Core Sudies - Developmental Psychology - Kohlberg’s Study Flashcards
What is level 1 of moral reasoning
Preconventional
What are the stages in level 1 moral reasoning
- Punishment and obedience orientation
- Instrumental-relativist orientation
What is the moral reasoning shown in Level 1, Stage 1
Whatever leads to punishment is wrong, if you avoid punishment is good
What moral reasoning is shown in Level 1, Stage 2
The right way to behave is the way that is rewarded
What is level 2 of moral reasoning
Conventional
What are the stages in level 2 moral reasoning
- Good-boy, Good-girl orientation
- Law and order orientation
What moral reasoning is shown in Level 2, Stage 3
The right way to behave is to be seen as the good person by others; for approval from other people
What moral reasoning is shown in Level 2, Stage 4
The right way to behave is to follow the wider rules of society, judgements concern obeying laws and avoiding guilt
What is level 3 of moral reasoning
Post-conventional
What are the stages in level 3 moral reasoning
- Social contract orientation
- Universal principles orientation
What moral reasoning is shown in Level 3, Stage 5
The right way to behave is not always clear-cut; while rules and laws might exist for the good of society, there are times when rules must be broken as they don’t benefit certain individuals
What moral reasoning is shown in Level 3, Stage 6
People at this stage have developed their own set of moral guidelines, which may or may not fit the law for example human rights, justice and equality. It takes account of likely views of everyone affected by a moral decision. People will be prepared to act to defend their principles even if it means going against the rest of society or facing consequences like imprisonment or disapproval
Aim 1
To investigate the development in moral reasoning throughout adolescence and early adulthood
Aim 2
To assess the extent to which these changes in moral reasoning hold true in a range of cultural contexts
Research method
Longitudinal study and a cross-sectional study
Sample
- 75 American boys
- Aged 10-16 at the start of the study
- Aged 22-28 at the end of the study
- They were followed at three year intervals
- Also studied boys from Great Britain, Canada, Taiwan, Mexico and Turkey
Procedure for Aim 1
- American boys were presented with hypothetical moral dilemmas in the form of short stories all deliberately philosophical
- The stories were to determine the p’s stage of moral reasoning for each of the 25 moral concepts
- Each dilemma involved options with different moral applications, an once the p understood the dilemma they were asked what the character in the dilemma should do
- Aspects included a motive given for rule, obedience or moral action and the value of human life
Example dilemmas included: - Age 10: “Is it better to save the life of one important person or a lot of unimportant people?”
- Age 13,20 and 24: “Should the doctor ‘mercy kill, a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?”
What was an example of a moral dilemma presented to the boys at 10 years old
“Is it better to save the life of one important person or a lot of unimportant people?”
What was an example of a moral dilemma presented to the boys at 13, 20 and 24 years old
“Should the doctor ‘mercy kill, a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?”
What aspects were included in the moral dilemmas
- A motive given for rule, obedience or moral action
- The value of human life
Procedure Aim 2
- Taiwanese boys aged 10-13 were asked about a story involving theft of food. They were asked “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 cant. Should he break in and steal some food? Why?”
- Young boys in Great Britain, Canada, Mexico and Turkey were also tested in a similar way
What is a cross-sectional study
They compare different groups of p’s of different ages
Result 1 for Aim 1
Based on p’s responses to the moral dilemmas at different ages, Kohlberg proposed that moral development went through a series of three levels and 6 stages. Each of the boys demonstrated each stage of moral reasoning and how values change as an individual progresses through the stages
Result 2 for Aim 1
P’s progressed through the stages as they got older. Some p’s had not reached the final stage of moral development by the end of the study
Result for Aim 2
At the age of 16, Stage 5 thinking was more prevalent in the USA than either Mexico or Taiwan - this stage was reached by p’s in these two countries at a later stage
Conclusions
- There is an invariant developmental sequence in an individual’s moral development
- Each stage of moral development occurs one at a time and always in he same order
- There is a cultural universality of sequence of stages
Key Finding
All boys develop in a fixed order, with the only difference in the development of morality being at age 16 where stage 5 thinking was more prevalent in the USA than in Mexico and Taiwan
Link to Key Theme
This demonstrates that the development through the stages of morality is culturally universal, however the only difference is the rate at which each individual develops morality
Link to Area
All boys developed through the stages of morality in a fixed order, demonstrating that a change in their biological stages of age (adolescence to early adulthood) is what led to other development through the stages of morality. However there was also a difference in morality as at age 16, stage 5 was more prevalent in the USA than in Mexico or Taiwan demonstrating that a change in cultural experiences will impact the rate at which boys develop though the stages of morality
