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.

Stages of moral judgment development: Applying item response theory to Defining Issues Test data

Validity study using factor analyses on the Defining Issues Test-2 in undergraduate populations

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

Measuring moral reasoning using moral dilemmas: evaluating reliability, validity, and differential item functioning of the behavioural defining issues test (bDIT)

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

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

Alchemy and beyond: Indexing the Defining Issues Test.

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

Challenges in Process Dissociation Measures for Moral Cognition

Insights From the Defining Issues Test on Moral Reasoning Competencies Development in Community Pharmacists

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

Probing the Moral Development of Large Language Models through Defining Issues Test

Development and Standardization of the Diagnostic Adaptive Behavior Scale: Application of Item Response Theory to the Assessment of Adaptive Behavior

Comparing Attitudes Across Groups: An IRT-Based Item-Fit Statistic for the Analysis of Measurement Invariance

Item analysis and differential item functioning of a brief conduct problem screen.

Item response theory in high-stakes pharmacy assessments

Moral Development in Adolescence: A Test of Change and Influences in Context of Sat with German Panel Data

Temporal Stability of Moral Dilemma Judgments: A Longitudinal Analysis Using the CNI Model

Detecting DIF in Multidimensional Forced Choice Measures Using the Thurstonian Item Response Theory Model

On the Validity of Forced Choice Scores Derived From the Thurstonian Item Response Theory Model

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