Moral Reasoning AO3

• Colby et al. found that criminals are more likely to be classified at the pre-conventional level, with only 10 % of them reaching the post-conventional level
• Who found research support for the link between level of moral reasoning and crime?

  Palmer and Hollin
• What did Palmer and Hollin do and find?

  Compared moral reasoning in 332 non-offenders and 126 convicted offenders, using the Social Moral Reflection Measure Short Form (SRM-SF) which contains 11 moral dilemma-related questions. Found that offender group showed less mature moral reasoning than the non-offender group.
• Limitation of moral reasoning: may depend on the offence

  Thornton and Reid found that people who committed crimes for financial gain were more likely to show pre-conventioanl moral reasoning than those convicted of impulsive crimes (e.g. assault). Pre-conventional moral reasoning tends to be associated with crimes in which offenders believe they have a good chance of evading punishment.
• Real world application for level of moral reasoning: Kohlberg found that 20 % of children aged 10 were at stage 1 and 60 % were at stage 2. This fits with the age of criminal responsibility in the UK (10)
• Blackburn suggests that delinquents may show poor moral development due to lack of role-playing opportunities in childhood. (also supports Eysenck’s socialisation idea)
• Limitation of levels of morality: Biased sample

  Giligan criticised the bias sample of participants in Kohlberg’s theory and the male oriented dilemmas that focused on justice rather than care and empathy.
• Kohlberg’s theory was developed using a dilemma scenario and therefore is argued to be low in predictive reliability. The way a participant responds on a questionnaire and what they say they would do in certain situations may differ greatly from what would happen in reality.