[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jbuset/v67y2006i1p63-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How do Scores of DIT and MJT Differ? A Critical Assessment of the Use of Alternative Moral Development Scales in Studies of Business Ethics

Author

Listed:
  • Chiharu Ishida
Abstract
The construct of Cognitive Moral Development (CMD) has drawn much attention in the study of business ethics for over two decades. The Defining Issues Test (DIT) has made a significant contribution to the literature as an easy-to-administer CMD instrument, and the Moral Judgment Test (MJT), an alternative scale, has also been used widely especially in Europe. The two scales differ in their approaches to measuring CMD, focusing on stage preference (DIT) and stage consistency (MJT), yet empirical comparisons have been scarce. The present research empirically compares the two scales in terms of their correspondence with ethical ideology as a reference scale, and it demonstrates a clear distinction between the DIT and the MJT. Although they both aim to measure CMD, their dissimilar approaches lead to distinctly different implications. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Suggested Citation

  • Chiharu Ishida, 2006. "How do Scores of DIT and MJT Differ? A Critical Assessment of the Use of Alternative Moral Development Scales in Studies of Business Ethics," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 63-74, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:67:y:2006:i:1:p:63-74
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-006-9005-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10551-006-9005-9
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-006-9005-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chlaß, Nadine & Riener, Gerhard, 2015. "Lying, Spying, Sabotaging -- Balancing Means and Aims --," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 113222, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Chlaß, Nadine & Riener, Gerhard, 2015. "Lying, spying, sabotaging : procedures and consequences," Working Papers 15-17, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    3. Nadine Chlaß & Peter G. Moffatt, 2017. "Giving in Dictator Games - Experimenter Demand Effect or Preference over the Rules of the Game?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-044, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    4. Nadine Chlaß & Lata Gangadharan & Kristy Jones, 2015. "Charitable Giving and Intermediation," Monash Economics Working Papers 18-15, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    5. Connie Bateman & Sean Valentine, 2010. "Investigating the Effects of Gender on Consumers’ Moral Philosophies and Ethical Intentions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 95(3), pages 393-414, September.
    6. André, Kévin, 2013. "Why Should Business Education Care About Care? Toward an Educare Perspective," ESSEC Working Papers WP1315, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    7. Bahtışen Kavak & Eda Gürel & Canan Eryiğit & Öznur Tektaş, 2009. "Examining the Effects of Moral Development Level, Self-Concept, and Self-Monitoring on Consumers’ Ethical Attitudes," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 88(1), pages 115-135, August.
    8. Ribhan & Albet Maydiantoro, 2021. "The Analysis of Cognitive Moral in Bridging the Gap Between Internal Marketing and B2B Salespeople Performance," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 10, September.
    9. Kévin André, 2013. "Why Should Business Education Care About Care? Toward an Educare Perspective," Working Papers hal-00880241, HAL.
    10. Nadine Chlaß & Lata Gangadharan & Kristy Jones, 2023. "Charitable giving and intermediation: a principal agent problem with hidden prices," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(4), pages 941-961.
    11. repec:hal:journl:hal-00880241 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Vassiliki Grougiou & George Balabanis & Danae Manika, 2020. "Does Humour Influence Perceptions of the Ethicality of Female-Disparaging Advertising?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-16, June.
    13. Gian Casali, 2011. "Developing a Multidimensional Scale for Ethical Decision Making," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(4), pages 485-497, December.
    14. Katrin Hummel & Dieter Pfaff & Katja Rost, 2018. "Does Economics and Business Education Wash Away Moral Judgment Competence?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 150(2), pages 559-577, June.
    15. James Weber & Elaine McGivern, 2010. "A New Methodological Approach for Studying Moral Reasoning Among Managers in Business Settings," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 149-166, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jbuset:v:67:y:2006:i:1:p:63-74. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.