Abstract

The concept of epistemological development is useful in psychological assessment only insofar as instruments can be designed to measure it consistently, reliably, and without bias. In the psychosocial domain, most traditional stage assessment systems rely on a process of matching concepts in a scoring manual generated from a limited number of construction cases, and thus suffer from bias introduced by an over-dependence on particular content. In contrast, the Hierarchical Complexity Scoring System (HCSS) employs criteria for assessing the hierarchical complexity of texts that are independent of specific conceptual content. This paper examines whether the HCSS and a conventional stage assessment system, Kohlberg's Standard Issue Scoring System (SISS), measure the same dimension of performance. We scored 378 moral judgment interviews with both scoring systems. We then conducted a multidimensional partial credit analysis to determine the extent to which the two scoring systems assess the same dimension of performance. The disattenuated correlation between performance estimates on the SISS and HCSS is .92. Based on this and other evidence, we conclude that a single latent trait - hierarchical complexity - is the predominant dimension assessed by the two systems. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc. All rights reserved.