|
Instruments,
Services, and Materials
The DIT
A common assumption in the field of morality,
and one with which we disagree, is that reliable information
about the inner processes that underlie moral behavior is
obtained only by interviewing subjects. Contrary to assuming
that interviewing presents a clear window into the moral
mind, researchers in cognitive science and social cognition
contend that self-reported explanations of one's own cognitive
process have severe limitations. There is now a greater
appreciation for the importance of implicit processes and
tacit knowledge on human decision making, outside the awareness
of the cognizer and beyond the subject's ability to verbally
articulate them. The DIT takes a different approach to information
collection.
The DIT is a device for activating moral
schemas (to the extent that a person has developed them)
and for assessing them in terms of importance judgments.
The DIT has dilemmas and standard items; the subject's task
is to rate and rank the items in terms of their moral importance.
As the subject encounters an item that both makes sense
and also taps into the subject's preferred schema, that
item is rated and ranked as highly important. Alternatively,
when the subject encounters an item that either doesn't
make sense or seems simplistic and unconvincing, the item
receives a low rating and is passed over for the next item.
The items of the DIT balance "bottom up" processing (stating
just enough of a line of argument to activate a schema)
with "top down" processing (not a full line of argument
so that the subject has to "fill in" the meaning from schema
already in the subject's head). In the DIT we are interested
in knowing which schemas the subject brings to the task
(are already in the subject's head). Presumably those are
the schemas that structure and guide the subject's thinking
in decision-making beyond the test situation.
Validity for the DIT has been assessed
in terms of seven criteria (Rest, et al. [1998] cite over
400 published articles): (1) Differentiation of various
age/education groups --studies of large composite samples
(thousands of subjects) show that 30% to 50% of the variance
of DIT scores is attributable to level of education in samples
ranging from junior-high education to Ph.D.s. (2) Longitudinal
gains--a 10-year longitudinal study show significant
gains of men and women, of college-attenders and non-college
subjects, from diverse walks of life. A review of a dozen
studies of Freshman to Senior college students (n=755)
shows Effect Sizes of .80 ("large" gains). DIT gains are
one of the most dramatic longitudinal gains in college of
any variable. (3) DIT scores are significantly related
to cognitive capacity measures of Moral Comprehension
(r = .60s), to recall and reconstruction of Postconventional
moral arguments, to Kohlberg's measure, and (to a lesser
degree) to other cognitive developmental measures. (4) DIT
scores are sensitive to moral education interventions--one
review of over 50 intervention studies reports an Effect
Size for dilemma discussion interventions to be .40 ("moderate"
gains) while the Effect Size for comparison groups was only
.09 ("small" gains). (5) DIT scores are significantly linked
to many "prosocial" behaviors and to desired professional
decision making--one review reports that 37 out of 47
measures were statistically significant (see also Rest &
Narvaez, 1994, for recent discussions of professional decision-making).
(6) DIT scores are significantly linked to political
attitudes and political choices--in a review of several
dozen correlates with political attitude, DIT scores typically
correlate in the range, r = .40 to .65. When combined
in multiple regression with measures of cultural ideology,
the combination predicts up to 2/3s of the variance of controversial
public policy issues (such as abortion, religion in the
public school, women's roles, rights of the accused, rights
of homosexuals, free speech issues). Such issues are among
the most hotly debated issues of our time, and DIT scores
are a major predictor to views on these issues. (7) Reliability--Cronbach
alpha is in the upper .70s / low .80s. Test-retest is about
the same.
Further, DIT scores show discriminant validity
from verbal ability/general intelligence and from Conservative/Liberal
Political attitudes--that is, the information in a DIT score
predicts to the seven validity criteria above and beyond
that accounted for by verbal ability/general intelligence
or political attitude (Thoma, Narvaez, Rest & Derryberry,
this issue). Moreover, the DIT is equally valid for males
and females (Rest, et al., in press).
In 1998, we initiated preliminary testing of a new version of the DIT (Rest, Narvaez, Thoma & Bebeau, 1998) that is more updated, shorter, has clearer instructions, purges fewer subjects for bogus data, and is slightly more powerful on validity criteria. The new test (“DIT-2”) indicates that the old test (“DIT-l”) can be replicated. In sum, in terms of the construct validity of the DIT, there is no other construct that accounts as well for the combination of findings than the construct of moral judgment. The persuasiveness of the validity for the DIT comes from the combination of criteria for construct validity that many researchers have found, not just from one finding with one criterion.
Dilemmas. On the following pages (yellow
paper) are two dilemmas from DIT-2 and two dilemmas from
DIT-1. The complete DIT-2 consists of five dilemmas
(each followed by 12 issue-statements); the complete DIT-1
consists of six dilemmas. The five dilemmas of DIT-2
are: (a) a father contemplates stealing food for his starving
family from the warehouse of a rich man hoarding food; (b)
a newspaper reporter must decide whether to report a damaging
story about a political candidate; (c) a school board chair
must decide whether to hold a contentious and dangerous
open meeting; (d) a doctor must decide whether to give an
overdose of pain-killer to a suffering but frail patient;
(e) college students demonstrate against U.S. foreign policy.
The six dilemmas in DIT-1 are as follows:
(a) Should Heinz steal a drug from an inventor in town to
save his wife who is dying and needs the drug? (b) Should
a man who escaped from prison but has since been leading
an exemplary life be reported to authorities? (c) Should
a student newspaper be stopped by a Principal of a high
school when the newspaper stirs controversy in the community?
(d) Should a doctor give an overdose of pain-killer to a
suffering patient? (e) Should a minority member be hired
for a job when the community is biased? (f) Should students
take over an administration building in protest of the Vietnam
war?
The Center's Scoring Service supplies Instruction
Booklets, Answer Sheets, and Guides for DIT-2 or DIT-1.
(The short form of DIT-1 is simply the first three stories.)
Answer sheets are then sent back to us for scoring. In turn,
we supply a paper copy REPORT, and a floppy disk with subject
scores. DIT-2, DIT-1 Long Form, and DIT-1 Short Form are
all the same price.
Free Rescoring Old Data by the Center
If you wish to have N2 scores for "old" data
(i.e. data already scored by the Center analyzed with the
P score and the other usual scores), the Center will rescore
your data for N2 free of charge if you used the Scoring
Service previously.
Return the diskette(s) along with a self-addressed label or envelope (at least 9 by 12”), and we will re-run your previous data, providing a hard copy on paper and the new files on the diskette. Send in as many diskettes as you want analyzed and the new files will be put on each diskette.
We can provide this scoring service free only if raw data is provided in the format that our computers recognize. It would be helpful to us if you also describe the sample that the data is from (in terms of age/education, sex, region of country, and approximate date of data collection). We would be very interested in hearing about your experience with the new index: whether or not it produced better trends than the previous index.
Ideas for research with the DIT
Workbook for students and advisors developing
dissertation topics, researchers using the DIT, and instructors
teaching courses in research methods and morality. Contents:
• Discusses 20+ kinds of studies --
basic research strategies, illustrative references, problems,
remedies, and unanswered questions needing new research
• Illustrates the graphs and statistical
analysis possible with a statistical package like SPSS®
and the data diskette from the Scoring Service of Minnesota's
Center
• Describes the concrete steps for
imputing data from the Scoring Service files into a statistical
package, replacing subjects who were purged, adding variables,
handling missing data (includes sample files on a floppy
disk to illustrate procedures)
• Describes how to do an item analysis,
providing programs and syntax files for conversion of item
rates and ranks into SPSS files
• Illustrates how to use the U score
as a moderator variable; how to divide your sample into
Quartiles or Terciles; how to calculate internal reliability
for your sample, devise group stage-profiles and individual-subject
analysis-of-change
• Contains over 1,500 DIT references
on floppy disk enabling electronic searches by topic or
author
Cost for 60+ page booklet and 3 1/2" floppy
disk is $20.
Teaching and Assessment Materials for educational
programs in the sciences
The following materials can be ordered from
Dr. Muriel Bebeau, 15-136 Moos Tower / Preventive Sciences
/ University of Minnesota / Minneapolis, MN 55455 / or call
for further information (612) 625 4633.
• The DEST (Dental Ethical Sensivitity
Test), 1990 Edition. Materials include audiotapes, directions
for assessment and scoring manual.
The DEST assesses Component 1 of the
Four Component Model in the context of the profession of
dentistry. It is designed to evaluate students' ability
to recognize ethical issues in real-life situations of dentists.
The test consists of audio tapes, to which the student tape-records
an "on-the-spot" response. Criteria have been developed
to judge the student's sensitivity to special characteristics
of the patient and awareness of the needs and interests
of others. Other research ha modified the DEST to apply
to different professions. (See Bebeau, M.J. (1994). Influencing
the moral dimensions of dental practice. In J. Rest &
D. Narvaez (Eds.), Moral development in the professions
(pp. 121-146). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.) $75.00.
• Moral reasoning in Dentistry: Cases for
Teaching and Assessment, 1990 Edition.
These materials include a student handout
describing criteria for evaluation of moral arguments, seven
cases with facilitator notes for leading discussion, and
scoring guides for assessment of written arguments. Designed
to assess aspects of Component 2 of the Four Component
Model. For a discussion of criteria development and sample
cases, see Bebeau (ibid).
• Moral Reasoning in Scientific Research:
Cases for Teaching and Assessment, 1994.
Bebeau, M.J. with Pimple, K.D., Muskavitch,
K.M.T., Borden, S.L., Smith, D.H., and Agnew, E. Available
from the Poynter Center, 410 North Park Ave., Indiana University,
Bloomington, IN 47405 (812 855 0261).
Based on earlier work in dentistry, these
materials include a student handout describing criteria
for evaluating moral arguments, six cases with faciliator
notes for leading discussion, scoring guides for assessment
of moral reasoning (Component 2), and a manual that
provides guidelines for leading discussion.
• The Professional Role Orientation Inventory,
1991.
This 40-item questionnaire and scoring guide
enables dental professionals to conduct a self-assessment
of role concepts. Assessment of professional role concept
is aimed at understanding some dimensions of Component
3 of the Four Component Model. Work on the validation
of this measure is on-going. See Bebeau, M.J., Born, D.O.
and Ozar, D.T. (1993). The development of a Professional
Role Orientation Inventory. Journal of the American College
of Dentists, 60 (2), 27-33.
• The Dental Ethical Reasoning and Judgment Test (1997). Bebeau, M. J., and Thoma, S. J.
This is an example of a measure of “intermediate” concepts. This test is described by the authors in the following paper: Bebeau,M., & Thoma, S.J.(1999). “Intermediate” concepts and the connection to moral education. Educational Psychology Review, 11, 343-360. The DERJT consists of five dental dilemmas that assess profession-specific “intermediate concepts.” A respondent rates action choices and justifications and then selects the two best and two worst action choices and the three best and two worst justifications. Scores are determined by calculating the proportion of times that a respondent selects actions and justifications consistent with expert judgment.
• Ethics Education for the Practicing Dentist,
1992. Bebeau, M.J. and Ozar, D.T. Available on loan from
the American College of Dentists, 839 Quince Orchard Blvd.,
Suite J, Gaithersburg, MD 20878-1603.
Materials include instructor manual, ethics
cases, The Professional Role Orientation Inventory, and
videotapes 1) Can Ethics be Taught? 2) Enhancing Ethical
Sensitivity, 3) Framework for Discussing Ethics and Engaging
in Moral Reflection.
• Course Materials (Ethics in Dentistry),
Revised Edition, 1996. Bebeau, M.J.
Materials include lecture guide, slides to
introduce students to the characteristics that distinguish
among professions and the implications for professionalism
that follow. Included in this package are Case materials
for enhancing ethical sensitivity (Component 1) and
ethical implementation processes (Component 4). $80.00.
DIT DEFINING ISSUES TEST University
of Minnesota
Copyright, James Rest
All Rights Reserved, 1979
HEINZ AND THE DRUG
In Europe a woman was near death from a special
kind of cancer. There was one drug that doctors thought
might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist
in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive
to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the
drug cost to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged
$2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband,
Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but
he could only get together about $1,000, which is half of
what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying,
and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But
the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going
to make money on it." So Heinz got desperate and began to
think about breaking into the man's store to steal the drug
for his wife. Should Heinz steal the drug?
__Should Steal
__Can't Decide __Should not steal
Please rate the following statements in
terms of their importance.
(1=Great importance, 2=Much importance,
3=Some Importance, 4=Little importance, 5=No importance)
__1. Whether a community's laws are
going to be upheld.
__2. Isn't it only natural for a loving husband
to care so much for his wife that he'd steal?
__3. Is Heinz willing to risk getting shot
as a burglar or going to jail for the chance that stealing
the drug might help?
__4. Whether Heinz is a professional wrestler,
or had considerable influence with professional wrestlers.
__5. Whether Heinz is stealing for himself
or doing this solely to help someone else.
__6. Whether the druggist's rights to his
invention have to be respected.
__7. Whether the essence of living is more
encompassing than the termination of dying, socially and
individually.
__8. What values are going to be the basis
for governing how people act towards each other.
__9. Whether the druggist is going to be allowed
to hide behind a worthless law which only protects the rich
anyhow.
__10.Whether the law in the case is getting
in the way of the most basic claim of any member of society.
__11.Whether the druggist deserves to be robbed
for being so greedy and cruel.
__12.Would stealing in such a case bring about
more total good for the whole society or not.
Now please rank the top four most important
statements. Put the number of the statement in the blank:
__ Most important item
__ Second most important item
__ Third most important item
__ Fourth most important item |