University of Hertfordshire

By the same authors

Standard

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{029f4be0550e4a3b85a08ed8eb31f77a,
title = "Moral judgments and ethical constructs in clinical psychology doctoral students",
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.",
keywords = "acculturation, clinical psychology students, defining issues test, moral judgment, personal constructs",
author = "Jenkin, {Angie C.} and Helen Ellis-Caird and Winter, {David A.}",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC",
year = "2019",
month = nov,
day = "3",
doi = "10.1080/10508422.2019.1684294",
language = "English",
journal = "Ethics and Behavior",
issn = "1050-8422",
publisher = "Routledge",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Moral judgments and ethical constructs in clinical psychology doctoral students

AU - Jenkin, Angie C.

AU - Ellis-Caird, Helen

AU - Winter, David A.

N1 - © 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

PY - 2019/11/3

Y1 - 2019/11/3

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - acculturation

KW - clinical psychology students

KW - defining issues test

KW - moral judgment

KW - personal constructs

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074780451&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10508422.2019.1684294

DO - 10.1080/10508422.2019.1684294

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85074780451

JO - Ethics and Behavior

JF - Ethics and Behavior

SN - 1050-8422

ER -