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

被引:11
作者
Choi, Youn-Jeng [1 ]
Han, Hyemin [1 ]
Bankhead, Meghan [2 ]
Thoma, Stephen J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alabama, Dept Educ Studies Psychol Res Methodol & Counseli, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487 USA
[2] Kennesaw State Univ, Dept Psychol Sci, Kennesaw, GA 30144 USA
关键词
NEO-KOHLBERGIAN APPROACH; MINNESOTA APPROACH; JUDGMENT; MODEL; PSYCHOLOGY; EDUCATION;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0238110
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2015, LISREL 9.20 for Windows [Computer software]
[2]  
Bebeau M. J., 2003, GUIDE DIT 2 UNPUB
[3]  
Brown T. A., 2015, Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research, V2nd
[4]  
Byrne B.M., 1998, STRUCTURAL EQUATION
[5]   Measuring moral reasoning using moral dilemmas: evaluating reliability, validity, and differential item functioning of the behavioural defining issues test (bDIT) [J].
Choi, Youn-Jeng ;
Han, Hyemin ;
Dawson, Kelsie J. ;
Thoma, Stephen J. ;
Glenn, Andrea L. .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2019, 16 (05) :622-631
[6]  
Colby A., 1987, The measurement of moral judgment: Vol. 1, V1
[7]   Phronesis and the Knowledge-Action Gap in Moral Psychology and Moral Education: A New Synthesis? [J].
Darnell, Catherine ;
Gulliford, Liz ;
Kristjansson, Kristjan ;
Paris, Panos .
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, 2019, 62 (03) :101-129
[8]  
Davison M.L., 1979, DEV JUDGING MORAL IS, P223
[9]  
DAVISON ML, 1978, DEV PSYCHOL, V14, P137
[10]   On the meaning and use of kurtosis [J].
DeCarlo, LT .
PSYCHOLOGICAL METHODS, 1997, 2 (03) :292-307