Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
19 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Kohlbergs Theory Of Moral Development |
|
|
Hypothesis and Method |
Hypothesis- As people get older their moral beliefs develop • Longitudinal study • Followed development of same group of boys for 12 years by presenting them with hypothetical moral dilemma • Cross-cultural element as moral development in other cultures were studied |
|
Sample |
75 American boys Aged 10-16 at start of study Were followed at 3 intervals to ages 22-28 Moral development in boys of different countries, such as Britain, Canada and Turkey |
|
Key theme |
Moral Development |
|
Individual Diveristy |
Disagreement between people not due to ignorance or carelessness, but rather the difference in moral development |
|
Procedure |
• PPS presented with hypothetical moral dilemmas in form of short stories to solve • Stories used to determine each pps stage of moral reasoning for each 25 moral concepts/aspects • Aspects assessed included: ▪Motive given for rule obedience or moral action ▪The value of human life, tested by asking pps: Age 10: "Is it better to save the life of one important person or a lot of unimportant people?" Age 13,16,20,24: "Should the doctor mercy kill a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?" |
|
Procedure- Using different cultures |
• Taiwanese boys aged 10-13, asked about a story involving theft of food: "A man's wife is starving to death but the store owner won't give the man any food unless he can pay, which he can't. Should he break in and steal some food? Why?" • Young boys tested similar way in other countries |
|
Results- Motive given for rule obedience or moral action |
Stages: 1. Obey rules to avoid punishment 2. Conform to obtain rewards 3. Conform to avoid disapproval 4. Conform to avoid censure by legitimate authorities and resultant guilt 5. Conform to maintain respect of impartial spectator judging in terms of community welfare 6. Conform to avoid self-condemnation |
|
Results- value of human life |
Stages: 1. Confused with value of physical objects and based on social status/physical attributes of its possessor 2. Seen as instrumental to satisfaction of needs of its possessor/other people 3. Based on empathy/affection of family members and others towards its possessor 4. Life conceived as sacred in terms of its place in categorical moral or religious order of rights and duties 5. Valued in terms of relation to community welfare and life being a universal human right 6. Belief in sacredness of life, represents universal human value of respect for individual |
|
Overall Results |
• PPS showed progression through stages with increased age • Not all pps progressed through all stages • PPS progressed through stage one at a time and in same order • Once a pps reached a stage they either stopped or moved upwards • A child at lower stage tends to move forward when confronted with views of a child one stage further along |
|
Cross Cultural Findings |
• Taiwanese boys aged 10-13 tended to give classic stage 2 answers • In the US, by age of 16, stage 6 rarely used. At age 13, stage 3 not used • No important differences in development of moral thinking between different faiths • Middle-class children more advanced in judgement than matched lower-class children |
|
Conclusions |
• Invariable developmental sequence in an individuals moral development • Each stage comes one at a time and in same order • Middle-class and working-class children move through same sequence, but middle-class move faster and further |
|
Reliability/Validity/Ethical Considerations |
Reliability: Qualitative data decreases replicability (however offers rich detail) Validity: Cross cultural study makes it easier to generalise EC: People may feel embarrassed/discriminated for being less developed morally |
|
Link to Area |
• Development of morals in children • Impact of cultural and social factors on development |
|
Nature vs Nurture |
Nature: • Innate predetermined sequence of moral stages • Child will have to go through disregarding situation placed in Nurture: • Social factors may influence how fast we develop- cross cultural findings |
|
Individual vs Situational |
Situational: Social class effects speed/extent of moral development Individual: Development at different paces and ages People stop at different stages |
|
Reductionism |
Assumes all humans undergo same moral development in same order |
|
Similarities and Differences to Lee et al |
Similarities: • Moral development cross culturally Differences: • Longitudinal • Androcentric sample |
|
Strength and Weaknesses |
Strengths: • Provides insight into moral development over time • Generalisable results- cross cultural study • Qualitative data provides rich detail of results
Weaknesses: • Qualitative data- hard to compare/draw conclusions • Subjective • Theory can't be physically tested, explanations inferred, reduces validity • Androcentric- reduces generalisability/population validity
|