scholarly journals Validity study using factor analyses on the Defining Issues Test-2 in undergraduate populations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Youn-Jeng Choi ◽  
Hyemin Han ◽  
Meghan Bankhead ◽  
Stephen J. Thoma
Keyword(s):  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Internal Structure ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Weighted Least Squares ◽  
Defining Issues Test ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Stage Model

Introduction The Defining Issues Test (DIT) aimed to measure one’s moral judgment development in terms of moral reasoning. The Neo-Kohlbergian approach, which is an elaboration of Kohlbergian theory, focuses on the continuous development of postconventional moral reasoning, which constitutes the theoretical basis of the DIT. However, very few studies have directly tested the internal structure of the DIT, which would indicate its construct validity. Objectives Using the DIT-2, a later revision of the DIT, we examined whether a bi-factor model or 3-factor CFA model showed a better model fit. The Neo-Kohlbergian theory of moral judgment development, which constitutes the theoretical basis for the DIT-2, proposes that moral judgment development occurs continuously and that it can be better explained with a soft-stage model. Given these assertions, we assumed that the bi-factor model, which considers the Schema-General Moral Judgment (SGMJ), might be more consistent with Neo-Kohlbergian theory. Methods We analyzed a large dataset collected from undergraduate students. We performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) via weighted least squares. A 3-factor CFA based on the DIT-2 manual and a bi-factor model were compared for model fit. The three factors in the 3-factor CFA were labeled as moral development schemas in Neo-Kohlbergian theory (i.e., personal interests, maintaining norms, and postconventional schemas). The bi-factor model included the SGMJ in addition to the three factors. Results In general, the bi-factor model showed a better model fit compared with the 3-factor CFA model although both models reported acceptable model fit indices. Conclusion We found that the DIT-2 scale is a valid measure of the internal structure of moral reasoning development using both CFA and bi-factor models. In addition, we conclude that the soft-stage model, posited by the Neo-Kohlbergian approach to moral judgment development, can be better supported with the bi-factor model that was tested in the present study.

Does It Matter How One Assesses Moral Reasoning? Differences (Biases) in the Recognition Versus Formulation Tasks

2016 ◽  
Vol 57 (7) ◽  
pp. 1440-1464
Author(s):  
James Weber
Keyword(s):  
Business Ethics ◽  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Ethical Dilemmas ◽  
Business Students ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Defining Issues Test ◽  
Moral Cognition ◽  
Theoretical Foundations ◽  
Different Levels

Most business ethics scholars interested in understanding individual moral cognition or reasoning rely on the Defining Issues Test (DIT). They typically report that managers and business students exhibit a relatively high percentage of principled moral reasoning when resolving ethical dilemmas. This article applies neurocognitive processes and Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, and its more recent revision, as theoretical foundations to explore whether differences emerge when using a recognition of learning task, such as the DIT or similar instruments, versus a formulation of knowledge task, such as the Moral Judgment Interview or similar instruments, to assess individual moral reasoning. The data show that significantly different levels of moral reasoning are detected when using a recognition-based versus formulation-based moral reasoning instrument. As expected, the recognition-based approach (using a DIT-like instrument) reports an inflated, higher moral reasoning score for subjects compared with using a formulation-based instrument. Implications of these results for understanding an individual’s moral reasoning are discussed.

Development of the Trauma-Related Anger Scale

Assessment ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 1117-1127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Connor Sullivan ◽  
Russell T. Jones ◽  
Neil Hauenstein ◽  
Bradley White
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Clinical Work ◽  
Good Evidence ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Factor Analyses ◽  
Exploratory Factor Analyses ◽  
Excellent Internal Consistency ◽  
Moderate Relationship ◽  
Best Fit

Anger is a pervasive problem following traumatic events. Previous research has demonstrated a moderate relationship between anger and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), yet findings also highlight that anger has not been rigorously measured in the context of PTSD. Thus, this study concerns the development of a complimentary measure to assess anger in the context of PTSD. Participants were 435 undergraduate students. The participants were given a battery including the proposed scale and measures of trauma exposure, PTSD, anger, depression, anxiety, and social desirability. Exploratory factor analyses revealed a hierarchical, four-factor model provided the best fit to the data. The scale appeared psychometrically sound, with excellent internal consistency, good evidence of validity, and good model fit. This scale may provide implications for clinical work, specifically for the assessment and tracking of anger symptoms connected to PTSD. Additionally, this scale may assist with research by predicting treatment outcomes, aggression, and PTSD.

scholarly journals Academic Life Assessment Scale (ALAS): A new factorial structure

Psico-USF ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Acácia Aparecida Angeli dos Santos ◽  
Francine Náthalie Ferraresi Rodrigues Queluz ◽  
Ana Carolina Pescarini Gallo ◽  
Thalyta Hulsen Lemos Veiga
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Internal Structure ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Assessment Scale ◽  
Life Assessment ◽  
Academic Life ◽  
Academic Experience ◽  
Factorial Structure ◽  
Good Reliability

Abstract The objective of the present study was to give continuity to the validation process of the Academic Life Assessment Scale (ALAS) by verifying its internal structure and the relationship with other related variables. The study involved 580 undergraduate students from two universities in the state of Paraíba, one public and one private. A majority of the participants were male (55%) with an average age of 22 (SD = 4.94) who responded to the ALAS and the Academic Experience Questionnaire - Reduced (AEQ-r). To verify the internal structure of the ALAS, first, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed and, as the structure was not confirmed, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed. After EFA, a three-factor model was found, which presented good reliability, as well as correlation with academic experiences measures. This study contributes to the literature suggesting a new factorial structure for ALAS.

Testing robustness, model fit, and measurement invariance of the Student Engagement Scale in an African university context

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 92-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tefera Tadesse ◽  
Robyn M Gillies
Keyword(s):  
Student Engagement ◽  
Measurement Invariance ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Structural Equation ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Equation Modelling ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
Engagement Scale

This study examined a modified version of the Student Engagement Scale, as adopted from the Australasian Survey of Student Engagement. It did so through examining model fit, predictive validity of the engagement factor, and testing of score reliability and measurement invariance across colleges and class years. Participants were volunteer undergraduate students (n = 536) from two colleges of a large university in Ethiopia. Confirmatory factor analysis using structural equation modelling was used. The results reasonably supported a nine-factor model over other models, and testing of measurement invariance confirmed a good model fit for the nine-factor model across college and class year. Overall, the findings demonstrated supporting evidence for the validity of the nine-factor structure.

EFFECTS OF GENDER AND EDUCATION ON THE MORAL REASONING OF KUWAIT UNIVERSITY STUDENTS

2002 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eissa M. Al-Ansari
Keyword(s):  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Formal Education ◽  
College Of Education ◽  
Defining Issues Test ◽  
Kuwait University ◽  
Percentage Score ◽  
Gender And Education ◽  
Cross Cultural Study ◽  
Stage 4

The moral reasoning of 189 undergraduate students from the College of Education, Kuwait University was studied, using the Defining Issues Test (DIT) by Rest (1990). The subjects ranged in age from 18 to 26 years (mean age =20.83). The results revealed that the sample reasoned predominantly at stage 4. Principled Morality Percentage Score (P%-score) was found to be below the norms reported in the literature for this group. There were no gender differences in moral reasoning. However, formal education did have a significant effect on moral judgment scores. In the light of this cross-cultural study as well as of other similar studies, a series of questions related to the understanding of moral development has been raised for further examination.

Welcoming Another CMD Instrument — The MES: But Don't Throw out the MJI or DIT Just Yet!

1996 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 517-522 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Weber
Keyword(s):  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Defining Issues Test ◽  
Multidimensional Ethics Scale

AbstractThis review offers a cautious acceptance of the Multidimensional Ethics Scale (MES) developed by Robin, Gordon, Jordan and Reidenbach. While the contribution of the MES to future empirical research of individuals’ moral reasoning is welcomed, a number of reservations or criticisms are raised regarding theory confusion, instrument confusion, and fears arising when using the MES. I conclude that the MES is a valuable compliment to existing moral reasoning instruments — the Moral Judgment Interview and the Defining Issues Test — but not a replacement of these instruments.

Moral Judgment and the Others-Concept

1978 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 283-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerry L. Whiteman ◽  
Karl B. Zucker ◽  
Liam K. Grimley
Keyword(s):  
Moral Development ◽  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Moral Education ◽  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Defining Issues Test ◽  
Developmental Model ◽  
Complex Relationship ◽  
Lower Stage ◽  
Correlation Statistics

198 students in Grades 7 through 12 were assessed for their level of moral reasoning and their perceptions of others. The respective instruments were James Rest's Defining Issues Test and the Paired Hands Test-Secondary developed by Karl Zucker and others. A one-way analysis of variance and correlation statistics showed a consistent relationship between students' level of moral development and their others-concept. Those students who had reached the higher (principled) stages of moral development perceived and/or felt more positively about other people than students who were at a lower stage of moral development. Students who were at the antiestablishment stage had an especially low others-concept. Since it is thought that a person's others-concept indicates how he feels about other people as well as how he perceives others, the results of this study suggest that the complex relationship between thoughts and feelings, and their respective roles in moral education should be reexamined. Perhaps a cognitive-affective-developmental model would be more helpful for developing approaches to moral education than the cognitive-developmental model currently supported by many authorities.

Comparison of Measures of Moral Judgment

1978 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 307-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bode ◽  
Roger Page
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Moral Judgment ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Defining Issues Test ◽  
The Relationship

Three measures of moral reasoning (Kohlberg's Moral Judgment Interview, Rest's Defining Issues Test, and Maitland and Goldman's Moral Judgment Scale) were administered to classes of college students to examine the relationship between the instruments as well as their internal consistency. The Kohlberg and Rest instruments showed the strongest relationship while the Maitland and Goldman measure correlated poorly with both. The Kohlberg measure produced the highest coefficient of internal consistency (which is perhaps to be expected given the nature of the scoring procedures), while the Maitland and Goldman measure produced the lowest coefficient of internal consistency.

Exploring the Multidimensional Facets of Authoritarianism: Authoritarian Aggression and Social Dominance Orientation

2008 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Passini
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Regression Analyses ◽  
One Dimensional ◽  
Confirmatory Factor ◽  
The One ◽  
Better Than

The relation between authoritarianism and social dominance orientation was analyzed, with authoritarianism measured using a three-dimensional scale. The implicit multidimensional structure (authoritarian submission, conventionalism, authoritarian aggression) of Altemeyer’s (1981, 1988) conceptualization of authoritarianism is inconsistent with its one-dimensional methodological operationalization. The dimensionality of authoritarianism was investigated using confirmatory factor analysis in a sample of 713 university students. As hypothesized, the three-factor model fit the data significantly better than the one-factor model. Regression analyses revealed that only authoritarian aggression was related to social dominance orientation. That is, only intolerance of deviance was related to high social dominance, whereas submissiveness was not.

From Bi-Dimensionality to Uni-Dimensionality in Self-Report Questionnaires

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bjarne Schmalbach ◽  
Markus Zenger ◽  
Michalis P. Michaelides ◽  
Karin Schermelleh-Engel ◽  
Andreas Hinz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Model ◽  
Common Factor ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Model Fit ◽  
Self Report ◽  
External Criterion ◽  
Common Factor Model ◽  
Random Intercept ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Core Self

Abstract. The common factor model – by far the most widely used model for factor analysis – assumes equal item intercepts across respondents. Due to idiosyncratic ways of understanding and answering items of a questionnaire, this assumption is often violated, leading to an underestimation of model fit. Maydeu-Olivares and Coffman (2006) suggested the introduction of a random intercept into the model to address this concern. The present study applies this method to six established instruments (measuring depression, procrastination, optimism, self-esteem, core self-evaluations, and self-regulation) with ambiguous factor structures, using data from representative general population samples. In testing and comparing three alternative factor models (one-factor model, two-factor model, and one-factor model with a random intercept) and analyzing differential correlational patterns with an external criterion, we empirically demonstrate the random intercept model’s merit, and clarify the factor structure for the above-mentioned questionnaires. In sum, we recommend the random intercept model for cases in which acquiescence is suspected to affect response behavior.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document