IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/buetqu/v6y1996i04p493-515_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Empirical Performance of Cognitive Moral Development in Predicting Behavioral Intent

Author

Listed:
  • Robin, Donald P.
  • Gordon, Gus
  • Jordan, Charles
  • Reidenbach, R. Eric

Abstract

The substantial work on cognitive moral development (CMD) by Lawrence Kohlberg and James Rest popularized the use of this construct in the literature on business ethics. This construct has been prominently used in models attempting to explain ethical/unethical behavior in management, marketing, and accounting, even though Kohlberg did not intend for the construct to be used in that manner. As a predictor of behavior, CMD has been attacked on the theoretical level, and its empirical performance has been weak. This article uses another established construct, which seems to satisfy the central criticisms of CMD, as a means of testing those complaints. The comparative multidimensional ethics scale (MES) substantially outperforms CMD, operationalized using Rest's Defining Issues Test, in every test. These results seem to suggest that other options perform better than CMD when the purpose is to model ethical/unethical behavior or even ethical judgment.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin, Donald P. & Gordon, Gus & Jordan, Charles & Reidenbach, R. Eric, 1996. "The Empirical Performance of Cognitive Moral Development in Predicting Behavioral Intent," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(4), pages 493-515, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:6:y:1996:i:04:p:493-515_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1052150X00012689/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Mudrack & E. Mason, 2013. "Ethical Judgments: What Do We Know, Where Do We Go?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 115(3), pages 575-597, July.
    2. Nhung Nguyen & Michael Biderman, 2008. "Studying Ethical Judgments and Behavioral Intentions Using Structural Equations: Evidence from the Multidimensional Ethics Scale," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 83(4), pages 627-640, December.
    3. Beverly Kracher & Robert Marble, 2008. "The Significance of Gender in Predicting the Cognitive Moral Development of Business Practitioners Using the Sociomoral Reflection Objective Measure," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 78(4), pages 503-526, April.
    4. Watkins, Alison & Hill, Ronald Paul, 2011. "Morality in marketing: Oxymoron or good business practice?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(8), pages 922-927, August.
    5. James Weber & Elaine McGivern, 2010. "A New Methodological Approach for Studying Moral Reasoning Among Managers in Business Settings," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 149-166, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:buetqu:v:6:y:1996:i:04:p:493-515_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/beq .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.