Defining Issues Test Scores Research Articles

Verbal Processing of the Defining Issues Test by Principled and Non-Principled Moral Reasoners

AbstractVerbal processing of Defining Issues Test (DIT) ratings were obtained from three groups chosen on age and education and criterial DIT scores. Principled and non-principled items were rated while thinking aloud, and sorted for their understand-ability and endorsement for decision-making. Verbal processing and objective sorting data together showed differences in understanding and endorsement responses of high-scoring philosophy graduate students and low-scoring conservative seminarians and ninth graders. Philosophers used more principled prescriptives overall, understood and endorsed principled items and understood and rejected non-principled items. Seminarians rejected principled and non-principled items, and used religious criteria in their processing. Ninth graders preferred principled items they could not fully understand. A case is made for online processing information of objective moral reasoning.

Verbal Processing of the Defining Issues Test by Principled and Non-Principled Moral Reasoners

Verbal processing of Defining Issues Test (DIT) ratings were obtained from three groups chosen on age and education and criterial DIT scores. Principled and non-principled items were rated while thinking aloud, and sorted for their understand-ability and endorsement for decision-making. Verbal processing and objective sorting data together showed differences in understanding and endorsement responses of high-scoring philosophy graduate students and low-scoring conservative seminarians and ninth graders. Philosophers used more principled prescriptives overall, understood and endorsed principled items and understood and rejected non-principled items. Seminarians rejected principled and non-principled items, and used religious criteria in their processing. Ninth graders preferred principled items they could not fully understand. A case is made for online processing information of objective moral reasoning.

Moral reasoning as a criterion for admission to medical school.

To determine whether admission interviews could differentiate applicants on their personal qualities (such as integrity, empathy and commitment) 456 applicants from two medical schools were tested on the Defining Issues Test (DIT), which measures the amount of principled or post-conventional moral reasoning. No difference was found between the DIT scores of the accepted and the rejected applicants of the school in which the admission criteria are the traditional scholastic ones. On the other hand, a great difference was shown in the school which admits students for their personal characteristics as assessed by interviews. Yet only moderate correlation was shown between the DIT and the interview scores. Since moral reasoning is a key concept in medical professional behaviour and is correlated with clinical performance, the findings deserve special attention. A possible use of the DIT in the student selection process is discussed.