A new test, the Moral Judgment Test–PE (MJT–PE), has good validity but scores on Competence should be used with great care. These scores will differ from those of the original Moral Judgment Test (MJT) because the single dilemma is targeted to the specific population of interest, physical educators. This reduces the variance in such a way that scores on the new test cannot be compared with or interpreted in the same way as scores on the original MJT. Careful research would be needed to develop norms for the MJT–PE; in the meantime, the two tests should be used together so that the C-scores can be interpreted with confidence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BatagliaP.Schillinger-AgatiM.LindG., & QuevedoT. L. (2003) Testing the segmentation hypothesis with an extended version of the MJT. Poster presented at the meeting of the Association for Moral Education, Krakow, Poland, July 19.
2.
LindG. (1978) Wie misst man moralisches Urteil? Probleme und alternative möglichkeiten der messung eines komplexen konstrukts [How does one measure moral judgment? Problems and alternative possibilities of measuring a complex construct]. In PorteleG. (Ed.), Sozialisation und moral [Socialization and morality]. Weinheim, Germany: Beltz. Pp. 171–201.
3.
LindG. (2008) The meaning and measurement of moral judgment competence revisited: a dual-aspect model. In FaskoD. & WillisW. (Eds.), Contemporary philosophical and psychological perspectives on moral development and education. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton. Pp. 185–220.
4.
MouratidouK.ChatzopoulosD., & KaramavrouS. (2008) Validity study of the Moral Judgment Test in Physical Education: development and preliminary validation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 106, 51–62.
