Kohlberg

• Methodology


  longitudinal study over 12 years,using interviews to collect qualitative data.

  Cross-cultural comparisons related to moral development
• Methodology 


  Participants

  studied a group of 75 American boys from the ages of 10-16 and again at 22-28.

  He compared those pps to those in Great Britain,Canada,Taiwan,Mexico and Turkey.
• Procedures


  9 hypothetical moral dilemmas,each presenting a conflict between 2 moral issues.

  Each pp discussed 3 of these dilemmas,prompted by a set of 10 or more open-ended questions

  'Should Heinz steal the drug?Why or why not?'

  If the respondent favours stealing:'If Heinz doesnt love his wife,should he steal the drug for her?Why or why not?'

  Suppose the person dying is not his wife but a stranger.Should Heinz steal the drug for the stranger?Why or why not?

  Answers were analysed and common themes were identified so the stage theory was constructed.

  Re-interviewed every 3 years
• Findings


  Stage theory,an account of how behaviour changes at different ages.

  Younger children thought at the pre-convectional level as they got older their reasons for their moral decisions became less focused on themselves and more on doing good as relationships are important.

  Mexico and Taiwan had the same results except they moved through the stages a little slower.
• Findings


  Preconventional

  most common level of morality in young children,up to the age of 9

  Based on its actions and direct consequences.

  Only see morality in terms of how actions will affect themselves,dont understand societies conventions regarding right and wrong
• Findings


  Preconventional Stage 1-Obedience and punishment orientation

  Direct consequences of their actions on themselves.

  Actions are only seen as wrong if there is a punishment,the worse the punishment,the worst the act is.

  Ignore motivation behind the act and focus on consequences.
• Findings


  Preconventional Stage 2 The instrumental purpose orientation

  'Whats in it for me?'

  Self-interest,the needs of others are considered but only to the extent to which they serve the childs interest
• Findings


  Conventional

  most common type of morality with most adolescents and adults.

  Assess morality by comparing it with societies views and expectations.

  They accept societies norms and values even if the rules seem unfair or inappropriate
• Findings


  Conventional Stage 3 Interpersonal cooperation

  Individual seeks approval by others and avoids disapproval by following societies norms and values.

  They have learnt that being good benefits themselves

  Consequences of their behaviour is now judged by how they affect relationships.
• Findings


  Conventional Stage 4 The social order maintaining orientation

  Following orders is understood as important for maintaining a functioning society rather than need for approval.

  Most adults dont progress past this stage
• Findings


  Postconventional

  Only 0-15% of over 20s reach this stage

  Realisation that individuals are separate entitles from society.

  The societies views may come into conflict with individual views and they may choose their individual views over the societies,which can be seen as acceptable.

  Rules are seen as useful but dont need to be adhered to absolutely any may be changed
• Findings


  Postconventional

  Stage 5 The social contract orientation

  Morality is seen as relative and flexible.

  What is seen as right and wrong may be wrong for different people and groups.

  Laws are seen as 'social contracts' rather than rigid rules and unfair rules should be changed in order to achieve the greatest good.
• Findings


  Postconventional

  Stage 6 The universal ethical principles orientation

  Moral reasoning is based on abstract ideas and ethical principles.

  Laws are only seen as valid if they are grounded in justice.

  Acts because it is right not because it avoids punishment,its in their best interest.
• Conclusions


  Key stages of moral development are

  • stages are invariant and universal,people everywhere go through the same stages in the same order.
  • each stage represents a more equilibriated form of moral understanding,resulting in a more logically consistent and morally mature form of understanding
• Evaluation Ethical issues


  Valid consent

  Difficult to give this as children but when the pps were older they should have understood what they were agreeing to,especially as they had taken part before
• Evaluation Ethical issues


  Risk of harm

  some of the dilemmas may have been upsetting to read about and some may have caused anxiety where the decision making was difficult
• Evaluation Ethical issues


  Confidentiality

  Not an issue as no identities were revealed
• Evaluation Ethical issues


  Privacy

  pp were questioned and probed and questioned at length about their moral decisions and can be seen as invasion of privacy,typically if they were unsure or uncomfortable about their decisions
• Evaluation Ethical issues


  Long term risk to beliefs,values etc

  Nature of the research may have forced pps to change their moral beliefs and values but Kohlberg would say that this is due to changes in maturity
• Evaluation Validity issues


  Internal validity

  elements of the research were standardised such as moral dilemmas and the questions that followed,this allowed comparisons to be made across time and across cultures

  The IVs were not open to manipulation so it was hard to establish cause and effect
• Evaluation Validity issues


  Ecological validity

  moral dilemmas were only hypothetical so we cant be sure how pps would respond if they were in the situation themselves-this may have given a different reflection of their morality
• Evaluation Validity issues

  Temporal validity

  Kohlberg relates morality to nature so unaffected by changes in experiences or expectations over time
• Evaluation Validity issues


  Population validity

  the sample represented a number of different cultures so Kohlberg was able to show the order of development is likely to be universal.

  He only studied boys which makes his findings potentially gender biased especially when other researchers

  Gilligan suggested that girls and boys moral development is distinct from one anothers
• Evaluation Validity issues


  Construct validity

  A range of moral dilemmas which required quite deep thinking but they did tend to be extreme scenarios and therefore didnt represent more everyday examples of morality
• Evaluation Validity issues


  Social desirability

  pps may feel under pressure to give certain types of responses to moral dilemmas which were more socially acceptable.

  Socially acceptable responses are seen in later stages of development,explains why morals seemed to change with age.
• Evaluation Validity issues


  Researcher bias

  Kohlberg had to interpret the qualitative data he gathered from the interviews so he may have unconsciously done this to fit his theory.

  He may have also influenced responses so that pp gave him the response he was expecting