This study explored the theoretical assumptions postulated by Gilligan (1982) that; (a) there exists two different moral decision-making orientations, the ethic-of-justice and the ethic-of-care, (b) that these orientations are gender related and c) that the face-to-face interview is sensitive to the context of the ethic-of-care as well as the ethic-of-justice. Thirty (15 males and 15 females) African-American college seniors participated in the study. The Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) and Gilligan's interview were utilized to explore the possible relationship between sex role and moral decision-making The findings affirm (a) that there exists two distinct moral decision-making orientations; negate (b) that these orientations are gender related and affirm (c) that the face-to-face interview is sensitive to the context of the ethic-of-care as well as the ethic-of-justice. The overwhelming preference for the ethic-of-care orientation for 25 subjects with only 5 subjects preferring the ethic-of-justice was supported by the unanimous classification of androgyny for all subjects on the BSRI. An unexpected finding suggests that moral decision-making orientation may be more related to the context of moral conflict being concerned with intimate or non-intimate relationships than gender or sex role for this population
