the moral reasoning of student athletes and athletic training students

(1981), Rest’s theory of moral development (1984) and Piaget’s (1932) theory of moral
development. The instrument uses 10 commonly occurring issues in sport and asks respondents
to answer whether they strongly agree, agree, are neutral, disagree or strongly disagree to the
scenario. The instrument has been used in studies with over 80,000 participants both within and
outside of sport (Beller, Stoll, & Hahm, 2006) and is considered the Gold Standard for general
moral reasoning in sport competition. The inventory has a 9 th grade reading level as identified by
the Flesch-Kinkaide Grade Level (Microsoft Word). Cronbach alphas range between .77 and .88.
The range of scores for the instrument is 10 – 50. The higher the score the more an individual
tends towards principles in making moral decisions. Scores in the teens and low twenties reflect
a ego-centered view, scores in the 30s reflect an understanding of social rules and laws, score in
the 40 reflect an understanding of principles as they guide moral decision making.
Ergogenic Aids Moral Competence Inventory (EAMCI)
The Ergogenic Aids Moral Competence Inventory (see Appendix B) has five main
questions based in deontological moral reasoning and moral philosophy (Frankena, 1973;
Kohlberg 1981; Piaget, 1932; Rawls, 1971; Rest, 1984). The purpose of the EAMCI is to help
examine other domain specific measures of morality – in this case doping. The five main
scenarios (questions/dilemmas) were designed to create a moral character index. These scenarios
attempt to create a cognitive dissonance in the respondent, a prerequisite that Piaget and
Kohlberg argue must be present to affect the degree to which moral principles become necessary
knowledge for the individual (Lickona, 1991). The nine sub-questions purport to measure how
respondents reason morally about common doping issues in sport.
48