Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:25:49.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Welcoming Another CMD Instrument — The MES: But Don't Throw out the MJI or DIT Just Yet!

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2015

James Weber
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This review offers a cautious acceptance of the Multidimensional Ethics Scale (MES) developed by Robin, Gordon, Jordan and Reidenbach. While the contribution of the MES to future empirical research of individuals’ moral reasoning is welcomed, a number of reservations or criticisms are raised regarding theory confusion, instrument confusion, and fears arising when using the MES. I conclude that the MES is a valuable compliment to existing moral reasoning instruments — the Moral Judgment Interview and the Defining Issues Test — but not a replacement of these instruments.

Type
Response Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , October 1996 , pp. 517 - 522
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Elm, D. R., Weber, J. 1994. “Measuring Moral Judgment: The Moral Judgment Interview or the Defining Issues Test?” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 13, pp. 341–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R. E., Gilbert, D. R. Jr., 1988. Corporate Strategy and the Search for Ethics (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall).Google Scholar
Weber, J. 1991. “Adapting Kohlberg to Enhance the Assessment of Managers’ Moral Reasoning.” Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 1 (3), pp. 293–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weber, J., Gillespie, J. 1995. “Should I? Would I? Did I? Differences Between Ethical Beliefs, Intentions and Actions.” International Association for Business and Society 1995 Proceedings, Nigh, D. and Collins, D. (eds.), pp. 173–78.Google Scholar