Exploring the Reliability and Validity of theSocial–MoralAwarenessTest

Abstract

There is early evidence of the construct validity and reliability of the SMAT. Further assessment of the validity of the SMAT will be required.

Social-moral awareness and theory of mind in adult offenders who have intellectual disabilities

“…Better ToM performance will predict higher social-moral awareness scores, as found by Livesey et al (2012).…”

“…Kohlberg (1969) suggested that there are six stages over three levels of moral development: pre-conventional (reasoning based on consequences); conventional (reasoning based on approval from others/group norms); and post-conventional (reasoning based on general rather than individual benefit, and conscience). Gibbs (1979) and Gibbs et al (1992) built upon Kohlberg’s work to develop a socio-moral stage theory (Livesey et al , 2012). The socio-moral stage theory categorises the justifications people give for their behaviour into “immature”, where decisions are rule-based (stage 1) or based upon personal gain (stage 2), and “mature”, where decisions are made based on understanding of emotional states (stage 3), and on concepts such as rights and values (stage 4) (Gibbs, 1979; Gibbs et al , 1992).…”

“…Until recently, there were no assessments of moral reasoning specifically developed for use with people with ID that have good clinical utility (Livesey et al , 2012). The Social-Moral Awareness Test (SMAT), which assesses social-moral rule knowledge and reasoning (collectively termed moral awareness), is a new test that has been developed specifically for people with ID, using an accessible pictorial format (Dodd et al , 2010).…”

“…The Social-Moral Awareness Test (SMAT), which assesses social-moral rule knowledge and reasoning (collectively termed moral awareness), is a new test that has been developed specifically for people with ID, using an accessible pictorial format (Dodd et al , 2010). Livesey et al (2012) also found a significant positive correlation between SMAT scores and theory of mind (ToM) in adults who have ID and so ToM also needs to be considered in studies of the SMAT.…”

Índices sintéticos para medir la responsabilidad social del estudiante universitario

“…Se han encontrado otras aportaciones en esta misma línea de investigación que apuntan a la extracción de índices de responsabilidad social, a los que dan seguimiento entidades como el Observatorio de Responsabilidad Social Corporativa (Observatorio de RSC, 2018;Galán, 2012). Respecto a la responsabilidad social universitaria tomamos como referencia para este artículo las aproximaciones de indicadores para la evaluación de la Responsabilidad Social Universitaria de Larrán (2011Larrán ( ,2014, Vallaeys (2006Vallaeys ( , 2012 e Yfarraguerri (2014), el índice integral para evaluar la responsabilidad social universitaria (Viteri-MoyaI, Jácome-VillacresI, Medina-LeónII y Neydalis, 2012), la validación de un constructo subyacente en una escala de evaluación del impacto de la investigación educativa (Díaz-Costa, Fernández-Cano, Faouzi y Henríquez, 2015) y la exploración de la fiabilidad y validez de pruebas de conciencia social y moral (Livesey, Dodd, Pote & Marlow, 2012).…”