Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp 439–449 | Cite as

Professional ethics in pharmacy practice: developing a psychometric measure of moral reasoning

Research Article

Abstract

Objective To develop and validate a psychometric measure of cognitive moral development in professional ethics in pharmacy. Setting Pharmacy practice in Australia. Method A psychometric instrument, the Professional Ethics in Pharmacy (PEP) test, was developed and validated following a systematic procedure. The theoretical foundation of the instrument was based on a hypothesised theory of cognitive moral development in professional ethics, which was integrated into a selection of scenarios experienced in practice by pharmacists in NSW, Australia. The PEP, along with the well established DIT test, was mailed in the form of a questionnaire to a randomly selected sample of 1,500 practising pharmacists. Data collected from returned questionnaires were statistically analysed to establish validity and reliability of the instrument. Main outcome measures The P-score calculated for each participant from DIT and PEP data and defined as a measure of principled moral reasoning, represented the main outcome measure for statistical testing. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to determine the strength of the relationship of the PEP with the DIT (regarded as the “gold standard”) in order to establish criterion and concurrent validity. Factor analysis was used to investigate construct validity. Cronbach’s Alpha, a measure of reliability of the instrument, was used for indicating internal consistency. Linear regression models further investigated construct validity in relation to predictors of moral reasoning. Results Face and content validity were established by pilot and peer review. Pearson’s coefficient of 0.53 indicated an acceptable level of concurrent validity. Factor analysis yielded factors closely related to the theoretical stages of cognitive moral development hypothesised, which indicated construct validity. Cronbach’s alpha of 0.75 demonstrated the reliability of the instrument, and linear regression models provided further evidence of construct validity. The PEP was established as a robust instrument on several dimensions of validity and reliability. Conclusion The validated PEP test has the potential to provide the pharmacy profession with valuable information for use education and research. The validation process also provided evidence supporting the hypothesis that moral reasoning in professional ethics in pharmacy is a developmental process, which has profound implications for furthering the understanding of professional behaviour.

Keywords

Australia Ethical decision making Moral reasoning Pharmacy practice Professional ethics 

References

  1. 1.
    Darvall L. Medicine, law and social change: the impact of bioethics, feminism and rights movements on medical decision-making. Aldershot, England: Dartmouth Publishing; 1993. ISBN 1885210770.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wingfield J, Bissell P, Anderson C. The scope of pharmacy ethics—an evaluation of the international research literature, 1990–2002. Soc Sci Med.. 2004;58:2383–96. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.09.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cooper R, Bissell P, Wingfield J. A new prescription for empirical ethics research in pharmacy: a critical review of the literature. J Med Ethics.. 2007;33:82–6. doi:10.1136/jme.2005.015297.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mitcham C. Ethics overview. In: Mitcham C, editor. Encyclopedia of science, technology and ethics. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA; 2005. p. 700–4. ISBN 0028659910(ebook).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sidgwick H. Practical ethics: a collection of addresses and essays. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 1898. ISBN 1570851131 (CD Rom).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pharmaceutical Society of Australia. Code of Professional Conduct. Canberra: The Pharmaceutical Society of Australia [online] 1998. [cited 15 Jan 2009] Available from: URL: http://www.psa.org.au/site.php?id=628.
  7. 7.
    Royal Pharmaceutical Society G. Britain. Medicines, ethics and practice: a guide for pharmacists. London: Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain; 2005. ISBN 0853696802.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Salek S, Edgar A. Pharmaceutical ethics. West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons Ltd; 2002. ISBN 0471490571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Savulescu J. Festschrift edition of the Journal of Medical Ethics in honour of Raanan Gillon: promoting respect for the four principles remains of great practical importance in ordinary medicine. J Med Ethics.. 2003;29:265–7. doi:10.1136/jme.29.5.265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2001. ISBN 0195143310.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jonsen A. Clinical ethics and the four principles. In: Gillon R, editor. Principles of health care ethics. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Ltd; 1994. p. 13–21. ISBN 0471930334.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jonsen A. The birth of bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 1998. ISBN 0195103254.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tassy S, Coz PL, Wicker B. Current knowledge in moral cognition can improve medical ethics. J Med Ethics.. 2008;34:679–82. doi:10.1136/jme.2006.018812.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Knapp D. Ethical pharmacy practice: prospects for the future. In: Buerki R (chairman). Proceedings of the Symposium presented at a joint session of the American Institute of the History of Pharmacy and the APhA Academy of Pharmacy Practice: The challenges of ethics in pharmacy practice. Madison, Wisconsin; 1985. p. 33–38. ISBN 0931292158 Publication No. 8 (New Series).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Betan EJ. Toward a hermeneutic model of ethical decision making in clinical practice. Ethics Behav. 1997;7(4):347–65. doi:10.1207/s15327019eb0704_6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haddad A, editor. Teaching and learning strategies in pharmacy ethics. 2nd ed. New York: The Pharmaceutical Products Press; 1997. ISBN 0789003783.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gettman D, Arneson D. Pharmacoethics—A problem-based approach. Florida: CRC Press; 2003. ISBN 1587160358.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    The Pharmacy Law and Ethics Resource Centre [online]. London, UK: Pharmacy Law and Ethics Association; 2006 [cited 15 Jan 2009]. Available from URL: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/pharmacy/applet/index.html.
  19. 19.
    Buerki RA, Vottero LD. Ethical responsibility in pharmacy practice. Madison, Wisconsin: American Institute of the History of Pharmacy; 1994. ISBN 0931292255.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cohen S. The nature of moral reasoning: the framework and activities of ethical deliberation, argument and decision-making. South Melbourne, Victoria: Oxford University Press; 2004. ISBN 0195514793.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grace D, Cohen S. Business ethics-problems and cases. 3rd ed. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press; 2005. ISBN 019551727.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Figurski TJ. Moral development. In: Borgatta EF, editor. Encyclopedia of sociology. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan Reference USA; 2001. p. 1894–906. ISBN 002865899.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Flanagan O. Moral development. In: Craig E, editor. Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy. London: Routledge; 1998. [Cited 14 Jan 2009]. Available from URL: http://www.rep.routledge.com/article/W027. ISBN 0415073103.
  24. 24.
    Hare RM. Moral thinking: its levels, methods and point. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1981. ISBN 0198246595.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kohlberg L. Stage and sequence: the cognitive-developmental approach to socialization. In: Goslin DA, editor. Handbook of socialization theory and research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally; 1969. p. 347–480.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Beauchamp TL. Methods and principles in biomedical ethics. J Med Ethics. 2003;29((Festschrift)):269–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rawls J. A theory of justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1976. ISBN 0674880102.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rest J. Cognitive development. In: Mussen P, Flavell J, Markman E, editors. Handbook of child psychology, vol. 3. New York: Wiley; 1983. p. 24–40. ISBN 0471090646 (v. 3).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thomas RM. An integrated theory of moral development. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press; 1997. ISBN 0313301301.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kohlberg L. Moral stages and moralization: the cognitive development approach. In: Lickona T, editor. Moral development and behaviour: theory, research and social issues. New York: Holt, Rinehard and Winston; 1976. ISBN 0030028116.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rest J, Narvaez D, Bebeau M, Thoma SA. Neo-Kohlbergian approach: the DIT and schema theory. Educ Psychol Rev. 1999;11(4):291–324. doi:10.1023/A:1022053215271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pritchard MS. Kohlbergian contributions to educational programs for the moral development of professionals. Educ Psychol Rev. 1999;11(4):395–409. doi:10.1023/A:1022013501159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rest J, Narvaez D, editors. Moral development in the professions: psychology and applied ethics. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1994. ISBN 0805815384.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rest J. Moral development: advances in research and theory. New York: Praeger; 1986. ISBN 0275922545.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hampshire S, editor. Public and private morality. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1978. ISBN 052122084X.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chang F. The development of a test of teacher’s moral reasoning. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation Minneapolis: University of Minnesota; 1993). In: Rest J, Narvaez D, editors. Moral development in the professions: psychology and applied ethics. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1994. p. 71–83. 0805815384.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bebeau MJ, Rest JR, Yamoor CM. Measuring the ethical sensitivity of dental students. J Dent Educ. 1985;49(4):225–35.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hoffmann J, Sprague J. Exploring alternate perspectives on fairness to help TAs develop course policies and manage student challenges. Paper presented at: Third National Conference on TA training and employment; 1991. Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Crisham P. Measuring moral judgment in nursing dilemmas. Nurs Res. 1981;30(2):104–10. doi:10.1097/00006199-198103000-00012.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Chaar B, Brien J, Krass I. Professional ethics in pharmacy: the Australian experience. IJPP.. 2005;13:195–204.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hibbert D, Rees J, Smith I. Ethical awareness of community pharmacists. IJPP.. 2000;8:82–7.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fink J. Applied ethics in pharmacy practice. In: Buerki R (chairman). Proceedings of the Symposium presented at a joint session of the American Institute of the History of Pharmacy and the APhA Academy of Pharmacy Practice: the challenges of ethics in pharmacy practice. Madison, Wisconsin; 1985. p. 23–30. ISBN 0931292158 Publication No. 8 (New Series).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Comrey AL, Lee HB. A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1992. ISBN 0805810625.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    De Vaus DA. Surveys in social research. St. Leonards: Allen and Unwin; 1995. ISBN 1863739394.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dillman DA. Mail and telephone surveys. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1978. ISBN 0471323543.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Litwin MS. How to measure survey reliability and validity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995. ISBN 0803957041.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Francis G. Introduction to SPSS for Windows: Versions 12.0 and 11. 4th ed. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia; 2004. ISBN 174103334.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 4th ed. Boston, USA: Allyn and Bacon; 2001. ISBN 0321056779.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Evens J. Indexing moral judgment using multidimensional scaling. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1995). In: Barnett R, Evens J, Rest J, editors. Faking moral judgment on the Defining Issues Test. Br J Soc Psychol. 1995;34:267–78.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Productivity Commission. Australia’s health workforce. Canberra, ACT: Productivity Commission Research Report; 2005. ISBN 1740371895.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (A.I.H.W). Pharmacy labour force to 2001. Canberra, ACT: AIHW; 2003. (National Health Labour Force Series no. 25) ISSN 1327-4309; ISBN 174024 256 4.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Fink A. How to analyze survey data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995. ISBN 0803973861.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of PharmacyUniversity of SydneyCamperdownAustralia

Personalised recommendations