Week 13 - Moral Judgement Flashcards
Morality
fairness - rights, equality, justice
others welfare - care and abstaining from harm
moral development
how children construct knowledge about the rules that govern how we ought to treat each other
moral judgement
deciding whether an action is morally right or wrong
is it okay to hit someone?
moral reasoning
justification for ones moral decisions
why is it not okay to hit someone?
moral emotions
emotions that reflect internalized moral principles
how do i feel after i hit someone?
moral behaviours
actions consistent with moral principles
how am i going to treat this person?
moral identity
the importance of being a moral person to ones identity
am i a kind person?
conscience
moral compass
internal regulatory mechanism which tries to guide a person to behave in accord with their internalized moral norms
how do i make sure that i am leading my life in a way that is morally good?
facets of morality
emotion: how do i feel about this
cognition: is this right or wrong and why
identity: am i a good person
behaviour: how should i treat others
Piagets theory of moral judgement
moral rules are products of social interactions and therefore develop over time
discussions and interactions with peers are more important for moral reasoning than interactions with adults
Piagets method
observed children playing games
interviewed children about what
- constitutes a transgression
- the importance of intention
- whether some punishments were fair
interview method
scenarios where there is a transgression without intention - accidents
piaget - two stages of morality
heteronomous morality - acting in accordance with ones desires rather than reason or moral duty
transitional period
autonomous morality - acting in accordance with ones moral duty rather than ones desires
stages of heteronomous morality
younger than 7 years - preoperational stage (see world through own perspective)
children see rules and obedience to authority just as they do concrete objects in the world
dont consider motives or intentions
justice = is the action consistent with the wants of authority
transitional period
7 or 8-10 years
appraoching concrete operations = reason logically, better at perspectives, no systematic testing
through peer interactions - learn to cooperate, negotiate and construct rules - leads to more value to fairness and equality
stage of autonomous morality
11-12
no longer blindly obedient to authority - formal operations - abstract thought
rules based on social agreement - can be changed
consider intentions, punishment should fit the crime
most children achieve stage - depends on opportunities with peers, cognitive maturity, how punitive or authoritarian their parents are
support for piagets theory
children increasingly take morals into account
parental punitiveness negatively related to moral development
perspective taking, logical skills, IQ associated with moral judgement
criticisms of piagets theory
peer interaction doesnt automatically stimulate moral development - quality, not quantity
when intentions are made more obvious children consider them earlier - 4-5
young children arent so blind to authority - dont think harming is right when adults say
kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning
built upon piagets theory
how we reason about morality is key
6 hierarchial stages - 3 levels
- progressively less self centred
- progressively less reliant on external authority
heinz dilemme
woman near death, one drug to save her
drug too expensive
broke into store to steal drug
preconventional level
justification for behaviour is based on desire to avoid punishment and gain rewards
stage 1 - avoid punishment - punishment and obedience orientation
stage 2 - seek rewards - instrumental and exchange orientation - tit for tat
conventional level
moral judgement centred on social relationshisps with a motive to conform to either get approval from others or follow societies rules
stage 3 - conform to get approval - expectations, relationships, conformity
stage 4 - confirm with society’s rules, laws, conventions such as duty to family, vows, the country - social system and conscience orientation - law and order
post-conventional level
judgements are controlled by an internalized ethical code that is relatively indepdent of the approval or disapproval of others
stage 5: morality is based on societys consensus about human rights - social contract or individual rights
stage 6: morality is based on abstract principles of justice and equality - universal ethical principles
kohlberg reasoning over the lifespan
followed 58 boys into adulthood - moral reasoning changes systematically with age
only a few achieved stage 5 and nobody reached stage 6
peaks
stage 2: age 10
stage 3: age 16
stage 4: adulthood
heinz dilemma results
6yo - its wrong
9yo - should steal it
critique of kohlbergs theory
moral reasoning as discontinuous - people move in and out of moral orders
sample only consisted of male participants - women value principle of care
unreliable coding system for categorizing reasoning - did not differentiate moral from social conventional issues well
cross culture generalizability? some issues like group cohesion are more important in some cultures
social domain theory
three domains of social knowledge
moral - justice, fairness, equality, rights, welfare of others, not harming others
societal domain - conventions, traditions, rituals
psychological domain - autonomy, individual choice and preference, physical/health consequences to the self
criteria for differentiation of rules
authority jurisdiction
- what if teacher says its okay?
punishment avoidance
- what if you dont get in trouble?
rule contigency
- what if there is no rule about it?
moral domain - rules still stand regardless of differentiation
social domain - fluid
reasons and justifications - moral
fairness - its not fair if he doesnt get a turn
equal treatment - they should be treated the same
others’ welfare - he’ll be hurt and cry and that’s wrong
reasons and justifications - social conventional
traditions - it’s always been done that way before
customs/authority - thats how my school does it
group regulations - if youre not quiet nobody learns
reasons and justifications - psychological
personal choice - she decides cause shes free to do so
childrens use of social judgement
differentiate between social and moral issues at age 3
view moral transgressions as more serious offences
- low SES children less likely than middle SES
- aggressive children confsuse moral and social conventional domains
believe parents have no authority over personal judgement
social domain theory - judgements about complex issues
conflict between rules in different domains might lead to ambiguities and uncertainties - disobeying a parent to help someone
social exclusion is unique - children consider norms, identity, traditions as a basis for exclusion - adolescents think its okay to exclude when identity of group is preserved
apply range of reasons from different domains, make decisions based on age and experience
how children learn the rules and distinguish between social domains
parents and teachers roles
- moral judgements/reasoning advances when parents inititate discussions about other people’s feelings
- emotional responses of others - breaking moral rules > anger compared to breaking conventional rules
timing of parents and teachers roles
effectiveness of socialization depends on how well the message fits the child’s developmental level and timing of discussion
- 1 yr - physical interventions
- 2 yr - verbal brief explanations
- 3 yr - rationalize about behaviour
- early-late childhood - introduce abstract concepts - fairnesss, care
should wait until child is calm to discuss
teacher specific roles
learn from classroom values and reasoning when rules are broken
children view teachers’ authority as limited to rules at school
moral emotions
emotions that reflect moral principles
vary by valence and orientation
affective and cognitive components
underlie our values, beliefs, and goals
valence and orientation
orientation - self/other
valence - positive/negative
pride - positive self
respect - positive other
guilt - negative self
sympathy - negative other
empathy
shared emotional response that parallel’s other’s feelings
a capacity - panaffective
affective empathy (feeling) and cognitive empathy (understanding)
development of empathy in infancy and toddlerhood
emotion contagion - newborn - rudimentary empathtic responding - share affect w/o understanding
egocentric empathic concern - age 1 - catch emotion and consoles self
quasi-egocentric empathic concern - 14-24mo - help in way they would want to be helped
verdical empathic concern - 24mo onward - feel and understand, help more adaptively
sympathy
feeling of concern for another
more morally relevant than empathy - empathy can lead to personal distress: overwhelming feeling of concern for another that inhibits ability to help
increases in sympathy ages 5-7 - peer interaction, seperation of self, more understanding
compassion
suffering with another and a desire to help - a bit deeper than sympathy
involves tolerance and non-judgement
guilt
feeling of regret after wrongdoing - behaviour
precursors of guilt in first two years of life
moral guilt: increases from 4-6 years
happy victimizer phenomenon: children may not feel guilt over wrongdoing as they may focus on the gains
happy victimizer findings
50% of 3-4yo report feeling happy in response to hypothetically victimizing another
10% of 8yo feel the same way
this is despite understanding that what they did was wrong, the other child will feel bad, and they would feel bad if someone did this to them
shame
feeling of regret the individual directs at the self
related to status, reputation
maladaptive - related to depression - not in all cultures
pride
feeling pleased with ones accomplishments
succeeding on a difficult task elicits pride
7yo - use word proud to reflect good outcomes regardless of whether they succeeded through own efforts
10yo - only own efforts
moral pride
positive feelings about the self after acting in accordance with ethical principles
moral pride -> prosocial behaviour
intrinsically rewarding and encourages future actions
increases in moral pride from early-late childhood
two types of moral pride
authentic pride - relate to genuine self esteem and linked to more favourable outcomes - proud because its the right thing to do
hubristic pride - related to narcissism and one’s global self concept - thinking one is a good person
jealousy
immoral emotion
competition between resources
relationships -> jealousy
objects/achievements -> envy
as early as age 1
express jealousy when mother directs atttention away from them
younger children show jealousy with expressions of distress, older children with anger and sadness
schadenfreude
immoral emotion
feeling joy at anothers misfortune
as young as 4
in contexts that involve a peer with immoral intentions suffering a harm - deservingness
when an envied suffers misfortune - upward social comparison turns into downward social comparison
in competitive contexts when opponent loses
antecedents of moral emotions
parental factors that predict moral development
mother-infant synchrony - empathy
responsiveness to childrens stress (parental sensitivity) - empathy
involvement and closeness, support - sympathy, moral reasoning
martin hoffman’s theory of inductive discipline
three main disciplinary techniques
power assertion, love withdrawal, induction
why might induction not always work?
efficacy of discipline moderated by several factors
- children need to be able to accurately interpret parental messages
- more likely to comply with messages that are reasonable, non-threatening
- timing is important
measuring moral emotions
vignette approach - scenario where child accidentally breaks an adults tower, adult feigns harm - coders rate childs responses
how would you feel if you did X?
how strongly would you feel X?
why would you feel X?
