University of Hertfordshire

By the same authors

View graph of relations
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages12
JournalEthics and Behavior
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 3 Nov 2019

Abstract

This cross-sectional study compared the moral reasoning of first-year and third-year doctoral students in clinical psychology. Nineteen first-year and 20 third-year students were recruited from 17 doctoral training programs in the UK. Most adopted a sophisticated approach to moral judgments, as assessed by the Defining Issues Test, although, surprisingly, more experienced students had significantly less sophisticated schemata. In their moral judgments, less experienced students relied more heavily on their personal, and more experienced students on their professional, constructs, as assessed by repertory grid technique. Integration between personal and professional constructs was higher in more experienced students.

Notes

© 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ID: 17729247