KOPS - Das Institutionelle Repositorium der Universität Konstanz

Moral Judgment Competence and Attitude as Moderators of Decisions Concerning War through Preferences of Frames and Arguments on the Iraq War

Moral Judgment Competence and Attitude as Moderators of Decisions Concerning War through Preferences of Frames and Arguments on the Iraq War

Zitieren

Dateien zu dieser Ressource

Prüfsumme: MD5:556f5647c9503ba24c8c5cf1c8b9fb82

LALLAVE, Juan, 2006. Moral Judgment Competence and Attitude as Moderators of Decisions Concerning War through Preferences of Frames and Arguments on the Iraq War

@phdthesis{LaLlave2006Moral-10530, title={Moral Judgment Competence and Attitude as Moderators of Decisions Concerning War through Preferences of Frames and Arguments on the Iraq War}, year={2006}, author={LaLlave, Juan}, address={Konstanz}, school={Universität Konstanz} }

This dissertation reports on research based on an experimental questionnaire designed using the theoretical validity, logic and the basic structure of the moral judgment test (MJT) Lind (1985). The study aimed at understanding how respondents attitude bias and/or capacity to rely on internal moral principles contributed to rejecting or accepting political arguments in favor of and against a preemptive war with Iraq in 2003. -<br /><br />An experimental questionnaire examined factors, which respondents may have relied on in their acceptance of the arguments. It consisted of three components: 1) A brief vignette, 2) Respondents own agreement with the need for the war and, 3) Twelve arguments from political speeches - Six by Bush and Blair in favor of (Pro,) and six by Chirac and Schroeder against (Con) the need for the Iraq war. Each argument was pre-scored using Kohlberg s (1984) stage theory and Common s (2004) Hierarchical Complexity Scoring System (HCSS). The details in each argument sentence were pre-scored using Kempf s (2003) Cognitive Escalation and De-Escalation Model (CEDM). -<br /><br />397 respondents responded using seven-point Likert scales. They rated their own orientation bias by whether they disagreed or agreed with the need for the war. For each argument they also rated: Whether they would have rejected or accepted the main point of each argument as measure of acceptance, whether it seemed illusory or realistic as a measure of subjective validity and whether it evoked destructive or constructive feelings as a measure of subjective comfort. -<br /><br />Data analysis aimed first, at the probability that within subject design factors were significant and relevant in predicting respondents aggregate acceptance of arguments. Second, at the probability that moderations by moral judgment competence and/or attitude bias as between subject factors were significant and relevant. -<br /><br />The analysis applied tests of covariance parameter estimates for Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM) proposed by Bryk & Raudenbush (1992) with Maximum Likelihood (ML), through the equation (1 model covariance/intercept covariance). Acceptance for significance was set at probability level, p < 0.01. Acceptance for relevance adhered to Cohen & Cohen s (1983) 10 % of the variance standard as criteria for model fitness. The pro and con slope intercepts for sensitivity to differences in stage represent respondents conscious intent, while the slopes represent respondents less conscious intent. -<br /><br />Both significant and relevant findings confirmed expectations consistent with theoretical formulations in the research design. They confirmed the theoretical validity of differences in moral judgment competence as defined by sensitivity to stage and the logic of the experimental design. They validated expectations for cognitive escalation and de-escalation details in conflict theory. They confirmed expected formulations of value in rational theory. Unexpected variations were explained using heuristics postulated in cumulative prospect theory by Tversky and Kahneman, (2000). Significant and relevant findings identified moderation of preference by two independent but inseparable aspects in competent decision-making: Respondents attitude or orientation bias and respondents capacity to rely on internal principles. -<br /><br />Suggestions for further research include a stage model formulated to represent the relationship between orientation bias and reasoning as inseparable, but distinct aspects of decisional-competence. Moralische Urteilskompetenz und Ansichten als Moderatoren von Entscheidungen bezüglich Krieg, durch Präferenzen von Rahmenbedingungen und Argumenten zum Irak Krieg deposit-license LaLlave, Juan eng LaLlave, Juan 2011-03-25T09:18:57Z 2006 Moral Judgment Competence and Attitude as Moderators of Decisions Concerning War through Preferences of Frames and Arguments on the Iraq War application/pdf 2011-03-25T09:18:57Z

Dateiabrufe seit 01.10.2014 (Informationen über die Zugriffsstatistik)

LaLlaveDiss.pdf 128

Das Dokument erscheint in:

KOPS Suche


Stöbern

Mein Benutzerkonto