level of moral reasoning

• Kohlberg proposed that people’s decisions and judgements can be summarised in a stage theory of moral reasoning- the higher the stage, the more sophisticated the reasoning.
• Many studies have suggested that offenders tend to show a lower level or moral reasoning.
• Kohlberg et al. found that a group of violent youths were at a significantly lower level of moral development than non-violent youths.
• Offenders are more likely to be classified at the pre-conventional level of Kohlberg’s model, whereas non-offenders have generally progressed to the conventional level and beyond.
• The pre-conventional level is characterised by a need to avoid punishment and gain rewards - associated with less mature, childlike reasoning.
• Adults and adolescents who reason at the pre-conventional level may commit crime if they think they can get away with it or gain a reward from it. This is supported by studies which suggest offenders are more egocentric and have poorer social perspective-taking skills than non-offender peers.
• Individuals who reason at higher levels tend to sympathise more with the rights of others and exhibit more conventional behaviours such as honesty, generosity and non-violence.
• Palmer and Hollin compared 332 non-offenders and 126 convicted offenders using the SRM-SF which contains 11 moral dilemma-related questions. The offender group showed less mature moral reasoning than the non-offender group. This is consistent with Kohlberg’s predictions.
• However, the level of moral reasoning may depend on the offence. Pre-conventional moral reasoning tends to be associated with crimes in which offenders believe they have a good chance of evading punishment.
• Thornton and Reid found that people who committed crimes for financial gain were more likely to show pre-conventional moral reasoning than those convicted of impulsive crimes. This suggests that Kohlberg’s theory may not apply to all forms of crime.