Differences by gender in the moral reasoning, personal values and value types of accounting majors: a study.

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to examine the differences in moral reasoning, personal values and value types of accounting majors based on gender, and the relationship between moral reasoning and personal values or value types. The research was conducted by employing two well-established and widely used tools: the Defining Issues Test developed by James Rest and the Schwartz Values Questionnaire. The results indicate that there are no statistically significant differences in the level of moral reasoning of accounting majors based on gender. In addition, there are few significant differences in values or value types based on gender, except for a greater concern on the part of female students for self-direction and equality. Overall, accounting majors give the highest importance to friendships and family relationships, to health, and to honesty. They have a high regard for self-respect, intelligence, capability, and success, as well as for freedom, responsibility, and the enjoyment of life but demonstrate a lack of societal interest overall. Finally, the results also show that the value type, tradition, is a predictor of the level of moral reasoning and that there is a link between personal value types and the level of moral reasoning.

Keywords: Personal Values; Moral Reasoning; Gender; Accounting Majors

1. INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to investigate the moral reasoning, personal values and value types of students majoring in accounting. The specific objectives are to both test for any differences in personal values, value types and moral reasoning based on gender and examine which value types are predictors for the moral reasoning of accounting majors. Recent corporate scandals and accounting irregularities dramatically underscore the importance of ethical considerations in the accounting profession and the business world. In response to increased concern about the ethical accountability of practicing accountants, this timely research provides preliminary indications the level of moral reasoning and personal values of Canadian students aspiring to this profession.

2. THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT AND LITERATURE REVIEW

According to prominent theorists, moral behaviour is much influenced by the level of cognitive moral development and by personal values. Kohlberg (1964) studied the cognitive processes used by individuals in determining right actions from wrong actions. He defined six stages of ethical development, ranging from an initial focus upon obedience and punishment as the basis of one's ethical thought processes to a mature reflection on the basis of personally held ethical principles In the Kohlberg model, each of the stages is viewed as qualitatively higher than the previous stages in terms of ethical reasoning. Stage 1 and stage 2 belong to the pre-conventional level, characterized by the principle of self-interest and the ethics of convenience. An individual at stage 3 does what is expected by the group while in stage 4, the individual obeys civic and/or religious laws, rules and regulations, and professional codes because he or she believes in the importance of obeying such laws, not just for the acceptance by peer groups. The last two stages 5 and 6 belong to the Post-conventional level, where the individual acts out of the ethics of conviction. At stage 5, the individual has achieved the ethics of conviction and acts according to the ethics of some high-order ethical principle such as utilitarianism. In the final stage 6, the individual follows the ethics of unwritten global ethical principles, such as the principles of justice, duties, and equal human rights.

Rest argued that moral judgment is "the process by which a person arrives at a judgment of what is a moral thing to do in a moral dilemma" (Guide to Defining Issues Test, p. 18). He proposed three other components in addition to moral cognition or judgment that affect the decisions made and actions taken by persons. They are moral sensitivity, motivation, and character encompassing respectively the awareness of the effect of one's actions upon others, the importance given to moral values, and strength of conviction and courage (Rest and Narvaez, 1994). Refining Kohlberg's work, Rest (1979), together with his colleagues at the University of Minnesota developed the Defining Issues Test (DIT), to provide an accurate measure of the level of moral reasoning. The DIT presents participants with a series of dilemmas and possible responses. The output of the DIT is a continuous variable, the "P" (Principled) score, indicating the level of moral reasoning according to which participants function. Since its inception in 1979, the DIT test has been rigorously tested and is considered to be a reliable and valid measure worldwide (e.g., Ponemon and Gabhart, 1993; Ziegenfuss, 1999).

Jeffrey (1993) argued that the study of the ethical reasoning of accountants should begin with the study of accounting students. She found that seniors in accounting had significantly higher "P" scores than seniors with non-accounting business majors and seniors in liberal arts. On the other hand, St. Pierre et al. (1990) found no significant difference in the "P" scores of accounting majors and other business disciplines included in their study. Bernardi and Arnold (1997) argued that because female accountants seem to be motivated by achieving fulfilling careers rather than "the attainment of higher status rewards," female auditors may focus on and emphasize the creative and autonomous aspects of the work environment that enable moral development. Some studies (e.g. Bernardi and Arnold, 1997; Etherington and Schulting, 1995) report that females scored higher than males, other studies (e.g. Ponemon and Gabhart, 1993; Tsui, 1996) have not reported comparable differences in scores. Abdolmohammadi, Gabhart, and Reeves (1997) found that courses in business ethics resulted in a significant increase in P scores for male, though not female students. These inconclusive studies indicate that program of study, gender, and education in ethics may or may not interact to improve ethical reasoning and behavior.

Ziegenfuss (1999) found no statistically significant differences in the personal ethical philosophies of students at varying stages in their education (from to freshmen to seniors), implying that the current accounting curricula did not encourage accounting students to progress to the same level of moral development as other college graduates. On the other hand, he found statistically significant differences in the personal ethical philosophies of accounting students and practitioners and noted that the personal ethical philosophies were the greatest determinants of personal behavior. Ziegenfuss concluded that the work experience had a more profound impact upon the accountants' personal philosophies, especially during the first years of their professional lives, than their previous collegiate experience. In their study, however, Bay and Greenberg (2001) found a problematic discrepancy between high P scores and actual ethical behavior among women respondents.

There is a substantial amount of research on the moral reasoning of accounting students in the United States (e.g. Armstrong, 1987; Jeffrey, 1993; St. Pierre et al., 1990), but few Canadian studies have investigated the cognitive moral development of Canadian accounting students. Thorne, (1999) reported both that the moral development of a sample of Canadian accounting students was positively associated with years of education and that female students had statistically higher P-scores than male students, echoing some U.S. studies. Thorne (1999) concluded more Canadian research was needed.

Lan, McMahon, King and Rieger (2003) analyzed the DIT2 (the recent version of the DIT) responses of 127 Canadian undergraduate students (consisting of 51 third and fourth year business undergraduates, 31 senior liberal arts students and 45 beginning students in nursing) and 29 MBA students at the University of Windsor. They reported that the level of formal education was a significant predictor of the DIT2 "P" (Principled) score, which is an indicator of the level of moral reasoning. Gender, political views and field of study did not have a significant effect on the level of moral reasoning. This extension targets personal values, which influence personal ethical philosophies and moral reasoning.

Although there is no universal definition of the concept of values, it is generally agreed that an individual's behavior is shaped by his/her personal values. Jones (1991) observed the likelihood that individuals will engage in unethical behavior depends partly upon the personal values motivating them to evaluate their actions. Feather (1988) determined that personal values are at the core of an individual's personality and influence the individual's behavior or characteristics such as attitude, evaluation, judgments, decisions, commitment, and satisfaction. Williams (1970) argued that value systems (types) are useful for explaining behavior.

Schwartz (1992) developed a personal values questionnaire in which he identified 56 values and 10 value types, derived from a combination of single values (see Appendix). For each of the value types, namely, achievement, benevolence, conformity, hedonism, power, security, self-direction, stimulation, tradition and universal, there are associated value concepts. The Schwartz questionnaire provides an extensive coverage and analysis of values and is the most widely used instrument for measuring personal values (Eliason and Schubot, 1995). Using Schwartz personal values questionnaire, Giacomino and Akers (1998) reported significant differences in values and value types between accounting and non-accounting majors and between female and male students. Hassan, Dhanani and Witherspoon (2002) reported that accounting students placed the highest importance on the value type "achievement," the lowest importance on "power", and minor differences in the value types of accounting students in terms of gender and age. Tsalikis and Ortiz-Buonafina (1990) reported that both male and female business students have similar ethical beliefs and use somewhat similar processes to evaluate ethical situations. Patterson and Kim (1991) reported that women are both less willing to compromise their values in order to get ahead, and less likely to engage in deviant behaviors at work such as employee theft and time theft.

3. RESEARCH HYPOTHESES

While noting that the research findings of the US studies may not be quite applicable in a Canadian setting and that some of the empirical results are not conclusive, we tested the following hypotheses, which, in general, tend to be supported by the literature on moral reasoning, personal values and value types:

H1: Female and male accounting majors exhibit no difference in their level of moral reasoning.

H2: Female and male accounting majors exhibit no difference in their personal values.

H3: Female and male accounting majors exhibit no difference in value types.

H4: Moral reasoning and value types are related for accounting majors.

For hypothesis 4, we expect that DIT2 P scores for the respondents to be positively associated with the value types Universal, Benevolence and Self-Direction as high P scores indicate that the individuals function at the higher stage (Post-Conventional) level of moral reasoning, act out of the ethics of conviction and follow some high-order global ethical principles such as principles of justice and equal human rights.

4. METHODOLOGY

The instruments used for this research are the Defining Issues Test 2 (DIT2) and the Schwartz Values Questionnaire (SVQ). The DIT2 test is a pencil and paper questionnaire containing 5 ethical dilemmas. For each, various issues are outlined and the respondents asked to rate and rank the issues in terms of importance in making their decisions. The SVQ consists of 56 individual values, which are rated in importance by each of the responding student. Respondents are asked to circle a number on a scale of -1 to 7 that best describes the importance of each value as a guiding principle in the respondent's life. Data was also gathered about age, gender, level of education undergraduate major, years of full-time work experience, political conviction, and whether the respondents had taken an ethics course.

The DIT2 reports Development Indices, which include moral schema scores and the N2 Scores. Three moral schema scores are provided for each respondent: 1) the Personal Interest Schema Score, which represents the proportion of items selected that appeal to Stage 2 and Stage 3 considerations; 2) the Norms Schema Score, which indicates the proportion of items selected that appeal to Stage 4 considerations and 3) the Post-conventional Schema Score, which represents the proportion of items selected that appeal to Stage 5 and Stage 6 considerations.

The P score is the sum of scores from Stages 5 and 6, converted to a percent. It is interpreted as the extent to which a person prefers Post-conventional moral thinking to the less developed levels of moral thinking.

The N2 index indicates the extent to which an individual is acquiring more sophisticated moral thinking and also gaining clarity about ideas that should be rejected for their simplistic or biased solutions. Thus it is the degree to which Post-conventional items are prioritized and the degree to which Personal interest items (lower stage items) receive lower ratings than the ratings given to Post conventional items higher stage items).

Accounting majors (recruited from those taking the advanced accounting courses and a fourth year business strategy course) at the University of Windsor were invited to participate in the study. A package containing the DIT2 test, the SVQ, and a covering letter from the researchers were given to the students. Given the length of the tests (approximately 1 hour), the students were asked to complete the questionnaires at home and respondents were paid an honorarium of $10 as compensation for the time spent. A total of 80 responses were received from accounting majors. Once the DIT2 tests were completed, they were coded and sent to the University of Minnesota Centre for the Study of Ethical Development for initial statistical analysis. The DIT2 scoring procedure calculates an M (meaningless) score and performs a consistency test on the respondents' questionnaires; subjects who failed these two tests are purged from the sample. 12 subjects were purged from the sample of accounting students as they failed the DIT2 consistency test and another two were excluded from the sample because their Schwartz values survey instruments were incompletely filled, resulting in a usable sample of 66.

5. RESULTS

Table 1 presents information about the mean age, gender distribution, educational level, political views and primary language of accounting majors in the usable sample of 66 respondents.

The students ranged in age from 20 to 41 years, and in educational level from junior to graduate student, with a mean age slightly over 24 years and the educational level that of a senior. Consequently, they represent a good cross-section of upper accounting students. 27 were male and 48 listed English as their primary language. The accounting majors had political views that were slightly more liberal than conservative on average.

Tables 2 and 3 report the means and standard deviations for the moral schema scores and the N2Score of accounting majors for the entire sample and by gender, respectively. As can be seen from Table 2, the means of the scores for the accounting majors were higher for the post conventional category (33.04) than for the maintaining norms category (32.2) and personal interest category (28.58). Table 3 shows that female accounting majors have higher P-Scores than male accounting majors (33.87 to 31.85).

T-tests reported in Table 4 indicate, however, that the differences in the means of the male and female accounting majors were not statistically significant. The results support H1, which states that the level of moral reasoning of female accounting majors does not differ from that of male accounting majors.

Tables 5-7 show the results for the Schwartz Values Survey Questionnaire, while Table 8 indicates a comparison of the results of the two tests.

Table 5 indicates the 10 highest and 10 lowest rankings of the 56 values for all participants, male and female. For senior accounting students, taken as a whole, True Friendship, Family Security, and Health, were rated the three most important values, with Honesty a very close fourth value. At the bottom of the scale in descending order were: Moderate, Unity with Nature, Social Power, and Detachment. Daring, Accepting My Portion in Life, and Devout, were all ranked 50th.

Table 6 identifies the value differences between male and female accounting majors that may be considered significant. These differences fall largely within the middle range of values, those considered neither highest nor lowest in importance. Of the differences in values significant at the 5% level, Choosing Own Goals was rated 8th by females and only 22nd by males. Equality, Inner Harmony, and World at Peace were assessed as more important by female accounting majors. Three other values were rated significantly different at the 10% level, namely Independent, Daring, and Accepting My portion in Life. Of these three, Independent was rated 13th by the female accounting majors and 21st by the male accounting majors.

Table 7 indicates the difference by gender in Value Types, the 10 value clusters or sets into which associated values are grouped. While there are differences between male and female students, none is significant at the 5% level, with Hedonism ranked highest and Power ranked lowest for each group. Comparing Tables 6 and 7, two values within the Universal value type (Equality and World at Peace) one each in the Self-Direction value type (Choosing Own Goals) and the Tradition value-type (Moderate) were ranked significantly higher by females (p< .05).

Table 8 shows the results of a regression analysis with the DIT2 P scores as dependent variable and the value types as independent variables, for all accounting majors. Only the Tradition value type was a significant predictor at the 5% level of significance. The negative value of the standardized coefficient (beta of -0.438) indicates that those who rank highly the Tradition value type score lower on the DIT P-scores. The beta for the Self-direction value type (significant at the 10% level) is positive (0.411), suggesting a positive relationship between this value type and the P-Scores of the accounting majors.

6. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The results supported (H1) that the level of moral reasoning among female accounting majors does not differ from that of male accounting majors with no statistically significant difference between males and females on the Post Conventional scores. These results corroborate those of Lan et. al (2003) but not of Thorne (1999) reflecting the inconclusive nature of results from earlier studies in the U.S. The results also supported the second hypothesis (H2) that values would not differ among female and male accounting majors, with no statistically significant difference for those values held to be most important and those held to be least important. For the mid range values, however, there are significant differences, for 5 at the 5% level and an additional 3 at the 10% level. The hypothesis holds true, however, for 48 of 56 values at both significance levels, and for 51 of 56 values when considering only those at the 5% level of significance.

The significant differences involve a higher ranking by females of such values as Choosing Own Goals, Independent, Equality, Inner Harmony, and World Peace. These findings may reflect the recent entry of large numbers of women into the profession, the struggles and concerns involved in asserting and finding their place in the business and professional world, and their desire to do so in a way that does not sacrifice other important values.

What is striking is the prime importance assigned to the values True Friendship, Family Security, and Healthy, with Honest ranked a close fourth most important value (actually ranked tied for second by men and fourth for women). On the other hand, involvement in or concern for the larger society and world did not seem to be a priority among these accounting majors. These findings support the results of Giacomino and Akers (1998), who found that Family Security, Honest, and True Friendship were most highly valued by accounting students, and social concerns of lesser import. Conversely, however, the values differing significantly (p<.05) between male and female accounting students, differed from those in this study. Of the 3 values given at least median importance in Giacomino and Akers study, Mature Love and Broadminded were ranked more highly by female accounting students, and Politeness was viewed as more important by male accounting students.

The results supported Hypothesis 3 (H3) that value types would not differ among female and male accounting majors with no statistically significant differences in value at the 5% level. While we have noted that some significant differences in individual values do hold true, when these are situated within sets or systems of values, the differences diminish.

For both male and female respondents, Hedonism, a value type that esteems pleasure and the enjoyment of life, is ranked most highly, with Achievement and Benevolence greatly valued as well. In both cases, Tradition and Power are least regarded. Once again, personal, relational, and work satisfaction stand out as priorities, while reverence for past authority and dominance over others hold little sway. Achievement, Benevolence, and Hedonism were also ranked highly, though not identically, in the study by Giacomino and Akers (1998), with Tradition and Power similarly at the bottom of the scale of value types. For the latter study, there are statistically significant differences between male and female accounting students, with men ranking Conformity and Power higher than women, although they hold the same positions of 5th and 10th respectively among the 10 value types.

The results failed to support Hypothesis 4 (H4) of an association between moral reasoning and value types for accounting majors. It was found, however, that the value type, Tradition, which was not highly regarded, did have a significant negative correlation with P scores. The sample size of this study, however, is relatively small. In addition, the sample is from one university, although the students are diverse in social and linguistic background, reflecting the multiculturalism of the nation. Another limitation is that the values may not be the ones that the students have internalised or genuinely believe in.

7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Within the limits of this study valuable findings have been reported. First, no significant difference was found in the level of moral reasoning between male and female accounting majors. The P scores of a substantial majority indicated that they have progressed beyond the lowest or personal interest level to the Conventional or Post Conventional level. Second, male and female accounting majors share similar values and value types, with only 5 of 58 values significantly different at the 5% level. These differences lie chiefly in the middle range values, rather than those which are considered be most and least important in directing one's life. Third, the high priority given to friendship and family security, as well as to honesty, responsibility, and success in the workplace, are notable. They suggest a strong concern to blend harmoniously personal life and the demands of worthwhile employment, without sacrificing one to the other. As these questionnaires have been completed largely by full-time students, they express perhaps the personal and professional hopes of those about to enter full-time employment. This is one of the factors that may also account for the combination of their relatively good level of moral reasoning with their apparent lack of real interest and involvement in wider social issues.

The findings of this study demonstrate a link between personal value types and the level of moral development. These research results could encourage potential employers to assess the extent to which they take into account the concern of female employees for equality and recognition in the workplace, and, while expecting solid professional commitment, to recognize as well the importance given by these younger employees to personal friendships, family life, and the enjoyment of life, in addition, perhaps, to evoking in them a wider social awareness and concern. Educational institutions and accounting firms may be able to increase further the level of moral reasoning of accounting majors by increasing self-awareness and developing values conducive to ethical behaviour and high level of moral reasoning.

Thus, this project is relevant to the accounting profession and useful to educators and institutions as well. Further research could delve into the development of and connection between personal values, value types and moral reasoning. Such studies might consider differences in levels of moral reasoning and changes in values as students both pass through various stages of undergraduate and graduate education, and as business professionals and accounting practitioners progress in their careers. Longitudinal studies would enable researchers to record the values of students and professionals at corresponding stages in their academic and employment lives, and discern the possible correlations between personally held values and sets of values and level of moral reasoning.

9. APPENDIX VALUE TYPES (SCHWARTZ & SAGIV STUDY) VALUES FOR EACH TYPE SHOWN IN PARENTHESES

ACHIEVEMENT: Personal success through demonstrating competence according to social standards. (Successful, Capable, Ambitious, Influential)

BENEVOLENCE: Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in frequent personal contact. (Helpful, Honest, Forgiving, Loyal, Responsible)

CONFORMITY: Restraint of actions, inclinations, and impulses likely to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms. (Politeness, Obedient, Self-Discipline, Honoring Parents and Elders)

HEDONISM: Pleasure and sensuous gratification for oneself. (Pleasure, Enjoying Life)

POWER; Social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources. (Social Power, Authority, Wealth)

SECURITY: Safety, harmony and stability of society, of relationships, and of self. (Family SecuritY, National Security, Social Order, Clean, Reciprocation of Favors)

SELF-DIRECTION: Independent thought and action-choosing, creating, exploring. (Creativity, Freedom, Independent, Curious, Choosing Own Goals)

STIMULATION: Excitement, novelty, and challenge of life. (Daring, A Varied Life, and Exciting Life)

TRADITION: Respect, commitment, and acceptance of the customs and ideas that traditional culture or religion impose of the self. (Humble, Accepting My Part in Life, Devout, Respect for Tradition, Moderate)

UNIVERSAL: Understanding, appreciation, tolerance and protection for the welfare of all people and for nature. (Broadminded, Wisdom, Social Justice, Equality, A World at Peace, A World of Beauty, Unity with Nature, Protecting the Environment)

Source: Giacomino, D. and Akers, M. 1998. Exhibit 1, p 571

8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding provided for this research by both the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants and the Canadian Academic Accounting Association.

REFERENCES

Abdolmohammadi, M.J., Gabhart, D.R., and Reeves, M.F., "Ethical Cognition of Business Students Individually and in Groups", Journal of Business Ethics, Vol., 16 (16), (1997), 1717-1725

Armstrong, M.B., Moral Development and Accounting Education. Journal of Accounting Education (Spring), Vol., 5 (1), 1987, 27-43.

Bay, D.and Greenberg, R., "The Relationship of the DIT and Behavior: A Replication", Issues in Accounting Education Vol., 16 (3), 2001,367-380.

Bernardi R. A. and Arnold, D. F., "An Examination of Moral Development within Public Accounting by Gender, Staff level, and Firm", Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol., 14 (4), 1997, 653-668

Eliason, B. C. and Schubot, D. B. , Personal values of exemplary physicians: Implications for professional satisfaction in family medicine", The Journal of Family Practice, Vol., 41 (3), 1995, 251-256.

Etherington, L.D. and Shulting, L., "Ethical Development of Accountants", Research on Accounting Ethics, Vol., 1, 1995, 235-51.

Feather, N., "From values to actions: Recent application of the expectancy-value model", Journal of Psychology, Vol., 40, 1988, 105-24.

Giacomino, D. and Akers, M., 1998. "An examination of the differences between personal values and the value types of female and male accounting and nonaccounting majors", Issues in Accounting Education, Vol., 13: 565-84.

Jeffrey, C., "Ethical development of accounting students, non-accounting business students, and liberal arts students", Issues in Accounting Education, Vol., 8 (1), 1993, 86-96

Jones, T., "Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model. Academy of Management Review, Vol., 79, 1991, 97-116

Hassan, M., Dhanani, K. and Witherspoon, A., "Personal values of accounting students: empirical study", Presented at IBER Conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, 2002.

Lan, G., McMahon, S., King, N. and Rieger, F., "Moral Reasoning of Business, Nursing and Liberal Arts Students", Journal of International Business and Economics Research Vol., 1,2003, 21-31

Patterson, J. and Kim, P., The Day America Told the Truth, Prentice Hall, New York, 1991.

Ponemon L. A. and Glazer, "Accounting education and ethical development: The influence of liberal learning on students and alumni in accounting practice", Issues in Accounting Education (Fall), 1990, pp. 195-208.

Ponemon L. A. and Gabhart, D. L., "Auditors' Ethical Reasoning: A Comparison of Firms in Canada and the United States", Research Monograph No. 21, Chapter 4, Vancouver, B.C. CGA--Canada Research Foundation, 1993.

Rest J., Defining Issues Test. Minneapolis, Minn., University of Minnesota Press, 1979.

Rest J. and Narvaez, D., "Background: Theory and Research", Moral Development in the Professions, 1994, 1-26.

St Cloud University Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, www.ed.gov/offices/OPE/FIPSE/Lessonsll/stcloud.html, 1993.

St Pierre K., Nelson E. and Gabin, A. , "A study of the ethical development of accounting majors in relation to the other business and nonbusiness disciplines", Accounting Educators' Journal, Vol., 3 (1), 1990, 23-35.

Schwartz, S., "University in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical test in 20 centuries", In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Ed. M. Zanna, Vol., 25, 1992, 1-56. Orlando: Academic Press.

Thorne, L., "An Analysis of the association of demographic variables with the cognitive moral development of Canadian accounting students: an examination of the applicability of American based findings to the Canadian Context", Journal of Accounting Education, Vol., 17, 1999, 157-174.

Tsalikis, J., and Ortiz-Buonafina, M., "Ethical beliefs' differences of males and females". Journal of Business Ethics, Vol., 9 (6), 1990, 509-517

Tsui, J.S.L., "Auditor's ethical reasoning: some audit conflict and cross cultural evidence", International Journal of Accounting, Vol., 5 (1), 1996, 121-34.

Williams, R.M. Jr., "The concept of values", In International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, edited by D.L. Sills, New York, NY: Macmillan, 1968

Ziegenfuss, D. E., "Differences in Personal Ethical Philosophy Among Accounting Students and Between Accounting Students and Practitioners", Southern Business Review, Vol., 25(1), 1999, 1-13

George P.W. Lan, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, CANADA

Sharon McMahon, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, CANADA

Fritz Rieger, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, CANADA

Norm King, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, CANADA

Maureen P. Gowing, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, CANADA

Dr. George Lan, (Ph.D. Management, Queen's University, Canada) is an Associate Professor of Accounting in the Odette School of Business, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada and a member of the Certified General Accountants of Ontario. He has published in the areas of ethics, accounting education, earnings management and governance.

Dr. Sharon McMahon (Ed.D. Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan in Curriculum Development and Counselling) is an Associate Professor, Faculty of Nursing, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. Research interests and publications include health and wellness of children and families, health behavior outcomes, learner's satisfaction and nonprofit governance.

Dr. Fritz Rieger (Ph.D. in Management, McGill University, Canada) is an Associate Professor of Business Policy and Strategy at the Odette School of Business, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. He has published in the areas of ethics, organizational behavior, systems theory, modeling and culture.

Dr. Norman King (Ph.D. in Religious Studies, University of St. Michael's College, Canada) is a Full Professor (retired) in the department of Languages, Literatures and Cultures, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. He has authored and co-authored many publications in contemporary spirituality and Western religious thought and remains an active board member of the Children's Aid Society.

Dr. Maureen P. Gowing (Ph.D. Management, Queen's University, Canada) is an Assistant Professor of Accounting at the Odette school Of Business, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. She is a co-author of both a financial and managerial accounting text and has published articles on ethics, cost control, and efficacy of decision processes to establish policies rationing health care.

TABLE 1. MEAN AGE, GENDER DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATIONAL LEVEL,
POLITICAL VIEWS AND PRIMARY LANGUAGE OF ALL ACCOUNTING MAJORS

                              N           Maximum   Mean    Std.
                                                            Deviation

Age                           66   20.0        41   24.17        3.93

Gender--Female: 0;            66      0         1    0.41        0.50
Male: 1

Educational Level *           66    8.0      13.0    9.20        1.02

Political Views **            66      1         5    2.79        0.95

Language--Native English:1,   66      0         1    0.73        0.45
Non-native: 0

N represents the number of respondents.

* Codes used for Level of Education:
6 = freshman in college in bachelor degree program
7 = Sophomore
8 = Junior
9 = Senior
10 = Professional degree e.g. M.B.A
11 = Masters Degree (in academic graduate school)
12 = Doctoral degree (e.g. PhD)
13 = Other Formal Education

** Codes used for political views
1 = Very liberal
2 = somewhat liberal
3 = neither liberal nor conservative
4 = Somewhat Conservative
5 = Very conservative

TABLE 2. DIT2 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR
SCHEMA SCORES AND N2SCORE OF ALL ACCOUNTING MAJORS

Index                               N    Mean    Std. Deviation

Post Conventional Score (P-score)   66   33.04       13.85
Maintains Norms (stage 4)           66   32.20       12.40
Personal Interest (Stage 2/3)       66   28.58       11.50
N2Score                             66   30.90       14.62

TABLE 3. DIT2 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR SCHEMA
SCORES AND N2SCORE OF MALE AND FEMALE ACCOUNTING MAJORS

Index                             Group     N    Mean    Std. Deviation

PostConventional Score (Pscore)   Females   39   33.87       14.48
                                  Males     27   31.85       13.07

Maintains Norms (stage 4)         Females   39   30.64       12.83
                                  Males     27   34.44       11.61

Personal Interest (Stage2/3)      Females   39   29.09       11.87
                                  Males     27   27.85       11.13

N2SCORE                           Females   39   31.43       15.45
                                  Males     27   30.12       13.58

TABLE 4. T-TESTS FOR EQUALITY OF MEANS
OF MALE AND FEMALE ACCOUNTING MAJORS

Index                             T-test *  df     Sig.        Mean
                                                (2-tailed)  Difference

Post Conventional Score (Pscore)    -.58    64     0.57       -2.01
Maintains Norms (stage 4)           1.23    64     0.22        3.80
Personal Interest (Stage2/3)        -.43    64     0.67       -1.23
N2SCORE                             -.36    64     0.72       -1.31

* Levene tests whether the assumption that the variances
of the two groups are equal is not violated.

TABLE 5. THE TOP 10 AND LOWER 10 RANKING OF VALUES FOR ALL
ACCOUNTING MAJORS

Values                        Mean     Rank

True Friendship               5.80     1
Family Security               5.73     2
Health                        5.67     3
Honest                        5.61     4
Self Respect                  5.41     5
Enjoy Life                    5.39     6
Freedom                       5.36     7
Successful                    5.36     7
Intelligent                   5.35     9
Capable                       5.26     10
Spiritual Life                3.38     47
Respect For Tradition         3.35     48
Authority                     3.35     48
Daring                        3.08     50
Accept My Portion in Life     3.08     50
Devout                        3.08     50
Moderate                      3.02     53
Unity With Nature             2.83     54
Social Power                  2.45     55
Detachment                    2.30     56

TABLE 6. VALUE RATINGS OF ACCOUNTING MAJORS
BY GENDER WITH SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES

Values                 Group     Mean   Rank   T-test   Sig. level

Equality               Females   5.23   15     -2.14    0.04 *
                       Males     4.37   27

Inner Harmony          Females   5.08   20     -2.11    0.04 *
                       Males     4.19   32

World at Peace         Females   4.74   26     -2.61    0.01 *
                       Males     3.59   45

Moderate               Females   2.62   54     2.08     0.04 *
                       Males     3.59   45

Choosing Own Goals     Females   5.51   8      -2.64    0.01 *
                       Males     4.67   22

Independent            Females   5.26   13     -1.74    0.09 **
                       Males     4.67   21

Daring                 Females   2.74   53     1.87     0.07 **
                       Males     3.56   47

Accepting My Portion   Females   3.46   49     -1.81    0.08 **
In Life                Males     2.52   55

* Significant (2-tailed) at 5% level

** Significant (2-tailed) at 10% level

TABLE 7. DIFFERENCES IN THE VALUE TYPES OF FEMALE
AND MALE ACCOUNTING MAJORS *

Value Types        Females n = 39    Males n = 27

Achievement            4.942            4.787
Benevolence            4.954            4.933
Conformity             4.855            4.803
Hedonism               5.167            5.056
Power                  3.385            3.296
Security               4.795            4.548
Self-Direction         4.718            4.400
Stimulation            3.803            4.222
Tradition              3.308             3.23
Universal              4.263            3.949

* None significant at the 5% level.

TABLE 8. REGRESSION ANALYSIS--DEPENDENT VARIABLE
IS P-SCORES OF ENTIRE SAMPLE

Predictors       Unstandardised   Standardised   T-Statistic   P-Value
                  Coefficient     Coefficient
                                     (Beta)

Achievement              -1.394         -0.111        -0.616   0.541
Benevolence              -2.588         -0.189        -0.876   0.385
Conformity                2.643          0.208         0.958   0.342
Hedonism                 -0.534         -0.049        -0.371   0.712
Power                    -2.263         -0.221        -1.495   0.141
Security                 -1.171         -0.090        -0.471   0.639
Self-Direction            6.185          0.411         1.859   0.068 **
Stimulation               0.483          0.044         0.255   0.800
Tradition                -4.885         -0.438        -2.546   0.014 *
Universal                -2.078         -0.159        -0.685   0.496
Constant                 49.972                        4.617   0.000 *
Parameter

* Significant (2-tailed) at 5% level
N = 66
R-Square = 0.251

** Significant (2-tailed) at 10% level

Adjusted R-Square = 0.114