Moral Development Flashcards
Week 10 (24 cards)
What is moral development?
What is right and wrong
* Thoughts, emotions, actions
* Varying levels of complexity
* Individual and/or social
* Situated: context matters e.g. public or private
List the 5 different theoretical approaches to moral development
Pscyhoanalytic
* Freud
Cognitive
* Piaget
* Kohlberg
Social Domain Theory (Henry)
Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura)
Explain how Freud’s psychoanalytical theory applies to moral development and what evidence shows in response to this theory.
Superego = conscience
* Parental views become internalised
* May shift from parental views across development (e.g. adolescence) but parental views remain a strong influence
* Strong superego = high guilt
* Pros: guilt may facilitate prosocial behaviour, e.g. apologising
* Cons: excessive guilt can be a risk factor for psychopathology
Key predictions: conscience stronger in boys than girls
* Due to full resolution of Oedipal complex (boys) vs partial resolution of Electra complex (girls)
Evidence
* But this prediction doesn’t hold up
* Kochanska & Murray (2000)
* 39 girls, 44 boys ~5-6YOs
* Girls > boys on 4 conscience measures e.g. girls = more likely than boys to follow mother’s request in her absence
Explain Piaget’s theory in regards to moral development. What are the critiques of this theory?
Key innovation: clinical interview technique
* E.g. who is naughtier?
* Angus accidentally broke 15 cups when he was trying to help drying the dishes
* Zachary broke one cup when he was trying to sneak a cookie from the cupboard
2 phases of moral development
* Heteronomous phase: younger children’s thinking about moral transgressions is governed by rules set by adults
* Autonomous phase: older children’s thinking about moral transgressions is governed by rules about fairness and justice set by the individuals involved
Critique
* Not able to account for children switching their responses
* Children will change their response following adults’ responses, in both directions
* Piagetian phrases critiqued for being too simplistic, focusing on just children
* Moral development extends into adolescence and adulthood
Describe Kohlberg’s lifespan approach to moral development and the 6 stages involved in it.
Hierarchy of cognitive maturity: level of sophistication that one can reason at
6 stages, characterised by different reasoning processes - invariant, irreversible, hierarchical, universal
Preconventional
* Heteronomous: follow rules, avoid punishment
* Instrumental: do what is right for you, now or in future. Right includes reciprocated agreements, e.g. tit-for-tat
Conventional
* Interpersonal normative: do what pleases and helps others; concern, trust, loyalty, conformity to social norms
* Social system: do what benefits the group; fulfill one’s duty, respect authority, contribute to society
Post-conventional
* Social contract: follow consensus principles, while respecting the diversity of values and views people hold
* Universal ethical principles: follow self-chosen ethical principles; human rights. Follow principles even when they violate laws
What are the critiques of Kohlberg’s lifespan approach to moral development?
Stages hold up OK in Western cultures
* Colby (1983): 20 year longitudinal study found strong correlation between age and morality stage, r = 0.78
- Large cultural variation, especially for later stages = not universal
- Stage 6 rarely evident, even in Western cultures
- People use a mix of moral reasoning rather than just one stage e.g. stage 5 reasoning = 10% of adult reasoning
- Bandura: moral development isn’t accumulated across life but instead new moral standards are adopted across each stage
- People can reason across stages as per their preference instead of reasoning at highest possible level
What is a more likely explanation as to how morally mature individuals approach moral reasoning than them applying a higher level of reasoning constantly?
- More flexible
- Expand repertoire of strategies across development -> choose the strategy appropriate to a given situation i.e. strategy-situation fit
Explain Henry’s Social Domain Theory and the evidence that supports it.
Explain
* Reformation of Kohlberg’s theory in relation to the source of moral authority
* Argues transition through stages is due to changes in who/what people perceive as authoritative sources
* Allows for multiple sources of authority -> can account for mix of moral reasoning at any life stage
* Ascribed source or moral authority: someone or some principle that guides one’s moral thinking
Evidence - Killen & Stangor (2001)
* 1st, 4th and 7th graders
* 95% of all children = wrong to exclude a peer just because of gender or race based on moral reasoning e.g. unfair, discriminatory
2 conditions
* Person A and B are equally qualified
* Person A is more qualified than Person B
* 7th graders chose person A in 2nd scenario based on conventional reasoning e.g. person A will do a better job
Results are opposite to Kohlberg’s prediction that younger children will use conventional reasoning and older children will use moral reasoning
What is thought to be the developmental trajectory of moral development overall?
what actually changes as children age is how moral, conventional and psychological considerations are weighted, the contexts that become salient for children and adolescents and the ability to determine when morality should take priority in a given situation
What are the authoritative sources of Henry’s social domain theory as reformed from Kohlberg’s theory?
Heteronomous = No Source
Instrumental = Self-interest
Interpersonal normative = Family
Social System = Educators
Social Contract = Society’s welfare
Universal ethical principles = Equality
How does Bandura’s social cognitive theory apply to moral development? How does evidence evaluate this theory?
Emphasises how moral reasoning and behaviour are learned
* E.g. verbal disapproval such a “naughty”
Moral reasoning and behaviour emerges in complex interaction between individual and their environment -> mutliform moral reasoning
* Different factors given different weights depending on individual development and situation
Shift from external to self regulation with development
Evaluation
* Evidence supports interaction between different stages of moral reasoning (not just the specific stage they have reached)
* Arguments that more influences than just social learning
* Evidence shows that improvements in children’s moral judgement through modelling are sustainable
Summarise the 5 theories of moral development
Freud = evidence against key prediction boys’ conscience stronger than girls’
Piaget’s phases = simplistic, don’t describe moral development at later stages
Kohlberg’s stages = rigid, reasonable fit in Western cultures but not universal, can’t explain why people use a mix of reasoning styles
Social domain theory = highlights that the content of a situation shapes moral reasoning
Bandura’s social cognitive approach = emphasises how moral reasoning is learned, combines form (individual development) and content (situational) factors -> multiform moral reasoning
When is moral development thought to first appear? What evidence is there to support this?
Contrary to cognitive theories, more recent work indicates morality has a strong intuitive and emotional component
* Emerges early in development, including in first year of life
Evidence
* Hamlin puppet show studies of 6-10MOs
* early preference for moral actors
Explain Grey’s model of moral decision making and how this model is reflected in real-world scenarios.
Intentionality
* shown in Piaget example of breaking glasses - key dimension of moral behaviour
* Adults = high intention/agency and high experience
* Children/animals = low intention/agency and high experience
Experience
* Person/victim at other end of act can experience pain/distress/negative outcome of the action
* Children, animals and adults all have high experience
Real-world
* Theory reflect CJS where sentencing for adults is higher/worse than children due to increased expectation of morality/intention/agency of adults compared to children
* Understanding potential experience of victim (e.g. ToM) important and so is understanding intentionality (critical)
What does the evidence say about the appearance of intentionality in infants?
Hamlin et al., (2013)
* 8MOs prefer characters who intended to help even when they failed (but 5MOs did not)
* Appreciation of intentionality (cornerstone of mature moral judgement) develops early
What does evidence show about the influence of parenting strategies on moral development? What are the 3 parenting strategies?
Strategies
* Love withdrawal e.g. not speaking to child
* Power assertion e.g. that’s very naughty, go to your room (authoritarian parenting)
* Induction e.g. what you did hurt that child, that’s why they’re crying, how do you feel when you get hurt like that? Do you think they might feel the same way?
Results
* Induction facilitates moral maturity
* Hoffman argues this is because induction promotes empathy
How are individual differences in child temperament influenced by parenting strategies?
Children who are fearful are easily socialised via gentle direction
Children who are fearless/low anxiety can still be socialised through a warm parental relationship; harsh direction may be counterproductive; gentle direction may not always work but don’t want to go too far in the other direction
How do coercive family environments influence child moral development?
Attempts to control antisocial or unwanted behaviour through coercion, e.g. love withdrawal or power assertion tactics
Cascading effects for social and academic functioning in school, and adolescent delinquency
How does a positive family influence develop from childhood to adolescence?
Positive adolescent-parent communication (from adolescent’s perspective) = higher adolescent-parent agreement on moral values
What does evidence show about the stability of moral judgments across the lifespan?
Moral judgments in adolescence correlate strongly with judgements in adulthood (even into early 30s)
Very little research across adulthood; difficult to draw firm conclusions
What is the evidence regarding the influence of peers on moral development?
one study for children and one for adults
Children value fairness especially when being watched
McAuliffe et al. (2020)
* 212 pairs of 6-9YOs (large sample size therefore more reliable results)
* Sweets allocated to each child
* 2 conditions: see or not see what the other child was offered
* Children more likely to refuse an unfair allocation in their favour when the other child could see than when they could not
* This effect was greater for 6-7YOs than for 8-9YOs (consistent with moral developmental theories)
Yu et al. (2021)
* 68 18-40YOs
* 3 step experiment
* Make a series of moral decisions about how much money they’d have to be given to inflict pain on a stranger
* Learn about a peer’s moral decisions
* Re-make the moral decisions at step 1
* Even adults shift moral decisions towards those of a peer
What are the key points of moral development?
Children understand intentionality early, in the first year of life
* Important for preference - want to be around people who do the right thing
Morality develops within the family, and is influenced by peers across the lifespan
* Family: parenting strategies
* Peers: early on influenced by what is perceived as right, later on internalise peer ideas
Strategies that focus on developing empathy may help promote prosocial behaviour
* E.g. induction
Alternatively, coercive strategies may promote antisocial behaviour
* Long-standing impact across lifespan
Moral development strategies need to be sensitive to individual differences e.g. in child temperament
* General strategies that centre around empathy and open communication critical for moral development within the family
What were the findings regarding the relations among the judgement, emotion and behaviour facets of moral development?
Children cheating on test
* In general increased cheating between 9-14YO (age moral thinking is supposed to become more sophisticated)
* Cheating was not consistent across contexts for children (same child would not consistently cheat across different situations)
* Situational factors led to cheating/influenced moral behaviour
Mixed findings on correlation between moral judgement and behaviour
How does religious context influence moral development?
People without religious preference showed stronger moral reasoning than conventional religious believers
Theorised that people belonging to more conservative religious groups are more likely to blindly follow externally set rules/laws
