2.2 case study:kohlberg Flashcards
four different options!
identify the methodologies used by Kohlberg (1968). (4)
1) cross-cultural/sectional
2) longitudinal
3) interview
4) case study
briefly explain the features of the case study methodology used by Kohlberg (2).
1) case study = holistic study by one or more methodology
2) in-depth investigation of a phenomenon.
evaluate the interview methodology used by Kohlberg. (2)
1) semi-structured interview allowed Kohlberg to ask supplementary questions if necessary
2) appropriate for children -> may be less competent with written questionnaires -> but may be more prone to researcher bias
evaluate the longitudinal methodology used by Kohlberg. (2)
1) allowed Kohlberg to track the actual development of the boys over 12 years
2) more likely to suffer from sample attrition
evaluate the cross-cultural methodology used by Kohlberg. (2)
1) using six different countries, half of which collectivist and the other individualist, comparison can then be drawn as to assess whether moral development is universal or culturally specific
2) different techniques in questioning across the cultures meant reliable comparisons could not be drawn
PROCEDURES: describe the participants used by Kohlberg (1968). (3)
1) 75 US boys were used, 10-16yrs at beginning of the study.
2) 22-28 years by the end of the period of the study.
3) additional samples from GB, turkey, mexico, taiwan, canada also interviewed by either Kohlberg or colleague of him, provided cross-cultural comparison
suggest one reason as to why Kohlberg (1968) chose to sample only males. (4)
1) less variation in hormones that may affect results
2) COMPARED TO females in early adolescence onwards
3) menstrual cycles in females create hormonal imbalance at diff. parts of their cycles, which could affect the ability to make rational, moral decisions
4) acceptable scientific practice at the time research began (1950s-1960s)
evaluate a sample issue regarding the age of participants (3).
1) sample age ranged from 10 years old at the beginning of the study, to 28 at its conclusion
2) youngest boy was 10 -> little evidence base for how moral development occurs before that age.
3) Piaget, who Kohlberg based his work off, postulated that this was moral realism (6-12), by now they can now problem solve, understand the world around them
evaluate the external validity WEAKNESS in regards to the sample chosen by Kohlberg. (4)
1) 75 boys chosen, therefore all male sample -> androcentric bias (Giligan, 1982)
2) gender socialisation means males and females may have different moral reasoning, e.g care and compassion , therefore logical, just, reasoning may pertain more to males
3) thus not representative of individual differences in moral orientation , and moral development of girls, not generalisable, 1/2 population validity
4) though, this could be an extension, rather than alternative, of his reasoning (Jorgensen, 2006). the invariant sequence + importance of social interactions are the same.
evaluate the external validity STRENGTH in regards to the sample chosen by Kohlberg. (4)
1) cross-cultural sample as participants chosen from US, GB, CND,taiwan, turkey, mexico -> cultural diversity, assess universal moral thinking, improve external validity, more representative, generalisable
2) lessens ethnocentric, Western cultural bias + perception, Kohlberg American, and individualist cultures have different moral reasoning that value independence + freedom (3IND, 3COV)
3) however, stage 5, K postulated as highest level of morality, valuing individual liberties + principles over social + cultural customs and traditions (stage 3) incompatible with collectivists ->MX + TAI, value of conserving tradition, honouring family, Confucian-like ethics, therefore conclusion that stages of moral development are “invariant + universal” may be invalid
4) little is published regarding the findings of the additional cultural samples, limited generalisability to other cultures.
compare the difference between cross-sectional and longitudinal study (2).
1) longitudinal studies are time-consuming and have higher attrition rates
2) cross sectional are easier as participants only partake once, can be done fairly quickly, but doesn’t control for individual differences
describe the methodology used by Kohlberg (1968). (8)
1) longitudinal study -> followed development of same 75 US boys over 12 years
2) semi-structured interviews to assess moral reasoning -> produced qualitative data
3) K created nine hypothetical moral dilemmas, like Heinz, presenting two morally conflicting issues
4) each participant asked to discuss three or more dilemmas, prompted by set of 10 or more open-ended questions:
CONTINUED: state five of the open-ended questions regarding Heinz’ dilemma. (5)
1) Should Heinz steal the drug, why or why not?
2) IF YES: if he doesn’t love his wife, should he steal the drug, why or why not?
3) IF NO: does it make a difference whether he loves his wife, why or why not?
4) Should Heinz steal the drug for a stranger, why or why not?
5) Suppose a stranger is dying, not his wife. . Should Heinz steal the drug for the stranger? Why or why not?
CONTINUED: state five of the remaining open-ended questions regarding Heinz’ dilemma. (5)
Suppose it’s a pet animal he loves. Should Heinz steal to save the pet animal?
6a. Why or why not?
Is it important for people to do everything they can to save another’s life?
7a. Why or why not?
It is against the law for Heinz to steal. Does that make it morally wrong?
8a. Why or why not?
In general, should people try to do everything they can to obey the law?
9a. Why or why not?
9b. How does this apply to what Heinz should do?
In thinking back over the dilemma, what would you say is the most responsible thing for Heinz to do?
10a. Why?
CONTINUED: describe the methodology used by Kohlberg (1968). (8)
5) the boys’ answered were analysed, common themes identified and stages constructed
6) each boy was interviewed every three years.
7) the same stimuli was applied to children + adults across the different cultures, controlled for variables in life experiences, improving internal reliability
evaluate the use of the methodology of moral dilemmas to assess moral reasoning in Kohlberg’s study. (3)
1) self-report -> social desirability bias as participants wants to present themselves in a positive, ‘moral’ light
2) use of hypothetical moral dilemmas -> examines what participants believe they would do, idealistically. may not translate to behaviour
3) however, Kohlberg identified this as a theory of moral reasoning, and this could have been the only ethical way to construct the study, cannot replicate the dilemma
evaluate the use of MORAL REASONING as a dependent variable quantified as morality. (3)
1) Kohlberg (1975) predicted a positive correlation between more mature reasoning, and inclination to morally mature behaviour
2) 15% of students at a post-conventional level cheated, compared to 70% at the pre-conventional level when given opportunity
3) however, Burton (1976) concluded that this pertained to behaviours which introduced the likelihood of punishment, like academic reprimands in cheating, encouraging moral consistency, so this still may not be a valid quantifier.
evaluate the use of hypothetical situations (2).
1) Heinz’ task lacks mundane realism, children unlikely to have been posed with stealing or life or death situations -> more familiar issue should have been chosen, Giligan postulated abortion
2) however different hypothetical situation were used for different children -> allowing for objective comparison across the sample group
describe the findings of Kohlberg (1968). (6)
1) answers were analysed + common themes identified, stage theory of moral development constructed
2) behaviour changes at different ages, which are stages of development
3) found that younger children thought at the pre-conventional level, as they got older, moral reasoning became less self-centered and orientated on others
4) final stage of development relates to personal moral principles
5) results same in MXC,TAI , but development was slower
outline the conclusion of Kohlberg 1968. (4)
1) K concluded the key features of moral development are ‘invariant and universal’, that people everywhere go thru the same stages at same order
2) each new stage represents a more ‘equilibriated’ form of moral understanding, one more logically consistent, and morally mature
3) moral discussion can be used to help children develop moral thinking, children between stages 3 -4, move them forward
4) individuals likely need to face a moral dilemma in personal lives to move them to the third postconventional level
identify the three stages of moral development. (3)
1) the preconventional level
2) the conventional level
3) the post-conventional (principled) level
describe the quantitative findings of Kohlberg. (3)
1) extended longitudinal study over 20 years with the same 75 boys, interviewed every three to four years
2) stage 1 + 2 thinking dropped to nearly 0 (Colby et.al, 1983) , stage 4 thinking increased from almost 0 aged 10 to 70%
3) 10% of sample showed stage 5 thinking age 36
briefly outline the Heinz moral dilemma. (6)
1) in EU
identify the two stages with the pre-conventional level. (2)
