亚里士多德关于道德决策的观点正确吗?构建实践智慧的新实证模型。

IF 2.6 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2025-01-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0317842
Shane McLoughlin, Stephen Thoma, Kristján Kristjánsson
{"title":"亚里士多德关于道德决策的观点正确吗?构建实践智慧的新实证模型。","authors":"Shane McLoughlin, Stephen Thoma, Kristján Kristjánsson","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0317842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article presents the development and validation of the Short Phronesis Measure (SPM), a novel tool to assess Aristotelian phronesis (practical wisdom). Across three studies, using large, nationally representative samples from the UK and US (demographically matched to census data), we employed a systematic and rigorous methodology to examine the structure, reliability, and validity of the SPM. In Study 1a, exploratory factor analysis identified ten distinct, internally reliable components of phronesis, challenging the traditional four-component Aristotelian model. Study 1b confirmed these findings in two additional nationally representative samples from the UK and the US. In Study 1c, the SPM demonstrated strong test-retest reliability over two months. Study 2 used network analysis to uncover interrelations among the components, allowing for the creation of a new and empirically driven neo-Aristotelian model of phronesis. In Study 3, we tested criterion validity, showing phronesis correlates positively with flourishing and predicts flourishing two months later, demonstrating strong predictive validity. Phronesis also correlated with Big 6 and Dark Tetrad personality traits, moral disengagement, and Moral Foundations in expected directions. Importantly, phronesis predicted key outcomes-related to flourishing, moral disengagement, and morally relevant aspects of personality-beyond what Moral Foundations alone explained, with an average increase in predictive power of 13.7% across all outcomes. The SPM is quick to administer (15-20 minutes), making it a valuable tool for researchers and practitioners in psychology, education, and professional ethics. The introduction of the neo-Aristotelian Phronesis Model, and the identification of central phronesis components, offers actionable insights for moral psychologists and moral educators, suggesting areas of focus that could yield broad, positive effects across related traits, providing a significant contribution to both theory and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":"20 1","pages":"e0317842"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11753716/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Was Aristotle right about moral decision-making? Building a new empirical model of practical wisdom.\",\"authors\":\"Shane McLoughlin, Stephen Thoma, Kristján Kristjánsson\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pone.0317842\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article presents the development and validation of the Short Phronesis Measure (SPM), a novel tool to assess Aristotelian phronesis (practical wisdom). Across three studies, using large, nationally representative samples from the UK and US (demographically matched to census data), we employed a systematic and rigorous methodology to examine the structure, reliability, and validity of the SPM. In Study 1a, exploratory factor analysis identified ten distinct, internally reliable components of phronesis, challenging the traditional four-component Aristotelian model. Study 1b confirmed these findings in two additional nationally representative samples from the UK and the US. In Study 1c, the SPM demonstrated strong test-retest reliability over two months. Study 2 used network analysis to uncover interrelations among the components, allowing for the creation of a new and empirically driven neo-Aristotelian model of phronesis. In Study 3, we tested criterion validity, showing phronesis correlates positively with flourishing and predicts flourishing two months later, demonstrating strong predictive validity. Phronesis also correlated with Big 6 and Dark Tetrad personality traits, moral disengagement, and Moral Foundations in expected directions. Importantly, phronesis predicted key outcomes-related to flourishing, moral disengagement, and morally relevant aspects of personality-beyond what Moral Foundations alone explained, with an average increase in predictive power of 13.7% across all outcomes. The SPM is quick to administer (15-20 minutes), making it a valuable tool for researchers and practitioners in psychology, education, and professional ethics. The introduction of the neo-Aristotelian Phronesis Model, and the identification of central phronesis components, offers actionable insights for moral psychologists and moral educators, suggesting areas of focus that could yield broad, positive effects across related traits, providing a significant contribution to both theory and practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS ONE\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"e0317842\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11753716/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS ONE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"103\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317842\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"综合性期刊\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0317842","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文介绍了短实践测量(SPM)的发展和验证,SPM是一种评估亚里士多德实践智慧的新工具。在三项研究中,我们使用了来自英国和美国的具有全国代表性的大型样本(人口统计学上与人口普查数据相匹配),采用了系统而严谨的方法来检验SPM的结构、可靠性和有效性。在研究1a中,探索性因子分析确定了10种不同的、内部可靠的phronesis成分,挑战了传统的四成分亚里士多德模型。研究1b在另外两个来自英国和美国的具有全国代表性的样本中证实了这些发现。在研究1c中,SPM在两个月内表现出很强的重测信度。研究2使用网络分析来揭示各组成部分之间的相互关系,从而创建一个新的、由经验驱动的新亚里士多德式的phronesis模型。在研究3中,我们测试了标准效度,发现phronesis与繁荣呈正相关,并预测两个月后的繁荣,显示出较强的预测效度。Phronesis还与大六人格、黑暗四人格、道德脱离和道德基础在预期方向上相关。重要的是,phronesis预测了与繁荣、道德脱离和人格道德相关方面相关的关键结果,超出了道德基础单独解释的范围,所有结果的预测能力平均提高了13.7%。SPM管理起来很快(15-20分钟),使其成为心理学、教育和职业道德领域的研究人员和实践者的宝贵工具。新亚里士多德的实践模型的引入,以及对核心实践成分的识别,为道德心理学家和道德教育者提供了可操作的见解,提出了可以在相关特征中产生广泛积极影响的重点领域,为理论和实践提供了重大贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Was Aristotle right about moral decision-making? Building a new empirical model of practical wisdom.

Was Aristotle right about moral decision-making? Building a new empirical model of practical wisdom.

Was Aristotle right about moral decision-making? Building a new empirical model of practical wisdom.

Was Aristotle right about moral decision-making? Building a new empirical model of practical wisdom.

This article presents the development and validation of the Short Phronesis Measure (SPM), a novel tool to assess Aristotelian phronesis (practical wisdom). Across three studies, using large, nationally representative samples from the UK and US (demographically matched to census data), we employed a systematic and rigorous methodology to examine the structure, reliability, and validity of the SPM. In Study 1a, exploratory factor analysis identified ten distinct, internally reliable components of phronesis, challenging the traditional four-component Aristotelian model. Study 1b confirmed these findings in two additional nationally representative samples from the UK and the US. In Study 1c, the SPM demonstrated strong test-retest reliability over two months. Study 2 used network analysis to uncover interrelations among the components, allowing for the creation of a new and empirically driven neo-Aristotelian model of phronesis. In Study 3, we tested criterion validity, showing phronesis correlates positively with flourishing and predicts flourishing two months later, demonstrating strong predictive validity. Phronesis also correlated with Big 6 and Dark Tetrad personality traits, moral disengagement, and Moral Foundations in expected directions. Importantly, phronesis predicted key outcomes-related to flourishing, moral disengagement, and morally relevant aspects of personality-beyond what Moral Foundations alone explained, with an average increase in predictive power of 13.7% across all outcomes. The SPM is quick to administer (15-20 minutes), making it a valuable tool for researchers and practitioners in psychology, education, and professional ethics. The introduction of the neo-Aristotelian Phronesis Model, and the identification of central phronesis components, offers actionable insights for moral psychologists and moral educators, suggesting areas of focus that could yield broad, positive effects across related traits, providing a significant contribution to both theory and practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信