94 Chapter 4 definition. In addition, we asked two senior expert researchers in the field of professional and empirical ethics research to comment on our definition. We then adapted the definition two more times and again reached a consensus among all authors about the final definition. Development of a Questionnaire Based on the mind map with the different levels and elements of MCS (part 1 of the results), and inspired by related questionnaires from the literature, we developed the first version of the Moral Craftsmanship Questionnaire (MCSQ 1.0). The categories from our mind map formed the initial domains of this new questionnaire. To guarantee coverage of all elements of the mind map, these domains were filled with 1) items directly copied from existing questionnaires, 2) items based on and inspired by items from existing questionnaires, and 3) newly developed items. The first version contained 143 items. After an iterative process and several rounds of adaptations, with all authors independently giving feedback and reaching a consensus on item relevance and adaptations, the final version consisted of 70 items on MCS. We recorded all steps and explanations of the choices we made. To test the usability and validity of the questionnaire, we initiated ‘think-aloud interviews’, during which participants fill in the questionnaire while verbalizing their thoughts during the task execution (Mcdonald et al., 2012). We used this method with three managers/ directors and four staff members from two different prison locations, all from different professional disciplines and with different educational backgrounds. All participated voluntarily and agreed to a descriptive and audio recording of the conversation. After seven tests with prison staff, we merged the insights and again had three rounds of adaptations to improve the usability and validity of the questionnaire. Initially, the items of the MCSQ 1.0 were formulated and tested in Dutch. For this publication, all authors – after consulting a professional translator – reached a consensus on the final English version (Appendix 6).