Adaptation of the Moral Identity Questionnaire on the Russian Sample

The relevance of the study is determined by the activation of malevolent creativity and the consequences of its implementation in behavior in the form of information wars, fraud and terrorism against the background of a special military operation in Ukraine. In a threatening socio-political context, the role of morality as a regulator of behavior is important. Foreign studies show that the relationship between morality and behavior is not unambiguous, and the research results contradict each other. In many ways, such discrepancies are associated with the use of tools that are not suitable for identifying the connection of morality with behavior. The article presents the results of adaptation of the Russian version of the questionnaire "Moral Identity" (K. Aquino, A. Reed). The advantage of this questionnaire is that the authors used it to show the connection between the importance for a person of moral identity and moral behavior in everyday life. The two-factor structure of the translated version corresponds to the original version and includes the following sections: "Internalization" and "Symbolization". The stability of the factor structure of the questionnaire was confirmed in a sample of young people (N=303, cf. age 19, SD = 2.03; 144 of them were girls). With the help of the questionnaire "Justice-Care" (V.S.Molchanov) and the scale of self-respect (M.Rosenberg) conducted an assessment of the constructive and disqualified validity (respectively). The results obtained are consistent with the results of the authors of the original version and serve as confirmation of the difference between the construct of moral identity from those constructs with which discriminant and constructive validity was checked. The analysis of retest reliability (N=80) revealed modest but significant correlations, which is consistent with the position of the authors of the original version about the instability and situativeness of moral identity. Additional studies of constructive validity using aggression questionnaires (BRAQ-24), Conscientiousness and Cooperation scales ("NEO-FFI"), tolerance scales as traits (G.U.Soldatova et al.) on the sample (N=158) revealed positive correlations of scales with the traits of the Big Five and negative associations with aggression. Hypotheses are formulated for further research, according to which the stability of moral identity in different contexts can be determined by the traits of the Big Five and tolerance. According to the results of the adaptation, the translated version of the questionnaire can be used for research purposes and in assessing, monitoring and correcting the moral and psychological state of older adolescents and young people.

Introduction

The regulatory role of morality in behavior becomes critical under conditions of uncertainty and a threatening socio-political context. Observations of real life in the conditions of the special operation in Ukraine show that it is in such conditions that asocial creativity, i.e. information wars, fraud and terrorist acts, which are always based on the intention to cause moral or physical harm to the enemy in new and original ways, has become more active. It becomes evident that morality neither in the generation of ideas nor in behavior that causes harm, at the level of world powers, does not exert its regulatory role, especially when it concerns the enemy. Meanwhile, how this kind of socio-political context affects the morality and creativity of ordinary people remains to be seen, as does whether it will affect interpersonal interaction with representatives of the parties involved in the conflict. Within the working scheme of the dynamic model of creativity (see [5]), an important place is given to moral identity. According to this scheme, context (socio-political conditions) influences both creativity and moral identity, which, in turn, also regulates creative behavior [5].

The question of the relationship between creativity and morality remains open, as the data obtained in the studies is extremely contradictory: some studies found a positive relationship, while others found a negative one [22]. The ambiguity of the results can be explained by the variety of tools used to diagnose morality: social dilemmas; moral judgments; Dark Triad traits, questionnaires of ethics, values, prosocial motivation, etc. [22]. Thus, in studies that have found positive correlations between creativity and morality, the latter was measured using the difference in the distribution of moral and immoral personality traits with respect to the subject and others [17] or with the effectiveness of ethical decision-making [9]. Negative correlations with morality have been exemplified by research on the association of creative personality with dishonest, i.e., immoral behavior [23]. A negative relationship between creativity and morality has also been shown, explained by the activation of unethical traits and the presence of unethical judgments [18]. Regarding the relationship with antisocial creativity, it has been shown that negative moral traits are manifested in high malicious creativity in divergent thinking tasks [15; 16]. In a pilot study, it was shown that higher levels of moral identity were combined with the generation of negative solutions in tasks with positive valency and the regulatory role of moral identity in situations with negative connotations (revenge for pouring compote) was revealed [7]. Despite the number of diagnostic tools available, there is clearly insufficient research to conclude what role morality plays in the implementation of creative harmful creative decisions in behaviors that harm others. Moreover, the results of the connection between moral consciousness and behavior are also ambiguous, and there are almost no studies on this topic in the last few years [12].  In addition, Russian science is lagging behind in the development of tools for diagnosing morality and moral consciousness, there are no standardized methods, there is no data on the reliability and validity of tests [11], and the available tests are labor- and resource-intensive.

Although in foreign psychology there is the opinion that morality and negative ideation are in no way interrelated [21], in our research we paid attention to the fact that some respondents, of different ages, refused in the tasks on antisocial creativity to come up with original ways of revenge for damage to property [4; 6], explaining that revenge is not acceptable. We assumed that moral identity can regulate such behavior and in a pilot study [7] we obtained confirmation of this, albeit on a small sample of adolescents and psychology students. During the course of studying the influence of socio-political context on antisocial creativity (see [5]), we needed a methodology that diagnoses moral behavior, and we settled on the moral identity questionnaire.

The purpose of this article is to present the results of the adaptation of the moral identity questionnaire developed by C. Aquino and A. Reed on a Russian sample. The questionnaire was chosen for several reasons.

The Characteristic of Moral Identity and the Questionnaire for its Diagnosis

In creating the questionnaire to diagnose moral identity, K. Aquino and A. Reed proceeded from several assumptions: 1. An individual has the ability to identify with others on a variety of variables, and, accordingly, that an individual's self-concept can be organized around moral characteristics. 2. Moral identity is based on character traits, yet it may have a social referent in the form of a real social group. 3. Individuals with a strong moral identity should strive to maintain consistency between their ideas of their moral self and their actions in the world. 4. To measure moral identity, it is important to activate a subset of moral traits related to those moral traits that are important to a particular person's self-concept. 5. Moral identity may be stable over time, but it is not a personal characteristic, and like other types of social identity can be activated by the influence of the situation. Nevertheless, the higher a person's moral identity, the more likely it is to manifest itself in a wide range of situations and the stronger is its connection to moral perceptions and moral behavior. 6. Moral identity is distinct from moral judgments. The motivational factor for its connection to behavior is that a person views certain moral qualities as essential to his or her self-concept [14]. Regarding the latter assumption, in the studies of S. Reynolds and T. Ceranic it was shown that moral identity and moral judgment influenced moral behavior independently of each other. Moreover, in situations of low social consensus about moral behavior, moral judgment and moral identity interacted to elicit moral behavior. This interaction effect confirmed the motivational power of moral and moral identity [20].

The authors of the moral identity questionnaire first conducted research based on implicit concepts of moral personality, which allowed them to identify a set of personality traits that are considered fundamental to highly moral persons [3], resulting in the selection of 9 characteristics. The instructions ask you to first imagine in your mind a person who possesses these characteristics (caring; compassionate; fair; friendly; generous; helpful; hardworking; honest; kind[1]) and then offer statements to agree with on a 7-point scale. There are 10 statements in the questionnaire (the 4^th and 7^th statements are reversed), each scale includes 5 statements. The moral identity questionnaire consists of two scales: Internalization and Symbolization. The first scale diagnoses how important these qualities are to the respondent, whether he/she would like to possess them, and so on. The second scale shows to what extent these qualities are manifested in helping behavior - in volunteering. The original English version of the questionnaire showed high reliability and validity: Cronbach's alpha = 0.73 for the Internalization scale and = 0.82 for the Symbolization scale. Confirmatory analysis confirmed the theoretical model of the questionnaire authors: chi-square (43, N = 347) = 205.96, p < 0.001, RMSR = 0.04, GFI = 0.87, CFI = 0.87, NFI = 0.84 [14].

It is worth mentioning the features of the validation of the original version of the questionnaire: nomological validity was tested with the help of the scale of propensity to approve the use of socially disapproved behavior to achieve goals; the scale of religiosity; the scale of sympathy for helping those in need; the scale of revenge for harm done; Rest's defining issues test. Discriminant validity was tested with the Rosenberg self-esteem scale; locus of control; social anxiety: there were no correlations of the original version of the questionnaire with these variables. Test-retest reliability, for the Internalization and Symbolization scales were 0.49 and 0.71, respectively, in the time interval from 4 to 6 weeks (N=148). All the validation activities conducted on the questionnaire led the authors to conclude that moral identity is different from all the measured constructs, not stable over time due to being influenced by situations or personality traits. The strength of this questionnaire is that the authors used it to show the relationship between the importance of moral identity and moral behavior: the measurement instrument was shown to be internally consistent, stable in its basic factor structure, constructively valid, and predictive of psychological and behavioral outcomes [14].

Methodology and Methods 

In our study on the adaptation of the moral identity questionnaire, 303 respondents (mean age 19, SD = 2.03; 144 of them were girls) took part in the questionnaire and were given forms with instructions and a form for answering the questions of the method. Some respondents (134) completed the questionnaire online. After 6 weeks, 80 people completed the retest of the moral identity questionnaire and the questionnaires "Justice-Care" [8] and self-esteem (M. Rosenberg) to check discriminant and construct validity, according to the validation of the original version of the questionnaire [14]. Based on the fact that "the maximum correspondence between moral judgment and behavior is observed in people at the end of the second and third levels of moral development" [2, P.62-63], we assume to reveal correlations of moral identity with the conventional and postconventional level of moral development according to L.Kohlberg and with such stages of moral development according to K.Gilligan and N.Eisenberg as self-sacrifice and self-respect (according to the questionnaire of V.S.Molchanov [8]). We also assumed, following the authors of the original version of the questionnaire, that the self-esteem scale (Rosenberg) should not correlate with moral identity, as these are different constructs [14]

The questionnaire was first translated into Russian and then into English via Yandex-translator. No differences were found between the English translation and the original English version of the questionnaire.

Also, in addition, to check convergent validity, 158 people completed the scales of Cooperation and Integrity ("NEO-FFI" - a shortened version of the questionnaire "NEO PI-R" by P. Costa and R. Makrae, adapted by V. Orl, I. Senin. Eagle, I. Senin), the "Tolerance Index" questionnaire (G. Soldatova et al.); BRAQ-24 (A. Bass and M. Perry adapted by S. Enikolopov, N. Tsybulsky). Here we assumed that helping behavior will be negatively related to aggression and positively to cooperation, and the internalization of moral traits will be positively related to tolerance and negatively to hostility.

 Statistical processing was performed in the program jamovi 2.3.24 using descriptive statistics, correlation, confirmatory factor analysis, reliability analysis using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald’s ω, and parametric comparisons using Student's T-test. Since the questionnaire already has a known structure, we refused to conduct exploratory analysis.

Results of the study and their discussion

Descriptive statistics of the whole sample and by gender are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics of moral identity questionnaire scales of the whole sample (N=303)

The assessment of the normality of the distribution of scales was carried out on the basis of asymmetry and kurtosis. The Internalization scale has a non-normal distribution as the asymmetry value is greater than the critical value of ±0.230 for a sample of 300 people, the Symbolization scale has a normal distribution with the kurtosis values of both scales within the critical values of ±0.818.

Retest reliability

According to the data obtained, the Spearman test-retest correlations of the moral identity questionnaire scales are significant, although not too high: for the Internalization scale rho = 0.405, p<0.001; for the Symbolization scale rho = 0.438, p < 0 .001. Here we can cite the values obtained by the authors of the original version, which were 0.49 and 0.71 for the Internalization and Symbolization scales, respectively. The authors explained that such values confirm that moral identity is not a stable trait and should not be considered stable. It can be activated depending on the situation and different contexts. Its degree of stability in different situations may be determined by the presence of comparable or equivalent stimuli that activate it or by personality traits (Aquino, Reed, 2002). Thus, the results obtained indicate an acceptable level of reliability of the Russian version of the questionnaire. Further areas of research may include identifying how a particular context influences the level of moral identity.

Assessment of the level of factor loadings of the questionnaire scales

The factor loadings were analyzed according to the distribution of statements on scales in the original version of the questionnaire. Table 2 presents the distribution of the questionnaire items by scales and the results of calculating the factor loadings of the questionnaire.

Table 2.

Factor loadings of the moral identity questionnaire (N=303)

Notation: * - reverse questions

Table 2 shows that the factor loadings are different from zero and all are significant. At the same time, items 4 and 7 of scale 1 (Internalization) have negative loadings, though small but significant. The reason for this is that they fall in the methodological factor due to their susceptibility to common effects due to the reverse direction of the wording.

As for the factor covariances of the questionnaire scales, based on the results obtained, according to which the standard score=0.780, p < 0.001, SE=0.0346, Z=22.5, we can talk about a good relationship between the questionnaire scales.

Verifying the validity of the questionnaire

The results obtained, when each scale was analyzed separately, were tested using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), which allows to analyze all the data of the questionnaire in the aggregate.

When the original author's theoretical model M1 of the questionnaire was verified by confirmatory analysis, the following consistency indices were obtained: χ² =283 with df=34, p<0.001; CFI=0.838; SRMR=0.074; RMSEA=0.156 (90% CI 0.139 lower and 0.173 upper), which indicate that the model is not fully consistent. Based on the analysis of the modification indices, we added the error covariances of statements 4 and 7 of the first factor and obtained the M2 model with the following fit indices: CFI=0.932; SRMR=0.0452; RMSEA=0.103 (90% CI 0.0852 lower and 0.121 upper); χ² =138 with df=33, p<0.001. To improve the model, we added the error covariances of statements 1 and 2 of the first factor. As a result of the improvements, the M3 model was obtained and confirmatory analysis showed a good fit of the theoretical two-factor M3 model to the original version of the questionnaire: CFI=0. 947; SRMR=0.0396; RMSEA=0.091; 90% CI 0.0737 lower and 0.110 upper); χ² =113 with df=32, p<0.001. For comparison, we performed confirmatory analysis of the single-factor model, but the model deteriorated: CFI=0.732; TLI=0.655; SRMR=0.0987; RMSEA=0.201. Thus, we adopt the M3 model (see Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Confirmatory factor analysis model of the moral identity questionnaire

Notation: F1 - the first factor, "Internalization" scale, F2 - the second factor, "Symbolization" scale; 1-10 - figures represent items of the questionnaire statements

Checking the reliability of the questionnaire

The results of Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω of the questionnaire statements, scales and the entire questionnaire are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

Cronbach's α and McDonald's ω of the questionnaire statements, scales and the whole moral identity questionnaire (N=303)

According to the obtained results of reliability analysis, the Cronbach's α coefficient of the questionnaire items is above 0.7 and that of the scales is above 0.8, which is within the reasonable range of Cronbach's α for personality test-questionnaires (Shmelev, 2013), and shows that all the scales of the questionnaire are reliable and the items perform well on the scales. McDonald's averaged total ω also has high consistency values: for the scales 0.88. The Internalization scale had the lowest consistency (α = 0.811; ω = 0.830). The Symbolization scale had higher consistency (α = 0.846; ω = 0.848). The whole questionnaire had acceptable consistency (α = 0.868; ω = 0.881).

Testing the discriminant and convergent validity of the questionnaire

Having investigated the factor structure of the questionnaire, we analyzed its convergent and discriminant validity. The results of the analysis are presented in Table 4.

Table 4.

Correlation matrix of the retest of moral identity scales with the self-esteem test (M.Rosenberg) and the Justice-Care questionnaire (S.Molchanov) (N=80).

Notation: * - p < 0 .05; **- p < 0 .01; SDI - instrumental exchange "you-to-me, I-to-you" (pre-conventional level of moral development according to L. Kohlberg; SCS - social law and order (conventional level according to L. Kohlberg); ZOS - orientation toward one’s self and self-interest (self-care - stage of moral development in C. Gilligan and N. Eisenberg); ZPR - reflexive empathic orientation (self-sacrifice - the stage of moral development in K. Gilligan and N. Eisenberg); ZPU - consideration of internalized values, protection of the rights of others (self-sacrifice - the stage of moral development in K. Gilligan and N. Eisenberg).

We assumed that moral identity will be positively correlated with the conventional and postconventional level of moral development according to L.Kohlberg and with such stages of moral development according to K.Gilligan and N.Eisenberg as self-sacrifice and self-resteem (according to V.S.Molchanov's questionnaire). The “Justice-Care” questionnaire consists of two scales named after the name of the questionnaire. The "Justice" scale includes statements on the basis of agreement with which it is possible to judge on what level of moral development according to L. Kohlberg the respondent is at. The "Care" scale includes statements corresponding to the stages of moral development according to K. Gilligan and N. Eisenberg [8]. According to the obtained results, both scales of the moral identity questionnaire are significantly positively correlated according to Spearman, although moderately, with the second level of moral development according to L. Kohlberg and the second stage of moral development according to K. Gilligan and N. Eisenberg, i.e. the significance of possessing the qualities of a moral person is consistent with the beliefs that justice is where all people obey the law and norms accepted by society and the majority, with the orientation to law and order; with empathy, understanding, sympathy, compassion for others, even, in the case of disagreements, with the attitudes of helping those in need, disregarding their own benefit [8].

Spearman correlation analysis showed modest correlations with Rosenberg's self-esteem of the Internalization scale and no correlation with the Symbolization scale. It should be noted that in the original version of the questionnaire, the Internalization scale was positively correlated with moral judgement and not correlated with self-esteem, while the Symbolization scale, on the other hand, was not correlated with moral judgement but was positively correlated with self-esteem. The correlation coefficients were low but significant. According to the authors of the questionnaire, the results obtained provide an argument in support of their assumptions that moral identity is distinct from all the constructs used in the study [14]. The results we obtained are consistent with the opinion of the authors of the questionnaire.

Next, we tested our hypotheses that the Symbolization scale would be negatively related to aggression and positively related to cooperation, and that the Internalization scale would be positively related to tolerance and negatively related to hostility. The results of the additional convergent validity test are presented in Table 5.

Table 5.

Correlation Matrix of Convergent Validity (N=158)

Notation: * p < .05, *** p < .001

Significant correlations of the Internalization scale with personality traits were revealed: Tolerance as a trait, Cooperation, Integrity, as well as negative correlations with Aggression and Hostility. The Symbolization scale is significantly, though moderately, positively correlated with Cooperation and Integrity and negatively with Aggression.

To explain these results, let us turn to the scales of the used questionnaires. In the moral identity questionnaire, the Internalization scale diagnoses how important for respondents such qualities characteristic of a moral person as caring; compassionate; fair; friendly; generous; helpful; hardworking; honest; kind are and whether they want to possess them; the Symbolization scale shows to what extent these qualities are manifested in helping behavior - in volunteering. Tolerance as a personality trait is formed as a set of personality traits, attitudes and beliefs that largely determine a person's attitude to the surrounding world, i.e. not to take revenge, not to respond with rudeness to rudeness, to be tolerant to other people [10], which is combined with such characteristics of a moral person as compassionate, friendly, helping, kind. High scores on the Cooperation scale characterize responsiveness, friendliness, sensitivity and softheartedness, the ability to help others; at the opposite pole are people indifferent to the suffering of others, self-centered and thinking only of their own good [9]. Cooperation is a personality trait responsible for prosocial behavior and behavior that benefits others, reflecting the essential characteristics not only of a prosocial individual, but also of a moral one. The scores of the Integrity variable are high in those who are motivated, disciplined, productive and responsible [9], which is also reflected in such characteristics of a moral person as fair and hardworking. It is easy to see that for respondents for whom it is important to possess the qualities of a moral person, and morality is a significant component for their self-identification [14], high values of moral identity are combined with such personality traits as Tolerance, Cooperation, and Integrity.

The obtained results confirm the hypotheses put forward. Clarifying the assumptions of the authors of the original version of the questionnaire about what personality traits can contribute to the stability of moral identity, in our opinion, they may be tolerance, cooperation and integrity. It can be hypothesized that a high moral identity, combined with reliability, responsibility, tolerance, empathy for others, and a desire for cooperation, is stable and can be manifested in all situations and contexts. Testing this hypothesis will be the focus of our future research.

Gender differences

Gender differences in moral identity are presented in Figures 1 and 2. Using Welch's T-criterion, differences were revealed: the male part of the sample has a higher level of Internalization compared to the female part of the sample: t(268)=-2.590, p=0.01, d = -0.300 (by Mann-Whitney, U=9876, p=0.039, r=0.13). Descriptive statistics are presented in Table 6. This fact means that for young men it is more significant to possess the qualities of a moral person, for their self-identification morality is more important than for women. Within the framework of social identity theory, moral identity is one of the possible components of a person's social self-schema [14]. On this basis, another component of social identity may be more significant for young women. It is characteristic that on the Symbolization scale there are no differences by gender and young women do not differ from men in terms of helping others in the form of volunteering. The results are presented in Fig. 2 and 3.

Fig. 2. Differences in the mean of the internalization scale in young men and women

Fig.3. Differences in the mean of the symbolization scale in young men and women

Table 6.

Descriptive statistics of the scales of the moral identity questionnaire in the male and female part of the sample

Findings and Conclusion

 The results of the conducted psychometric analysis confirm the suitability of the adapted Russian version of the Moral Identity Questionnaire. The advantage of the questionnaire is its compactness and low labor intensity in comparison with existing methods of diagnostics of moral judgments. The identified two-factor structure of the adapted version corresponds to the theoretical provisions of the original version of the questionnaire and includes the scales "Internalization" and "Symbolization".

An important result of the study is the discovered relationship between the components of the moral identity questionnaire and such traits of the Big Five as Integrity and Cooperation, as well as Aggression. According to the authors of the original version of the questionnaire, moral identity is not stable and is subject to activation depending on the situation in which the subject finds himself. Its stability is determined by personality traits [14]. We can hypothesize that the stability of moral identity may be mediated by traits such as tolerance, integrity, and cooperation. Subsequent work may seek to investigate the relationship of personality traits and moral identity in different socio-political settings, and with malevolent creativity.

According to the results of the study, we came to the following conclusions: confirmatory analysis confirmed the two-factor model of the original questionnaire; the reliability of the questionnaire is high; convergent validity is confirmed; the retest is modest, but only confirms the assumptions of the authors of the questionnaire about the situational nature of moral identity. According to the already available results, we can say that the questionnaire can be used for research purposes, as well as in the assessment, monitoring and correction of the moral and psychological state of older adolescents and young people.

[1] The presented list of characteristics is consistent with the implicit representations of the Russian sample about decency as a moral characteristic of a person, obtained in the study by M.I. Volovikova and A.L. Zhuravlev [1].

1. Volovikova M.I., Zhuravlev A.L. Kharakteristiki nravstvennoi elity i sovremennye predstavleniya o poryadochnom cheloveke [Characteristics of the moral elite and modern ideas about a decent person]. Izv. Sarat. un-ta. Nov. ser. Ser. Akmeologiya obrazovaniya. Psikhologiya razvitiya [Izv. Sarat. university New ser. Ser. Acmeology of education. Developmental psychology], 2018. Vol. 7, vyp. 1(25), pp. 44–48. DOI:10.18500/2304-9790-2018-7-1-44-48 (In Russ.).
2. Gulevich O.A. Stadii moral'noi sotsializatsii [Stages of moral socialization]. In A.L. Zhuravlev, A.V. Yurevich (eds.). Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya nravstvennosti [Psychological studies of morality]. Moscow: IP RAN, 2013, pp. 52–66. (In Russ.).
3. Kozlova M.A. Moral' kak prediktor individual'nogo povedeniya: perspektivy integratsii personologicheskogo i sotsial'no-psikhologicheskogo podkhodov [Morality as a predictor of individual behavior: prospects for the integration of personological and socio-psychological approaches]. Vestnik Pravoslavnogo Svyato-Tikhonovskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta. Seriya 4: Pedagogika. Psikhologiya [Bulletin of the Orthodox St. Tikhon Humanitarian University. Series 4: Pedagogy. Psychology], Vol. 4, no. 3 (34), pp. 133–147. (In Russ.).
4. Meshkova N.V. Interrelation of Malevolent Creativity and Values in Adolescents with Different Levels of Aggression [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, Vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 77–87. DOI:10.17759/psyedu.2018100207 (In Russ.).
5. Meshkova N.V. Social Creativity and Context: Perspectives of Research [Elektronnyi resurs]. Sovremennaia zarubezhnaia psikhologiia [Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology], Vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 100–108. DOI:10.17759/jmfp.2023120111 (In Russ.).
6. Meshkova N.V., Debolsky M.G., Enikolopov S.N., Maslenkov A.A. Features of сreativity in social interaction among convicts who have committed self-serving and aggressively violent crimes [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psikhologiya i pravo = Psychology and Law, Vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 147–163. DOI:10.17759/psylaw.2018080111 (In Russ.).
7. Meshkova N.V., Enikolopov S.N., Zharinova Ju.I., Mukovnina D.D. On the Relationship of Types of Social Creativity with Moral Identity and Tolerance. Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta. Seriya 14. Psikhologiya [Moscow University Psychology Bulletin], Vol. 4, pp. 159–178. DOI:10.11621/vsp.2022.04.07 (In Russ.).
8. Molchanov S.V., Markina O.S. Moral Orientation Dynamics in Adolescence and Youth [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie = Psychological Science and Education, 2014. Vol. 6, no. 4. Available at: http://psyedu.ru/journal/2014/4/Molchanov_Markina.phtml (Accessed 01.07.2023). (In Russ.).
9. Orel V.E., Senin I.G. Questionnaire NEO PI R. Yaroslavl: Publ. ”Psychodiagnostics”, 2004. 33 p. (In Russ.).
10. Soldatova G.U., Kravtsova O.A., Khulaev O.E., Shaigerova L.A. Psikhodiagnostika tolerantnosti [Psychodiagnostics of tolerance]. In Soldatova G.U., Shaigerova L.A. (eds.). Psikhologi o migrantakh i migratsii v Rossii: inf.-analit byulleten’ [Psychologists about migrants and migration in Russia: information-analyst bulletin]. Moscow: Smysl, 2002, no. 4, pp. 59– (In Russ.).
11. Khvostov A.A. Diagnostika moral'nogo soznaniya v zarubezhnykh issledovaniya [Diagnostics of moral consciousness in foreign studies]. Razvitie lichnosti [Development of personality], 2016. Vol. 3, pp. 113–138. (In Russ.).
12. Khvostov A.A. Moral'noe soznanie v zarubezhnykh issledovaniyakh [Moral consciousness in foreign studies]. Razvitie lichnosti [Development of personality], 2017. Vol. 1, pp. 94–126. (In Russ.).
13. Shmelev A.G. Prakticheskaya testologiya. Testirovanie v obrazovanii, prikladnoi psikhologii iupravlenii personalom [Practical Testology. Testing in Education, applied psychology and humanresources management]. Moscow: IPTs “Maska”, 2013. (In Russ.).
14. Aquino K.F., Reed A. The Self-importance of Moral Identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002. Vol. 83(6), pp. 1423–1440.
15. Gong Q. The relationship between negative creativity and moral personality. Master, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, 2013. URL: http://202.119.108.211/lunwen/list.asp?id=29472 (Accessed 06.07.2023).
16. Lee S.A., Dow G.T. Malevolent creativity: does personality influence malicious divergent thinking? Creativity Research Journal, 2011. Vol. 23(2), pp. 73–82.
17. Liu C., Shen W.B., Luo J. Positive association between creativity and morality: evidence from cognitive neuroscience. Journal of Nanjing Normal University, 2014. Vol. 4, pp. 104–115.
18. Mai K.M., Ellis A.P., Welsh D.T. The gray side of creativity: Exploring the role of activation in the link between creative personality and unethical behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2015. Vol. 60, pp. 76–85.
19. Niepel C., Mustafić M., Greiff S., Roberts R.D. The dark side of creativity revisited: is students’ creativity associated with subsequent decreases in their ethical decision making? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2015. Vol. 18, pp. 43–52.
20. Reynolds S.J., Ceranic T.L. The Effects of Moral Judgment and Moral Identity on Moral Behavior: An Empirical Examination of the Moral Individual. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2007. Vol. 92, no. 6, pp. 1610–1624.
21. Runco M.A. The continuous nature of moral creativity. In Cross T., Ambrose D. (eds.). Morality, ethics, and gifted minds. New York: Springer U., 2009, pp. 105–115.
22. Shen W. et al. A Theoretical and Critical Examination on the Relationship between Creativity and Morality. Curr Psychol. 2019. Vol. 38, pp. 469–485.
23. Wang Y.Q., Si J.W. The linkage between puplis' creativity personality and dishonesty in junior school: The distinct roles of explicit and implicit self-esteem. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2014. Vol. 12(2), pp. 161–166.