Suppr超能文献

难道《决断问题测试》衡量的是道德判断能力还是政治立场?

Does the Defining Issues Test measure ethical judgment ability or political position?

机构信息

University of Memphis, Fogelman College of Business and Economics, School of Accountancy, 3665 Central Ave., Memphis, TN 38152, USA.

出版信息

J Soc Psychol. 2011 May-Jun;151(3):314-30. doi: 10.1080/00224545.2010.481690.

Abstract

This article addresses the construct validity of the Defining Issues Test of ethical judgment (DIT/DIT-2). Alleging a political bias in the test, Emler and colleagues (1983, 1998, 1999, 2007), show that conservatives score higher when asked to fake as liberals, implying that they understand the reasoning associated with "higher" moral development but avoid items they see as liberally biased. DIT proponents challenge the internal validity of faking studies, advocating an explained-variance validation. This study takes a new approach: Adult participants complete the DIT-2, then evaluate the raw responses of others to discern political orientation and ethical development. Results show that individuals scoring higher on the DIT-2 rank others' ethical judgment in a way consistent with DIT-2-based rankings. Accuracy at assessing political orientation, however, is low. Results support the DIT-2's validity as a measure of ethical development, not an expression of political position.

摘要

本文探讨了道德判断定义问题测试(DIT/DIT-2)的建构效度。埃姆勒等人(1983、1998、1999、2007)声称该测试存在政治偏见,他们发现,当被要求假扮成自由派时,保守派的得分更高,这表明他们理解与“更高”道德发展相关的推理,但回避他们认为带有自由派偏见的项目。DIT 的支持者质疑假扮研究的内部有效性,主张用解释方差验证。本研究采用了一种新方法:成年参与者完成 DIT-2 后,评估他人的原始反应,以辨别政治倾向和道德发展。结果表明,在 DIT-2 上得分较高的人以与 DIT-2 排名一致的方式对他人的道德判断进行排名。然而,评估政治倾向的准确性较低。结果支持 DIT-2 作为道德发展衡量标准的有效性,而不是政治立场的表达。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验