Lee Et Al (Contemporary Study) Flashcards
Individualistic cultures
Peoples identities are defined by PERSONAL achievements and choices
Right to do your own thing
Collectivist cultures
Peoples identities are defined by the groups they are part of
Background of this study
Kohlberg said that in terms of moral reasoning there is no cultural differences
But when it comes to honesty, differences in collectivist vs individualistic cultures exist so Lee wanted to discover if there were differences
What part of morality are we looking at?
Honesty: telling the truth or a lie in a situation
Aims
See if there are differences in moral reasoning in a collectivist culture (China) vs an individualistic culture (canada) in terms of how acceptable they rate truth telling after pro social or anti social story
See if there are changes in moral reasoning as the child gets older
Independent variable
Age of children, either ages 7 to 9 to 11
Culture child was raised in (Chinese or Canadian)
Whether antisocial or pro social behaviour was depicted
What type of study was this and why?
A quasi experiment because the independent variable of age and culture of child is naturally occurring and cannot be manipulated by researcher
Experimental design and why?
Independent measures because the naturally occurring variable means we cannot have the same children experience one condition then ‘manipulate variable’ (eg change culture) and have them experience the other condition: each child only went through procedure once and results were compared across conditions
Cross sectional study
A type of snapshot study where we can take a sample which encompasses children of different ages and compare responses across age groups to determine if there is a difference in moral reasoning (moral development)
Why is this study cross sectional?
Because we collected data all in one go rather than followed up children later as they aged and compared results to when they were different ages
Compared results of different 11 year olds to different 9 year olds to different 7 year olds
Sample
120 Chinese children: 40 11 year olds, 40 9 year olds, 40 7 year olds
108 Canadian children: 32 11 year olds, 40 9 year olds, 32 7 year olds
Gender split across the sample
Fairly even in each age group within each culture
Outline of the procedure
2 groups in total: social and physical stories
Children presented with 4 stories under each
Presented with rating scale after each story to say how morally good/bad they thought actions in this story were
Social stories
When an action is targeted at an individual within the story
Pro social, social stories
Giving money to a friend in need of lunch money
Anti social, social stories
A child Pushing another child over
Physical stories
In which the character of the story does something to target their environment than an individual either pro socially or anti socially
Pro social physical stories example
Tidying up a classroom
Anti social physical stories
Ruining library books by tearing out pages
How were the children split into the physical stories condition?
60 Chinese children
52 Canadian children
Each had even split of age groups and gender within each age group
How were the children sorted into the social stories condition
60 Chinese children
56 Canadian children
Each had even split of age groups and gender within each age group
The 4 stories children saw
Pro social story + child told truth when asked
Pro social story + child told lie when asked
Anti social story + child told truth when asked
Antisocial story + child told lie when asked
These were either physical or social stories
Counterbalancing
When half of the children in each group were presented with the stories in a different order to the other half
Why is counterbalancing good?
Because this controls for order effects, eg so we know that the responses to each story are accurate and what the child believes, not impacted by boredom
Why is counterbalancing good?
Because this controls for order effects, eg so we know that the responses to each story are accurate and what the child believes, not impacted by boredom
How is data collected in this study?
After every story the child was presented with a rating scale = self report
Rating scale
A 7 point scale with 7 options using symbols
very good
Circle = neither
very naughty
What did child use the rating scale to rate?
Behaviour of child in the story
Their either truth telling or lie telling
Why use symbols on rating scale?
So it’s easy for child to understand, increases validity
Reversing the symbols?
In order to avoid the standard response set so we know the children aren’t choosing the same option each time
Increases validity = accurate reflection of their beliefs and not a measurement impacted by boredom
Results in terms of gender
No significant difference
Results in terms of either social/physical story
No significant difference
Across cultures, was the rating for the deed in the story different?
No, both agreed that anti social behaviour was very naughty and pro social behaviour was very good
Results for telling the truth after a pro social act
As Chinese children got older they were increasingly less favourable and voted it more naughty
Though Canadian children voted thus fairly favourably
Results for lying after a pro social act
Chinese children voted this positively, score of +0.98
Canadian children voted thus negatively, score of -1.00
Qualitative data collected
Chinese children quoted Chinese proverb: ‘one should not leave their name behind a good deed’
Conclusions
Unlike Kohlberg’s claim, moral development does differ across cultures due to different norms and practises such as collectivist/individualist ideas on what defines a person
However moral development does develop with cognitive development as the age groups had significantly different ratings (voted stronger as they grew up)
How is this similar to kohlbergs?
Both collected data using the self report method
Both used children in the study
Both were cross cultural
Both presented a scenario to Ps
Both considered moral development as u age
Differences to Kohlberg’s study
Kohlberg was longitudinal, Lee was cross sectional
Kohlberg used interviews, Lee used rating scale question
Lee collected quantitative data but Kberg did not
Lee studied girls but Kberg only studied boys
Kberg says moral development is universal but Lee says culture impacts it
