4.8 • +11k Ratings
Save
Print
Edit
How do we determine what behaviour is moral? When answering this question, psychologists focus not only on the behaviour itself but also on the underlying reasoning. Our reasoning is perhaps more important than behaviour for understanding a complex concept like morality.
Moral reasoning, flatison.com
Psychologists have investigated for decades whether children understand morality. To behave morally, we need to make judgements about what is "right" and "wrong". It's been theorised that children start from a very basic and rigid understanding of morality and gradually develop an ability to make more sophisticated moral judgements.
Morality is about making the distinction between "good" and "bad" behaviour. Moral reasoning refers to the process of deciding what is just, fair, and right to do in a situation.
Jean Piaget was one of the earliest psychologists investigating moral development in early childhood. He analysed children's interpretation of morality through a social-emotional/cognitive perspective to understand the origin of adult morality.
He presented children with social dilemmas (like the trolley problem) to investigate how children make moral judgements. Then, he analysed their answers.
Based on his observations, Piaget argued that children in the early stages of cognitive development understand morality in terms of fixed rules. They consider all actions against the rules immoral, even if committed with good intentions or by accident. Later, when children begin to consider the perspectives of others, they start to show more flexibility in their understanding of rules and can appreciate the role of intentions.
Influenced by earlier work by Piaget, American psychologists Lawrence Kohlberg conducted studies that tested children's moral reasoning in response to moral dilemmas.
Based on Kohlberg's observations of how boys at different levels of cognitive development make moral judgements, Kohlberg proposed three stages of moral reasoning, each consisting of two levels.
Children get their knowledge about what is "right" and "wrong" from their environment. Their reasoning is egocentric, meaning that they mainly consider the consequences for them.
Level 1 - Obedience and punishment orientation
Children start developing an understanding of what behaviour is bad and good based on rewards and punishment, freepik.com
Level 2 - Instrumental purpose orientation
We conform to social rules to maintain positive social relationships, systems and a positive image of ourselves in the social system.
Level 3 - Good boy/girl orientation
Level 4 - Law and order orientation
Adhering to traffic laws is a moral duty because traffic laws help us maintain order on the roads and avoid accidents.
The last stage, which not everyone reaches, focuses on internal moral principles. These reflect universal ethical principles, such as human rights. Individuals recognise that social rules are helpful but also realise that they are arbitrary and can be unjust.
Level 5 - Social contract orientation
Level 6 - Universal ethical principle orientation
Kohlberg (1968) presented 75 American boys with moral dilemmas to test moral reasoning in children. The study began when participants were in their teenage years (10 to 16) and lasted for 12 years. Each year, the participants were interviewed about social dilemmas.
An example of a social dilemma they were presented with was the Heinz dilemma.
"A woman was on her deathbed. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000, which is half of what it cost.
He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said: “No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it.” So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's laboratory to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal the drug for his wife? Why or why not?" - Kohlberg (1981)
According to Kohlberg's study, participants answered in a way consistent with one level of moral development. With age, as their moral reasoning developed, their approach to answering the dilemmas also changed in how Kohlerg's theory described.
At stage 1, the participants would consider the problem through the lens of rewards and punishment so they could give answers like:
Heinz shouldn't have broken in because now he will be punished and put in prison.
At stage 2, participants would approach the answer with a focus on other people's approval or disapproval of the law.
At level 4 of moral reasoning, people believe that rules are fixed and need to be upheld, freepik.com
Heinz should have broken in because a good husband would steal to save his wife.
OR
Heinz shouldn't have broken in because it is against the law to steal.
At stage 3, participants would focus on their internal moral principles.
Heinz should have broken in because the value of human life is more important than breaking the law to steal.
Some critics of Kohlberg's theory have argued that the way he constructed stages of moral development reflects a traditionally masculine perspective and Western values.
According to Kolberg's theory, once we develop beyond a stage, we should no longer use it to make moral judgments. However, it can be argued that we tend to reason on different levels depending on the context we are in, in some situations we might prioritise law while in others rewards and consequences.
Piaget proposed that young children judge lying as immoral if the lie is significantly different from reality and they think it results in punishment. At the age of 11, children start to consider the intentions behind lying. Kohlberg proposed a similar trajectory of how moral reasoning of lying develops. However, researchers soon noticed that children's evaluations of lying can be more complex even at an early age and can differ depending on context. Sweetser (1987) proposed a three-component model of lying.
According to Sweetser, how lying is perceived depends on:
The majority of research on morality and truth-telling was conducted with children socialised in Western, individualistic countries. Lee and colleagues (1997) aimed to investigate children's evaluations of lying cross-culturally. Since collectivist and individualistic cultures can focus on different values concerning modesty and individual achievement, we can expect some differences in evaluating lies about your achievements or good behaviours.
Lee and colleagues investigated if Chinese and Canadian children would judge lying and truth-telling differently.
Canadian and Chinese children aged 7, 9 and 11 participated in this lab experiment. The researchers told them a story about a child that had done something adults disapproved of (antisocial behaviour) or something they valued (prosocial behaviour). There were four conditions children rated: 1) the morality of a child lying about antisocial behaviour, 2) telling the truth (admitting to) antisocial behaviour, 3) lying about prosocial behaviour or 4) telling the truth about prosocial behaviour. Participants rated this behaviour on a scale from -3 (very naughty) to 3 (very good).
Culture affected how children evaluated lying and truth-telling in the context of prosocial behaviours. It can be concluded that cultural norms and values influence moral judgements.
Moral development is important because our sense of morality guides our behaviours. Moral individuals consider how their actions impact society and can act in a way that benefits instead of harming society.
Moral development refers to the change in how we make moral judgements as we develop. Kohlberg proposed that moral reasoning starts with an egocentric perspective. As we develop, we begin to understand the value of social contracts. In the last stage, we begin to reason more flexibly, abstractly and consider multiple perspectives in our reasoning.
Kohlberg's six levels of moral reasoning are:
1. Obedience and punishment orientation
2. Instrumental purpose orientation
3. Good boy/girl orientation
4. Law and order orientation
5. Social contract orientation
6. Universal ethical principle orientation
Piaget was the first psychologist to introduce two stages of moral development. Kohlberg built on his work and proposed three stages of moral development, each consisting of two levels.
Moral development refers to how our understanding of what are "right" and "wrong" actions changes as we develop.
60%
of the users don't pass the Moral Development in Childhood quiz! Will you pass the quiz?
Start Quiz
Be perfectly prepared on time with an individual plan.
Test your knowledge with gamified quizzes.
Create and find flashcards in record time.
Create beautiful notes faster than ever before.
Have all your study materials in one place.
Upload unlimited documents and save them online.
Identify your study strength and weaknesses.
Set individual study goals and earn points reaching them.
Stop procrastinating with our study reminders.
Earn points, unlock badges and level up while studying.
Create flashcards in notes completely automatically.
Create the most beautiful study materials using our templates.
Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.
