science". Journal of Moral Education . 31 (3): 297–314. doi:10.1080/0305724022000008124. S2CID   6947889.
  6. ↑ Rest, James; Narvaez, D.; Thoma, S.; Bebeau, M. (2000). "A Neo-Kohlbergian approach to morality research". Journal of Moral Education. 29 (4): 381–395. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.415.5865 . doi:10.1080/713679390. S2CID   15525889.
  7. ↑ "Center for the Study of Ethical Development" (Website). DIT_2. Retrieved 2016-10-22.
  8. ↑ Rest, James; Narvaez, D.; Bebeau, M.; Thoma, S. (1999). "DIT-2: Devising and testing a new instrument of moral judgment". Journal of Educational Psychology. 91 (4): 644–659. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.415.6248 . doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.4.644. S2CID   18117395.
  9. ↑ Rest, James; Narvaez, D.; Bebeau, M.; Thoma, S. (1999). "A Neo-Kohlbergian Approach: The DIT and Schema Theory". Educational Psychology Review . 11 (4): 291–324. doi:10.1023/A:1022053215271. S2CID   14483253.
  10. ↑ Rest, James; Narvaez, D.; Bebeau, M.; Thoma, S. (1999). Postconventional Moral Thinking: A Neo-Kohlbergian Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN   978-0-8058-3285-3.

the Center for the Study of Ethical Development at the University of Alabama https://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/

the Center for the Study of Ethical Development at the University of Alabama https://ethicaldevelopment.ua.edu/

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.