From Donders’ Dilemma to Objective Internal Assessment: How Experimental Developmental Psychology Can Contribute to Moral Education

Georg  Lind

Tytuły

Abstrakt

For a century, developmental psychology, and psychology as a whole, has been caught in an objectivity-validity dilemma which divides the scientific community: when measuring psychological traits, researchers either strive for objectivity at the expense of validity in regard to the object of the measurement, or they strive for validity by using subjective information from participants and subjective methods of rating this information, thus lacking objectivity.

While the main problem of physical measurement is precision, the main problem of psychology is validity: does an instrument really measure what it should? On the one hand, psychologists like Sigmund Freud, Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg believed that valid inferences on psychological functioning can only be made through subjective methods like clinical interviews – at the expense of objectivity. On the other hand, scientists working in the tradition of Louis Leon Thurston and Karl Pearson wanted to turn psychology into an objective science by assessing psychological traits through behavioral data even if that meant deleting important psychological traits like moral orientations and moral competence from the scientific research agenda.

In this article I will show that this methodological dilemma can be (and has been) resolved on the basis of the ideas of Franciscus Cornelis Donders (1868), who, a long time ago, showed how we can study internal mental processes in an objective way, that is, without relying on the subjective experience of the participant and without subjective scoring. Interestingly, Donders used behavioral dilemmas in order to measure thinking.

It took us a long time to understand the significance of Donders’ invention and to apply it to psychological measurement. Our Moral Competence Test (MCT) is probably the first method of psychological measurement based on it. The MCT has helped us to test many hypotheses on moral orientations and moral competence objectively, which hitherto could be studied only with subjective methods. It has also made possible to design and evaluate new, effective methods of moral education.

For a century, developmental psychology, and psychology as a whole, has been caught in an objectivity-validity dilemma which divides the scientific community: when measuring psychological traits, researchers either strive for objectivity at the expense of validity in regard to the object of the measurement, or they strive for validity by using subjective information from participants and subjective methods of rating this information, thus lacking objectivity.

While the main problem of physical measurement is precision, the main problem of psychology is validity: does an instrument really measure what it should? On the one hand, psychologists like Sigmund Freud, Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg believed that valid inferences on psychological functioning can only be made through subjective methods like clinical interviews – at the expense of objectivity. On the other hand, scientists working in the tradition of Louis Leon Thurston and Karl Pearson wanted to turn psychology into an objective science by assessing psychological traits through behavioral data even if that meant deleting important psychological traits like moral orientations and moral competence from the scientific research agenda.

In this article I will show that this methodological dilemma can be (and has been) resolved on the basis of the ideas of Franciscus Cornelis Donders (1868), who, a long time ago, showed how we can study internal mental processes in an objective way, that is, without relying on the subjective experience of the participant and without subjective scoring. Interestingly, Donders used behavioral dilemmas in order to measure thinking.

It took us a long time to understand the significance of Donders’ invention and to apply it to psychological measurement. Our Moral Competence Test (MCT) is probably the first method of psychological measurement based on it. The MCT has helped us to test many hypotheses on moral orientations and moral competence objectively, which hitherto could be studied only with subjective methods. It has also made possible to design and evaluate new, effective methods of moral education.

Słowa kluczowe

moral-democratic competence, moral development, moral psychology, education, democracy

moral psychology, education, democracy, moral-democratic competence, moral development

Bibliografia

Anderson, N.H. (1991), Moral-Social Development. In: N. H. Anderson (ed.), Information Integration Theory. (Vol. III: Developmental, pp. 137–187). Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

Arbuthnot, J. (1979), Error in Self-Assessment of Moral Judgment Stages. The Journal of Social Psychology, 107, 289–290.

Beck, K., Dransfeld, A., Minnameier, G., Wuttke, E. (2002), Autonomy in Heterogeneity? Development of Moral Judgment Behavior During Business Education. In: K. Beck (ed.), Teaching-learning processes in vocational education, pp. 87–119. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Blasi, A. (1980), Bridging Moral Cognition and Moral Action: A Critical Review of the Literature. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 1–45.

Brunswik, E. (1955), Representative Design and Probabilistic Theory in a Functional Psychology. Psychological Review, 62, 193–217.

Broughton, J. M. (1978), The Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Morality: A Reply to Kurtines and Greif. Journal of Moral Education, 7, 81–86.

Colby, A., Kohlberg, L., Abrahami, A., Gibbs, J., Higgins, A., Kauffman, K., Lieberman, M., Nisan, M., Reimer, J., Schrader, D., Snarey, J., Tappan, M. (1987). The Measurement of Moral Judgment. (Vol. I). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Comunian, A. L., Gielen, U. P. (2006), Promotion of Moral Judgment Maturity Through Stimulation of Social Role-Taking and Social Reflection: An Italian Intervention Study. Journal of Moral Education, 35(1), 51–69.

Cortese, A. J. (1984), Standard Issue Scoring of Moral Reasoning: A Critique. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 30, 227–246.

Donders, F. C. (1986), On the Speed of Mental Processes. Acta Psychologica, 30, Attention and Performance II, 412–431. (Original work published 1868). Retrieved from http://www2.psychology.uiowa.edu/faculty/mordkoff/InfoProc/pdfs/Donders%201868.pdf

Emler, N., Renwick, S., Malone, B. (1983), The Relationship between Moral Reasoning and Political Orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1073–1080.

Emler, N. (1996), How can we Decide whether Moral Education Works? Journal of Moral Education, 25, 117–126.

Feitosa, H., Rego, S., Bataglia, P.U., Sancho, K.F.C., Regor, G., Nunes, R. (2013). Moral Judgment Competence of Medical Students: A Transcultural Study. Advances in Health Science Education, 18(5), 1067–1085. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-013-9449-5

Flanagan, O. F. (1991), Varieties of Moral Personality. Ethics and Psychological Realism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gulliksen, H. (1950), Theory of Mental Tests. New York: Wiley.

Habermas, J. (1990), Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Haidt, J. (2001), The Emotional Dog and its Rational Tail: A Social Intuitionist Approach to Moral Judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.

Hartshorne, H., May, M. A. (1928), Studies in the Nature of Character. (Vol. I: Studies in deceit, Book one and two). New York: Macmillan.

Hemmerling, K. (2014), Morality behind Bars – An Intervention Study on Fostering Moral Competence of Prisoners as a new Approach to Social Rehabilitation. Frankfurt/New York: Peter Lang.

Keller, M. (1992), Soziales Verstehen und moralisches Urteilen im Kindesalter. In: F. Oser & W. Althof (hrsg.), Moralische Selbstbestimmung: Modelle der Entwicklung und Erziehung im Wertebereich. Ein Lehrbuch, pp. 196–198, Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.

Kelly, G. A. (1955), The Psychology of Personal Constructs. New York: Norton.

Kohlberg, L. (1958), The Development of Modes of Moral Thinking and Choice in the Years 10 to 16 (Doctoral dissertation). University of Chicago. (Published with Garland Press)

Kohlberg, L. (1964), Development of Moral Character and Moral Ideology. In: M.L. Hoffman, L.W. Hoffman (eds.), Review of Child Development Research. (Vol. I, pp. 381–431). New York: Russel Sage Foundation.

Kohlberg, L. (1984), Essays on Moral Development. (Vol. II: The Psychology of Moral Development). San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.

Kohlberg, L. (2010), Foreword. In: G. Lind et al. (eds.), Moral Judgment and Social Education, pp. xv–xvii. New Brunswik, NJ: Transaction Publ. Inc. (Original work published 1985).

Kohlberg, L., Candee, D. (1984), The Relationship of Moral Judgment to Moral Action. In: L. Kohlberg (ed.), Essays on moral development. (Vol. II: The Psychology of Moral Development, pp. 498–582). San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row.

Kurtines, W.M., Gewirtz, J.L. (1995), An Introduction and Overview. In: W.L. Kurtines, J.L. Gewirtz (eds.), Moral development: An introduction, pp. 1–16. Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Kurtines, W.M., Greif (1978), The Development of Moral Thought: Review and Evaluation of Kohlberg’s Approach. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 453–470.

Lerkiatbundit, S., Utaipan, P., Laohawiriyanon, C., Teo, A. (2006), Randomized Controlled Study of the Impact of the Konstanz Method of Dilemma Discussion on Moral Judgment. Journal of Allied Health, 35(2), 101–108.

Lind, G. (1978), Wie misst man moralisches Urteil? Probleme und alternative Möglichkeiten der Messung eines komplexen Konstrukts [How can we measure moral judgment? Problems and possibilities of measuring a complex construct]. In: G. Portele (hrsg.), Sozialisation und Moral, pp. 171–201. Weinheim: Beltz.

Lind, G. (1982), Experimental Questionnaires: A New approach to Personality Research. In: A. Kossakowski, K. Obuchowski (eds.), Progress in Psychology of Personality, pp. 132–144. Amsterdam, NL: North-Holland.

Lind, G. (1989), Measuring Moral Judgment: A Rewiev of the Measurement of Moral Judgment by Anne Colby and Lawrence Kohlberg. Human Development, 32, 388–397.

Lind, G. (2008), The Meaning and Measurement of Moral Judgment Competence Revisited: A Dual-Aspect Model. In: D. Fasko, W. Willis (eds.), Contemporary philosophical and psychological perspectives on moral development and education, pp. 185–220. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Lind, G. (2010), Attitude Change or Cognitive-Moral Development? How to Conceive of Socialization at the University. In: G. Lind, H.A. Hartmann, R. Wakenhut (eds.), Moral judgment and social education, pp. 173–220. Rutgers, NJ: Transaction Books.

Lind, G. (2013), Thirty Years of the Moral Judgment Test* – Support for the Dual-Aspect Theory of Moral Development. In: C.S. Hutz, L.K. de Souza (eds.), Estudos e pesquisas em psicologia do desenvolvimento e da personalidade: Uma homenagem a Angela Biaggio, pp. 143–170. Sao Paulo, Brazil: Casa do Psicólogo. [* now renamed into Moral Competence Test]

Lind, G. (2016), How to Teach Morality. Promoting Deliberation and Discussion. Reducing Violence and Deceit. Berlin: Logos.

Lind, G., Nowak, E. (2015), Kohlberg’s Unnoticed Dilemma: The External Assessment of Internal Moral Competence? In: B. Zizek, D. Garz, E. Nowak (eds.), Kohlberg Revisited, pp. 139–154. Rotterdam.

Loevinger, J. (1957), Objective Tests as Instruments of Psychological Theory. Psychological Reports, 3, 635–694.

Lohmann, D.F. & Ippel, M.J. (1993), Cognitive Diagnosis: From Statistically Based Assessment Toward Theory-Based Assessment. In: N. Frederiksen, R. J. Mislevy, I. I. Bejar (eds.), Test Theory for a New Generation of Tests, pp. 41–71. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass., Publ.

Lupu, I. (2013), Moral Competence and Dogmatic Religiosity. In: E. Nowak, D. Schrader, B. Zizek (eds.), Educating Competencies for Democracy, pp. 379–390. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.

Meehl, P. E. (1958), When to Use your Head Instead of the Formula? In: H. Feigl, M. Scriven, G. Maxwell (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, pp. 498–506. Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press.

Messick, S. (1995), Validity of Psychological Assessment. Validation of Inferences from Persons’ Responses and Performances as scientific Inquiry into Score Meaning. American Psychologist, 50, 741–749.

Mischel, W. (1973), Toward a Cognitive Social Learning Reconceptualization of personality. Psychological Review, 80, 252–283.

Mischel, W., Shoda, Y. (1995), A Cognitive-Affective System Theory of Personality: Reconceptualizing Situations, Dispositions, Dynamics, and Invariance in Personality Structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–268.

Mouratidou, K., Chatzopoulos, D., Karamavrou, S. (2007), Moral Development in Sport Context: Utopia or Reality? Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 4, 163–184.

Nicolayev, J., Philips, D.C. (1979), On Assessing Kohlberg’s Stage Theory of Moral Development. In: D.B., Cochrane; C.M., Hann, A. Kazepides (eds.). The Domain of Moral Education, pp. 231–250. New York.

Nowak, E., Schrader, D., Zizek, B. (eds.) (2013), Educating Competencies for Democracy. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.

Pearson, K. (1913), On the Correlation of Fertility with Social Value: A Cooperative Study. London: Dulau & Co.

Piaget, J. (1965), The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: The Free Press. (Original work published 1932)

Pittel, S. M., Mendelsohn, G. A. (1966), Measurement of Moral Values: A Review and Critique. Psychological Bulletin, 66, 22–35.

Rest, J. R. (1979), Development in Judging Moral Issues. Minneapolis, MI: University of Minnesota Press.

Schillinger, M. (2006), Learning Environments and Moral Development: How University Education Fosters Moral Judgment Competence in Brazil and Two German-Speaking Countries. Aachen: Shaker-Verlag.

Scott, W. A. (1968), Attitude Measurement. In: G. Lindzey , E. Aronson (eds.), Handbook of Social Psychology, pp. 205–270. Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.

Slovácková, B., Slovacek, L. (2007), Moral Judgment Competence and Moral Attitudes of Medical Students. Nursing Ethics, 14(3), 320–328.

Sprinthall, R. C., Sprinthall, N. A., Oja, S. N. (1997), Educational Psychology: A Developmental Approach (7th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Thurstone, L. L. (1928), Attitudes can be Measured. Journal of Sociology, 33, 529–554.

Torgerson, W. S. (1958), Theory and Methods of Scaling. New York: Wiley.

Wark, G. R., Krebs, D. L. (1996), Gender and Dilemma Differences in Real-Life Moral Judgments. Developmental Psychology, 32(2), 220–230.

Wiggins, J. S. (1973), Personality and Prediction. Principles of Personality Assessment. Reading MA:
Addison-Wesley.

Yang, S., Wu, H. (2008), The Features of Moral Judgment Competence Among Chinese Adolescents. Asia Pacific Review, 9(3), 296–307.

Informacje

Informacje: Psychologia Rozwojowa, 2017, Tom 22, Numer 3, s. 15 - 24

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4467/20843879PR.17.013.7573

Typ artykułu: Oryginalny artykuł naukowy

Tytuły:

Polski:

From Donders’ Dilemma to Objective Internal Assessment: How Experimental Developmental Psychology Can Contribute to Moral Education

Angielski:

From Donders’ Dilemma to Objective Internal Assessment: How Experimental Developmental Psychology Can Contribute to Moral Education

Autorzy

Georg Lind

University of Konstanz, Department of Psychology 78457 Konstanz, Germany

Publikacja: 13.12.2017

Status artykułu: Otwarte

Licencja: CC BY-NC-ND

Udział procentowy autorów:

Georg Lind (Autor) - 100%

Korekty artykułu:

-

Języki publikacji:

Angielski

Liczba wyświetleń: 1634

Liczba pobrań: 1084

<p> From Donders’ Dilemma to Objective Internal Assessment: How Experimental Developmental Psychology Can Contribute to Moral Education</p>

Pobierz pełny tekst

Tytuły

Abstrakt

Słowa kluczowe

Bibliografia

Informacje

Autorzy