New research and methodology to measure morality
In his thesis, Erik Forsberg examines basic moral psychology and related questionnaires. He has also developed a new software, D3mirt, which provides a more detailed and visual picture of how moral values can be measured.
On 4 October, Erik Forsberg will defend his doctoral thesis entitled ‘Tracing Morals: On Moral Foundations Theory and the Development of the D3mirt Package for R’. In his thesis, Erik Forsberg takes a closer look at Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) and the associated Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ), by examining how these can be recreated and validated using advanced psychometrics.
– The MFT has been criticised and dismissed by many. Despite this, it seems to live on. A large part of my thesis is about explaining what went wrong. I do this on both a theoretical and methodological level, which is a combination that has not been presented before.
Erik Forsberg's main field is psychometrics, specializing in moral psychology.
– I usually say that I am working with questionnaires and graphical analysis of these when measuring personality, and morality more specifically.
Important concepts
Psychometrics is the measurement of latent abilities using tests and questions. Latent abilities are characteristics that are hidden but can be outlined and measured. They can be abilities related to personality and attitudes, but also knowledge or intelligence. One's moral personality is therefore a type of latent ability that can be measured using psychometric methods.
Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) is a specific theory that claims that our morality consists of previously five (the first version) and now six foundations. These are hereditary, latent and universal – we have them all within us. These foundations are intuitive, in other words a type of moral emotion, and we therefore cannot control them. We ‘feel’ and ‘perceive’ what is right and wrong, but do not really know why.
The Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) is a 30-item questionnaire that measures moral foundations. The scale has two subscales: the Relevance subscale and the Judgment subscale, consisting of 15 questions each. The MFT and MFQ are closely related as the measurement model used to create the questionnaire (MFQ) is also the basis for the moral foundations described in the MFT.
D3Mirt (pronounced De-tre-mirt) stands for Descriptive three-dimensional item response theory. D3mirt is a free application for the statistical software R where the output is mainly interactive three-dimensional models. R is available for free online and applications in R are more specifically called packages and D3mirt is available as such a package.
Psychometrics in focus
Erik Forsberg's research contains elements of several different subjects: a mixture of psychology, philosophy, mathematics and even computer science. In his thesis, Forsberg has developed his own software, D3mirt, which enables a more visual and nuanced understanding of how the MFQ's questions measure various characteristics, such as compassion and justice.
– The emphasis of my work is psychometric, where I argue that the core of the theory, the moral foundations, is based on a misinterpretation of the original measurement model. Related to this, I introduce D3mirt as a better method that probably would not have given rise to the same misinterpretation.
Previous methods give an incomplete picture
In his thesis, Erik Forsberg notes that the structure of the MFQ is more complex than the theory behind it (MFT) suggests, and that it is important to consider both theoretical and methodological aspects in psychological research. In this regard, Erik Forsberg argues that D3mirt is a useful tool for analyzing and validating questionnaires, especially in moral psychology where traditional methods often fail to capture the complexity of moral reasoning.
– It has been interesting to attack MFT because I suspect that what has gone wrong with that theory is not unique to psychology as a research field. There seem to be two common problems: the power of habit, and an overly strong tendency to rename variables. Old methods continue to be used, even though there are new and sometimes better approaches. When new scales are developed, they are often described as new discoveries and given a new name, even though they often measure the same things as existing scales.
Questions of right and wrong seem to be central to what it means to be human
When did people start to study morality?
– This is a big question. The tradition is both qualitative and quantitative and has involved studies on adults and children. It is very difficult to say when studies on morality actually started because it is so interdisciplinary. If we include the philosophical aspect, it is probably thousands of years, as questions of right and wrong seem to be a central part to what it means to be human. In a more Western modern scientific tradition, Piaget's studies on moral development are seen as an important starting point and it is almost 100 years since his famous book ‘Moral Judgment of the Child’ was published. His studies consisted mostly of observations, experiments and interviews, which are fairly typical methods of psychological research in general.
How did psychometrics come into the picture?
– Measuring morality with psychometric questions also has a long tradition, especially if we involve political psychology and personality more generally. It is difficult to draw a specific line on what counts as purely moral psychometrics, but some well-known examples could be Adorno's Fascism scale published in 1950, which has strong moral connotations. There is also Piaget's successor, Kohlberg, who developed a standardized questionnaire to measure moral development according to his model and which became an important component of his research work. Today, studies are conducted that broadly follow the same template. The difference is rather that the internet and computers have made it possible to collect large amounts of data that can be analyzed in ways that were previously difficult.
Maths, R and programming were actually things I started learning during my PhD
What is your own educational background?
– I have two master's degrees, one in psychology and one in philosophy. I have also taken a large number of different courses. But I had no background in maths or programming when I started my PhD. I didn't even know what R was. So maths, R and programming were actually things I started learning during my PhD. It's been a bit of a slog to take all this on and it's not something I would recommend!
What is it like to do research on morality?
– Morality is a field of research that requires a lot of insight and personal experience. It is inevitable that studying morality also involves studying oneself to some extent. Turning oneself inside out is therefore at least as important as turning data inside out. Likewise, philosophical theories about ethics are inevitable, so it is important to sit down and think about these things from time to time. Otherwise, there is a great risk of very crazy interpretations or, in the opposite direction, insightless conclusions.
Two recurring moral types
What are the main findings of your thesis?
– Many decades of research on morality show that there seem to be two moral types that keep coming back and being rediscovered. They have had many names over the years but I have chosen to call them Compassion and Conformity. Compassion has to do with empathy and sympathy, values characterized by universalism and the equal value of all. Conformity has to do with belief in hierarchy and following norms, laws and rules and is characterized by conservatism and traditionalism. These two are the A (Conformity) and B (Compassion) of morals. The strange thing is that the MFT theory does not really want to recognize these but instead claims that there are more than two, previously five and most recently six. Ironically, some studies show that MFT's own questionnaires actually measure these two types.
How were your studies conducted more concretely?
– I use a pilot dataset for what became the final MFQ and show that I get similar problems when I use the same methods as the originators of the theory used when they developed the MFQ. In addition, I show that the two types of morality, the A and B of morals, also appear both in the pilot dataset and in the MFQ.
How can this be linked to the development of your D3mirt software?
– My approach is to adapt the methodology to what you want to say and focus on understanding the similarities between what has been reported in the literature and what you found, before claiming to have found something new. D3mirt came about largely because of this. Specifically, I wanted to find a way to investigate the problems in a more summarized and reliable way.
D3mirt allows for more in-depth analysis of data
What is special about D3mirt?
– The original method is called descriptive multidimensional item response theory (DMIRT) and was developed in the 80s and early 90s. However, there has been very limited software that can analyze data according to the method and the method has not been widely used. D3mirt makes a unique contribution by implementing DMIRT in a three-dimensional interactive environment, where the user can experience the model almost as if it were a physical object. In D3mirt it is possible to study profiles, for example graphically illustrate where all or individual participants are in the model.
Who do you think will benefit from your software and how?
– I didn't mention anything about profile analysis in the thesis because it wasn't part of the topic, but I personally find it one of the most interesting parts of D3mirt. For example, it makes it possible to study different subgroups and see how they differ from others and it also gives transparency to the analysis as anyone can see the results for themselves. However, my suspicion is that it is probably psychometricians from the younger generations who will be drawn to D3mirt. I guess it's just hard to teach old dogs to sit.
Do you call yourself a Psychometrician now?
– Yes, I think I am a psychometrician. Essentially, anyone who uses standardized questionnaires to measure latent abilities and quantitative methods to analyze the answers is a psychometrician.
What have you learnt about morality during your work?
– I have learnt to think about how I think we should understand the phenomenon of morality. But these ideas are not really written about in the thesis. Instead, I hope to have them published as articles in the future.
What's next for you? What is the next step for you and for D3mirt?
– Some development of D3mirt has started and there are also some thoughts about trying to develop other graphical analysis methods. Personally, I want to study more maths – and sing.
Last updated: October 3, 2024
Source: Department of Psychology