Advertisement

Predictive models of biology students’ convictions towards bioethical issues

  • Jeannemar Genevive Yap-FiguerasEmail author
Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

This study aimed at determining B.S. Biology students’ comprehension of the Bioethics principles and conviction schemas towards bioethical issues; as well as at identifying predictors for comprehension of bioethical principles and convictions and creating model constructs of predictors which are fit for the data. One-hundred sixteen Filipino Biology majors were pre and post-tested for comprehension of bioethics principles and convictions towards bioethical issues. Predictors for comprehension and convictions among personal and family background factors, global and primary personality factors, and mental ability were identified through step-wise multiple regression. Constructed path models were tested for goodness of fit using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Results showed that case study discussion and the bioethics course had positive effects on comprehension of the bioethics principles and on convictions towards bioethical issues. Predictors for comprehension of Bioethics principles before intervention were verbal ability, warmth, and exposure to media. Sex and openness to change were predictors for pre-convictions. Post-conviction predictors were anxiety, self-control, extraversion, liveliness, and perfectionism. Four out of five model constructs were accepted based on model fit criteria. In conclusion, personal factors, i.e., sex and personality factors are contributors in bioethical convictions; not cognitive factors like mental ability or comprehension of Bioethics principles; implying that bioethical convictions are already pre-conceived and that empathy-based experiences may strengthen convictions towards bioethical issues.

Keywords

Ethics education Bioethics Bioethical convictions Model constructs 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research would not have been possible if not for the scholarship and research grant of Dr. Jeannemar Genevive Yap-Figueras under the Department of Science and Technology Science Education Institute-Accelerated Science and Technology Human Resource Development Program (DOST-SEI ASTHRDP) of the Philippines, the support of West Visayas State University, particularly the University Research Center and Development for the research funding; WVSU University Testing Center, and the personal assistance of Ms. Elzie Palmes as checker and interpreter. For all of these, this the researcher is greatly indebted.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

40889_2019_72_MOESM1_ESM.docx (110 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 109 kb)

References

  1. Athota, V. S., & Peter, J. O. (2009). ResearchOnline @ ND.Google Scholar
  2. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., & Caprara, G. V. (1996). Mechanisms of Moral Disengagement in the Exercise of Moral Agency, 71(2), 364–374.Google Scholar
  3. Barnes, G.M., J.W. Welte, J.H. Hoffman, and B. Dintcheff. 2005. Shared predictors of youthful gambling, substance use, and delinquency. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 19 (2): 165–174.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-164x.19.2.165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bartels, D. M., Bauman, C. W., Cushman, F. A., Pizarro, D. A., & Mcgraw, A. P. (2015). Moral judgment and decision making. In G. Kerem, G. and Wu (Ed.), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgement and Decision Making (1st ed., pp. 478–515). John Wiley and Sons,Ltd. Retrieved from home.uchicago.edu/bartels/papers/BartelsEtAl-MoralJDM-2015.pdf. Accessed 07/26/2017.
  5. Bartz, J.A., and J.E. Lyndon. 2008. Relationship-specific attachment, risk regulation, and communal norm adherence in close relationships. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44 (3): 655–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baumeister, R.F., and J.J. Exline. 1999. Virtue, personality, and social relations: Self-control as the moral muscle. Journal of Personality 67: 1165–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cesur, S., and M.S. Top. 2010. Report Information from ProQuest a reliability and validity study of the defining issues test : The relationship of age , education , gender and parental education with moral development. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 10 (3): 1681–1697.Google Scholar
  8. Ebbesen, M. 2011. Cross cultural principles for bioethics, 207–215 Retrieved from http://www.intechopen.com/books/show/title/advanced-biomedical-engineering. Accessed 03/26/2013Google Scholar
  9. Feeney, B.C., and N.L. Collins. 2001. Predictors in caregiving in adult intimate relationships: An attachment theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 80 (60): 972–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fiske, S.T., A.J.C. Cuddy, and P. Glick. 2007. Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 11 (2): 77–83.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gleichgerrcht, E., and L. Young. 2013. Low levels of empathic concern predict utilitarian moral judgment. PLoS One 8 (4).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0060418.
  12. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural Equation Modelling : Guidelines for Determining Model Fit, 6(1), 53–60.Google Scholar
  13. Jagger, K. S., & Furlong, J. (2014). Theme : Scientific Ethics Infusing Bioethics into Biology and Microbiology Courses and Curricula : A Vertical Approach, 15(2), 213–217.Google Scholar
  14. Johnson, J., R. Hogan, and A.B. Zonderman. 1981. Moral judgment, personality, and attitudes toward authority. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40 (2): 370–373.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.40.2.370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnston, J.S. 2009. Rule following standards of practice and open-mindedness. Paideusis 18 (1): 17.25.Google Scholar
  16. Keith, T.Z. 1993. Latent variable structural equation models: LISTREL in special education research. Remedial and Special Education. Retrieved from.  https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259301400609.
  17. Kerr, N. A. (2007). Are there personality factors that can undermine moral judgment development ?Google Scholar
  18. King, P.M., and M.J. Mayhew. 2002. Moral judgement development in higher education: Insights from the defining issues test. Journal of Moral Education 31 (3): 247–270.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0305724022000008106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kuhse, H. and Singer, P. (Ed.). (2009). 1 . What is bioethics ? A historical introduction. In Bioethics (2nd editio, pp. 1–7). Blackwell Publishing, Ltd.Google Scholar
  20. Leman, P. J., & Duveen, G. (1999). Representations of authority and children ’ s moral reasoning. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(July 1998), 557–575.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199908/09)29:5/6<557::AID-EJSP946>3.0.CO;2-T.
  21. López, J. 2004. How sociology can save bioethics ... Maybe. Sociology of Health and Illness 26 (7): 875–896.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0141-9889.2004.00421.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mayhew, M.J., T.A. Seifert, and E.T. Pascarella. 2010. A multi-institutional assessment of moral reasoning development among first year students. The Review of Higher Education 33 (3): 357–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Melorose, J., Perroy, R., & Careas, S. (2015). a Social Learning Theory and Moral Disengagement Analysis of Criminal Computer Behavior: an Exploratory Study. Statewide Agricultural Land Use Baseline 2015, 1(C).  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.
  24. Milkulineer, M., and P.R. Shaver. 2001. Attachment theory and intergroup vias: Evidence that priming the secure base schema attenuates negative reactions to out-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81 (1): 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Murphy, P.K., I.a.G. Wilkinson, A.O. Soter, M.N. Hennessey, and J.F. Alexander. 2009. Examining the effects of classroom discussion on students’ comprehension of text: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology 101 (3): 740–764.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Narvaez, D., and P.L. Hill. 2010. The relation of multicultural experiences to moral judgment and mindsets. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education 3 (1): 43–55.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Osofsky, M.J., A. Bandura, and P.G. Zimbardo. 2005. The role of moral disengagement in the execution process. Law and Human Behavior 29 (4): 371–393. Retrieved from.  https://doi.org/10.1007/510979-005-4930-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Park, M., D. Kjervik, J. Crandell, and M.H. Oermann. 2012. The relationship of ethics education to moral sensitivity and moral reasoning skills of nursing students. Nursing Ethics. Retrieved from.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733011433922.
  29. Paxton, J. M., & Greene, J. D. (2010). Moral Reasoning : Hints and Allegations, 2, 511–527.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01096.x.
  30. Rest, J.R., D. Narvaez, S.J. Thoma, and M.J. Bebeau. 2000. A neo-Kohlbergian approach to morality research. Journal of Moral Education 29 (4): 381–395.  https://doi.org/10.1080/713679390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Riegle, S., Frye, A., Glenn, J., & Smith, K. (2012). Assessing Medical Students’ Moral Judgment over the Course of a Four-Year Professionalism and Humanism Curriculum. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, (April 2012). Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED534225&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED534225. Accessed 07/27/2017.
  32. Rogotneva, E.N., I. Melik-haikazyan, and M. Goncharenko. 2015. Bioethics : Negotiation of fundamental differences in Russian and US curricula. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 215 (June): 26–31.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sara, M. (2000). Document resume. https://doi.org/ED419696 Google Scholar
  34. Simpson, J.A., W. Ickes, and J. Grich. 1999. When accuracy hurts: Reactions of anxious-ambivalent dating partners to a relationship-threatening situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76 (5): 754–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Simpson, J.A., J.S. Kim, J. Fillo, W. Ickes, W. Rholes, M. Orina, and H.A. Winterheld. 2011. Attachment and the management of emphatic accuracy in relationship-threatening situations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 37 (2): 242–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stoljiljkovic, S. 1998. Personality characteristics and moral judgement. Facta Universitatis 1 (5): 507–514.Google Scholar
  37. Tiberius, V. 2012. Open-mindedness and normative contingency 1. Vol. 7, 182–204.Google Scholar
  38. Troy, D., & Sadler, T. D. (2002). Socioscientific issues and affect 1 Socioscientific issues and the affective domain : Scientific literacy ’ s missing Link University of South Florida college of education department of secondary education 4202 East Fowler Avenue EDU162 Paper Presented at.Google Scholar
  39. Vollum, S., and J. Buffington-Vollum. 2010. An examination of social-psychological factors and support for the death penalty: Attribution, moral disengagement, and the value-expressive function of attitudes. American Journal of Criminal Justice 35: 15–36.  https://doi.org/10.1007/512103-009-9068-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vollum, S., J. Buffington-vollum, and D.R. Longmire. 2004. Moral disengagement and attitudes about. Society and Animals 12 (3): 209–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yap-Figueras, J.G. 2013. Case study discussion for students’ comprehension of the four bioethics principles. West Visayas State University Research Journal 2 (2): 43–53.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biological Sciences Department, College of Arts & SciencesWest Visayas State UniversityIloilo CityPhilippines

Personalised recommendations