用于评价道德判断的道德困境工具:系统综述

Aline Ponzoni, G. G. Souza, L. R. Sampaio, I. Argimon
{"title":"用于评价道德判断的道德困境工具:系统综述","authors":"Aline Ponzoni, G. G. Souza, L. R. Sampaio, I. Argimon","doi":"10.9788/cp2022.1-01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"orality is an essential element of the human being, who, on many occasions, needs to face complex and stressful decisions. Techniques with moral dilemmas are considered a standard methodology in moral judgment studies. One of the traditional dilemmas is the “Trolley Problem”; using it as a model, sets of moral dilemmas were developed and adapted to diff erent research objectives, but there is no consensus regarding its psychometric properties. Similarly, assessment instruments with moral dilemmas have been developed: the Moral Judgment Interview and the Moral Competence Test are some of the best known. The aim of this study was to investigate the assessment instruments with moral dilemmas, used to assess moral judgment, in surveys conducted between 2010 and 2020, period with a signifi cant increase in publications on this topic. For this, a systematic review of literature was carried out using the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and PsycInfo databases, following the PRISMA protocol. 354 studies were found, of which 8 were selected, containing the following instruments: Moral Competence Test (MCT), Moral Judgment Test (MJT), Moral Sense Test (MST), Moral Thinking and Communication (MTC) and Moral Judgments of Sport Managers Instrument (MJSMI). It is also important to consider that 90 of the excluded studies contained varied sets of dilemmas. In conclusion, in this analysis, few studies using assessment instruments were found and the predominant use was of sets adapted to the objectives of each research.","PeriodicalId":33882,"journal":{"name":"Cadernos de Psicologia Social do Trabalho","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Instrumentos de Dilemas Morais Utilizados para Avaliar Julgamento Moral: Revisão Sistemática\",\"authors\":\"Aline Ponzoni, G. G. Souza, L. R. Sampaio, I. Argimon\",\"doi\":\"10.9788/cp2022.1-01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"orality is an essential element of the human being, who, on many occasions, needs to face complex and stressful decisions. Techniques with moral dilemmas are considered a standard methodology in moral judgment studies. One of the traditional dilemmas is the “Trolley Problem”; using it as a model, sets of moral dilemmas were developed and adapted to diff erent research objectives, but there is no consensus regarding its psychometric properties. Similarly, assessment instruments with moral dilemmas have been developed: the Moral Judgment Interview and the Moral Competence Test are some of the best known. The aim of this study was to investigate the assessment instruments with moral dilemmas, used to assess moral judgment, in surveys conducted between 2010 and 2020, period with a signifi cant increase in publications on this topic. For this, a systematic review of literature was carried out using the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and PsycInfo databases, following the PRISMA protocol. 354 studies were found, of which 8 were selected, containing the following instruments: Moral Competence Test (MCT), Moral Judgment Test (MJT), Moral Sense Test (MST), Moral Thinking and Communication (MTC) and Moral Judgments of Sport Managers Instrument (MJSMI). It is also important to consider that 90 of the excluded studies contained varied sets of dilemmas. In conclusion, in this analysis, few studies using assessment instruments were found and the predominant use was of sets adapted to the objectives of each research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33882,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cadernos de Psicologia Social do Trabalho\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cadernos de Psicologia Social do Trabalho\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.9788/cp2022.1-01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cadernos de Psicologia Social do Trabalho","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9788/cp2022.1-01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

口才是人类的基本要素,在很多情况下,我们需要面对复杂而有压力的决定。道德困境技术被认为是道德判断研究中的一种标准方法。传统困境之一是“电车问题”;以其为模型,开发了一系列道德困境,并根据不同的研究目标进行了调整,但对其心理测量特性尚无共识。同样,道德困境的评估工具也被开发出来:道德判断面试和道德能力测试是其中最著名的。本研究的目的是调查2010年至2020年期间进行的调查中用于评估道德判断的带有道德困境的评估工具,这一时期有关该主题的出版物显著增加。为此,根据PRISMA协议,使用PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus和PsycInfo数据库对文献进行了系统综述。共发现354项研究,其中选择8项,包含以下工具:道德能力测试(MCT)、道德判断测试(MJT)、道德感测试(MST)、道德思维与沟通(MTC)和体育管理者道德判断测试(MJSMI)。同样重要的是要考虑到,被排除的研究中有90项包含各种各样的困境。总之,在这一分析中,很少发现使用评估工具的研究,主要使用的是适应每项研究目标的集合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Instrumentos de Dilemas Morais Utilizados para Avaliar Julgamento Moral: Revisão Sistemática
orality is an essential element of the human being, who, on many occasions, needs to face complex and stressful decisions. Techniques with moral dilemmas are considered a standard methodology in moral judgment studies. One of the traditional dilemmas is the “Trolley Problem”; using it as a model, sets of moral dilemmas were developed and adapted to diff erent research objectives, but there is no consensus regarding its psychometric properties. Similarly, assessment instruments with moral dilemmas have been developed: the Moral Judgment Interview and the Moral Competence Test are some of the best known. The aim of this study was to investigate the assessment instruments with moral dilemmas, used to assess moral judgment, in surveys conducted between 2010 and 2020, period with a signifi cant increase in publications on this topic. For this, a systematic review of literature was carried out using the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and PsycInfo databases, following the PRISMA protocol. 354 studies were found, of which 8 were selected, containing the following instruments: Moral Competence Test (MCT), Moral Judgment Test (MJT), Moral Sense Test (MST), Moral Thinking and Communication (MTC) and Moral Judgments of Sport Managers Instrument (MJSMI). It is also important to consider that 90 of the excluded studies contained varied sets of dilemmas. In conclusion, in this analysis, few studies using assessment instruments were found and the predominant use was of sets adapted to the objectives of each research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
78 weeks
期刊最新文献
Intensificação laboral e gênero profissional de professoras da educação infantil Relações de gênero e trabalho das mulheres na Cadernos de Psicologia Social e do Trabalho: uma revisão bibliográfica (1998-2018) Percepções de mulheres sobre gestação e os sentidos do trabalho Impactos Psicológicos da Pandemia de Coronavírus (COVID-19) em Profi ssionais de Saúde: Overview Percepção de Estresse em Tempos de Pandemia COVID-19
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1