The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Clarifying the relationship of medical education and moral development
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the development of the moral reasoning skills of medical students through the course of their education, and to determine whether their scores would reflect the increases usually found at this age range and education level. METHOD: Using Rest's Defining Issues Test (DIT), the authors assessed the moral reasoning of a total of 95 Texas A&M medical students from the classes of 1991-94 at the beginning of their first semester, at the end of a required first-semester medical ethics course, and at the end of the students' fourth year. RESULTS: The mean score on the first test was 47.7; on the second, 53.7; and on the third, 56.5. The +6.0 change in mean scores from the first to second test was statistically significant (p < .0001), as was the +8.8 change from the first to final test (p < .0001). The +2.8 change from the second to final test was also significant, although at a lower level (p < .0302). Analysis revealed no significant correlation between moral reasoning scores and age; however, there was a significant correlation between moral reasoning scores and sex, with women scoring higher than men on all three tests. CONCLUSIONS: While data from the current study seem to contradict earlier findings that medical education inhibits an increase in moral reasoning skills, the current findings may alternatively be interpreted as resulting mainly from the required first-semester medical ethics course, which involved small-group discussion of moral dilemmas, an educational method shown elsewhere to be effective in enhancing moral reasoning skills.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“A goal-oriented educational program [2] (Table 1) has been shown to improve learner awareness, attitudes, knowledge, moral reasoning, and confidence [3,4].”
From Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice (2021) · cites this paper as [4]
Citations
Cited by
Principles of Clinical Ethics and Their Application to Practice
Varkey, B. (2021) · Medical Principles and Practice · doi:10.1159/000509119 · Cited by 1,171
Medical Ethics Education: Where Are We? Where Should We Be Going? A Review
Eckles, R. E., Meslin, E. M., Gaffney, M. M., & Helft, P. R. (2005) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00001888-200512000-00020 · Cited by 397
Katz, D., Caplan, A. L., & Merz, J. F. (2010) · The American Journal of Bioethics · doi:10.1080/15265161.2010.519226 · Cited by 356
Supporting the moral development of medical students
Branch, W. T. (2000) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.06298.x · Cited by 223
The Essential Role of Medical Ethics Education in Achieving Professionalism
Carrese, J. A., Malek, J., Watson, K., Lehmann, L. S., Green, M. J., McCullough, L. B., Geller, G., Braddock, C. H., & Doukas, D. J. (2015) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000715 · Cited by 209
Metadata
- Authors
- Self, D. J., Olivarez, M., & Baldwin, D. C.
- Affiliations
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Venue
- Academic Medicine
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1998-05
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 517-20
- ISSN
- 1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2054949118
- Cited by
- 89
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 2.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Ethics in medical practice
- Social Sciences › Education › Values and Moral Education
- Keywords
- moral reasoning, medical students, medical ethics education, moral development, Defining Issues Test, sex differences, age differences, small group discussion, ethical dilemmas, medical education
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Female, Humans, Human Development, Male, Morals, Students, Medical, Texas, Moral Development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.