Abstract: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.

“Intermediate” Concepts and the Connection to Moral Education

The Defining Issues Test and the Four Component Model: Contributions to professional education

Why Be Moral? A Conceptual Model from Developmental Psychology

Does Moral Education Improve Moral Judgment? A Meta-Analysis of Intervention Studies Using the Defining Issues Test

Moral rationality and intuition: An exploration of relationships between the Defining Issues Test and the Moral Foundations Questionnaire

A Cognitive–Intuitionist Model of Moral Judgment

Designing a Method of Moral Education Based on an Integrated Approach to Moral Judgment

Evaluating moral reasoning in nursing education

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

The development and validation of a measure of moral intuition salience for children and adolescents: The Moral Intuitions and Development Scale

The notion of moral competence in the scientific literature: a critical review of a thin concept

A Person-Centered Approach to Moral Judgment

Disagreement, justification, and equitable moral judgments: A brief training study

Moral Schemas and Tacit Judgement or How the Defining Issues Test is Supported by Cognitive Science

Moral Behaviour in Organizations: The Contribution of Management Education and Development

Conceptual Development in the Moral and Conventional Domains: Implications for Values Education

Moral Judgement Development in Higher Education: Insights from the Defining Issues Test

Development and preliminary validation of the moral authorship questionnaire

How not to evaluate a psychological measure: Rebuttal to criticism of the Defining Issues Test of moral judgment development by Curzer and colleagues

Moral Education: An Evaluation of the Effect of Moral Dilemma Discussions for Sixth Graders

Moral Learning and Decision-Making Across the Lifespan