Ethical Reasoning in Action: Validity Evidence for the Ethical Reasoning Identification Test (ERIT)
Professionals in business and law, healthcare providers, educators, policymakers, consumers, and higher education practitioners value ethical reasoning (ER) skills. Because of this, we concentrated campus-wide reaccreditation efforts to help students actively engage in ER. In doing so, we re-concept...
| Autores principales: | ; ; |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Electrónico Artículo |
| Lenguaje: | Inglés |
| Verificar disponibilidad: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Publicado: |
2017
|
| En: |
Journal of business ethics
Año: 2017, Volumen: 144, Número: 2, Páginas: 417-436 |
| Otras palabras clave: | B
Known groups validity
B Ethical reasoning skills B Confirmatory Factor Analysis B Internal validity B The eight key questions |
| Acceso en línea: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Sumario: | Professionals in business and law, healthcare providers, educators, policymakers, consumers, and higher education practitioners value ethical reasoning (ER) skills. Because of this, we concentrated campus-wide reaccreditation efforts to help students actively engage in ER. In doing so, we re-conceptualized the ER process, implemented campus-wide ER interventions designed to be experienced by all undergraduate students, and created the ethical reasoning identification test (ERIT) to measure students’ ability to engage in a foundational step in the ER process. Using factor analysis, we demonstrated internal validity evidence for ERIT scores. More specifically, confirmatory factor analysis provided support for a unidimensional factor structure, meaning stakeholders can report and analyze ERIT total scores. The unidimensional factor structure was replicated using two independent samples. Across all samples, ERIT scores demonstrated reliability consistent with professional standards. In addition, we collected external validity evidence for ERIT scores. The ERIT was sensitive to slight differences in ER training. That is, students experiencing a 75-min intervention performed better on the test compared to students without this experience. Overall, results suggested that our ER intervention may effectively increase students ER abilities and the ERIT demonstrated great potential for assessing foundational ethical reasoning skills. To further examine validity, researchers should consider known groups analyses with varying “doses” of the ER intervention, as well as measurement invariance studies. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1573-0697 |
| Obras secundarias: | Enthalten in: Journal of business ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10551-015-2841-8 |
