L17 - Development of Moral and Prosocial Behvaiour Flashcards
1
Q
What was Piaget’s Theory of Moral Reasoning?
A
- Rigid acceptance of rules to recognition that social context can change morality
- Heteronomous morality: rules are unchangeable, outcome more important than intention - 0-7yo
- Autonomous morality: rules created by people and can be changed - intention is important - 11-12yo
- Transition period in between
2
Q
Why do children have hetrogeonous reasoning?
A
- Parents use unilateral, coercive rules for young children
- Cognitively, rules = solid things
- Evidence supports these factors: increasing recognition of complexity with age & more punitive parents = less mature moral behaviour in their children
- CRITIQUES: children are underestimated - it can be done more accessibly and children can understand the higher reasoning. EXP: young children consider intentionally in subsequent behaviours - adults who accidentally/deliberately hurt another
3
Q
What is Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Reasoning?
A
- Used moral dilemmas to understand decisions and reasoning behind them
- Interviewed boys between 10 and 16 and tried to understand the reasoning behind their decisions
- Level 1: Pre-morality: Stage 1 - Punishment and obedience orientation: doing what is right because of fear of punishment. Stage 2 - Hedonistic Orientation: doing what is right for personal gain, perhaps a reward
- Level 2: Conventional Morality: Stage 3 - Interpersonal concordance orientation: doing what is right according to the majority to be a good boy/girl. Stage 4: Law and order orientation: doing what is right because it is your duty and helps society
- Level 3: Post-conventional morality: Stage 5 - Social contract or legalistic orientation: doing what is right even if it is against the law because the law is too restrictive. Stage 6 - Universal ethical principles orientation: doing what is right because of our inner conscious
4
Q
Are these stages universal?
A
- Not all individuals reach all stages
- Some indication = higher stages = IQ and education
- Discontinuous development and higher stages
5
Q
Is Kohlberg’s theory culturally similar?
A
- Claimed universality as researched in 5 settings
- Adapted dilemmas to be more applicable and found cultural differences in expectations
- In 75 countries, the same stages were seen
6
Q
Does Kohlbergs theory have gender differences?
A
- Biased against females? - authority vs caring (change way they react to authority)
- No real evidence of different stages but explanations more about caring
7
Q
What is Social Domain Theory?
A
- Moral Domain: welfare/rights, authority independent = universal context e.g teachers allowing hitting in school
- Social Convention Domain Social etiquette/rules, Authority dependent = context specific e.g teachers choosing clothing in hot weather
- Personal Domain: Personal choices = personal jurisdiction
- 5 yo can distinguish different types of morality/authority
8
Q
What are cultural differences in Social Domain Theory?
A
- Similar across cultures
- Indian children: moral obligation to help others, US Children - personal obligation to help
- US children consistent in generous/no model = more stingy in parent model
- Indian children followed parent modelling more
9
Q
What are the three forms of prosocial behaviour seen in childhood?
A
- Feeling for others: empathy, sympathy, affection
- Working with others: Sharing, cooperating, helping
- Meeting other’s needs: Caregiving
10
Q
What was a study looking at responses to distress?
A
- 165 infants followed 3-18mo
- Depictions of distress either parent/experimenter hurting themselves OR video of infant crying
- Reactions were coded:
- Concerned affect = sympathy/sad facial expressions
- Inquiry behaviour = social referencing/visual scanning and vocalisations
- Self-distress = looking distresses & crying
- Prosocial behaviour = comforting e,g hug/ handing toy
- RESULTS: Infants as young as 3 mo show concern for others distress
- Increases in prosocial behaviours with age
- Self-distress low at all ages, not significantly different to neutral event
11
Q
What was a study on sharing?
A
- Followed children from birth - 7yo
- At 18 mo, looked at interaction between different children - mock bday party
- Found a lot of children offer a toy to another - prosocial behaviour is a lot more prevalent than the opposite
- Girls more likely to share
12
Q
What was a study looking at helping and cooperative behaviour?
A
- 14 mos performed 6 different tasks to help an adult
- Children frequently help adults when something was out of reach, no significant helping where tasks were more complicated
- When ran with 18mo, all behaviours were seen as helpful, and do more prosocial behaviours
- Interpretation of adults intent/harder for 14mo to complete
13
Q
What was the study of cooperation?
A
- Trampoline task and elevator task: hold the trampoline to hold toy, or elevator where 2 people needed, one to hold button and another to retrieve toy
- 14, 18 and 24 mo, successful cooperation at 14 mo but dependent on task difficulty
14
Q
What was a study looking at different types of behaviours with different tasks? (Sharing)
A
- Some prosocial behaviours are easy for child to interpret
- Comforting someone requires a higher level of development
- Sharing task were both given a bowl and sharing behaviour was not elicited as complicated to interpret
15
Q
What are developmental patterns of prosocial behaviour?
A
- Tends to increase from early to middle childhood
- In middle adolescence = drop in prosocial behaviour
- Increases around late adolescence and into adulthood
- Levels of prosocial behaviour does depend on situation and individual differences
