1
Q
low ecological validity
A
- were asked hypothetical dilemmas
- ps less likely to take it seriously or be as stressed as they would be in a real life situation where their response would have actual consequences
- answers they gave are unlikely to reflect how they would actually respond SO can’t be generalised to explain moral reasoning (MR) in real life
2
Q
counter to ecological validity
A
- results still useful as his theory of moral development has been successfully applied to explain certain bevs
- has been argued that person with preconventional level of MR is more likely to committ a crime as they focus on whether benefits outweigh costs or punishment can be avoided instead of how their actions could affect others
3
Q
time validity
A
- moral attitudes have changed so findings may not be relevant to contemporary situations
- eg: sexual harrassment used to be normalised or not spoken about but now people are much outraged by & are fighting against it & homosexuality was considered a crime
- m.a may have changed but arguably still relevant in areas like ed, as still used to help teachers find a better way of addressing problematic bev in classroom by helping them undrstand their students’ MR
4
Q
low internal validity
A
- high ATTRITION RATE as ps may have dropped out if they lost touch with researcher or interest in study, & sample likely 2 bd biased as only certain peeps would want 2 stay in study 4 12yrs
- SDR: may have tried 2 appear more moral to impress K
- DC: may have altered their answers based on what they thought K wanted - ps would’ve been more likely to guess the study’s ‘true aims’ as it progressed
- questioning style may’ve been unnatural 4 ps from OTHER CULTURES - affecting their performance in study
- RESEARCHER BIAS: k’s expectations of how p’s MR would develop as they aged may have affected how he interpreted & stage coded their responses
5
Q
high internal validity
A
- study being longitudinal made it clear to see the effect of age on changes in MD over time
6
Q
ANDROCENTRIC - low population validity
A
- ANDROCENTRIC as initial sample is all male so can’t generalise findings to females as have different MR (BUT may have helped mantained internal validity as gender could’ve affected results & was considered inappropriate at time when he conducted his research)
- carol gillingham (1982): W develop a care-based morality whilst M develop a justice-based morality
7
Q
high population validity
A
- cross cultural as subjects from great britain, mexico, turkey, taiwan & canada were added later on in study & their results were compared
- findings reflect stages of MR in other countries
- results can be generalised to greater variety of cultures
8
Q
aim
A
aimed 2 investigate how moral reasoning develops through adolscence & see if there was any support for k’s theory
9
Q
method
A
- longitudinal 12 year study that was cross cultural & used semi-structured interviews
- initial sample was 75 boys aged 10 - 16 year olds & from l/c & m/c families in chicago
- later added boys & girls from GB, mexico, taiwan, turkey, canada (& japan??) deliquents & younger kids
10
Q
procedure
A
1) (in semi structured interviews) ps were asked to answer a series of (9) hypothetical dilemmas to test their MR (delivered as short story)
2) responses were stage coded based on their structure
3) re-interviewed with same dilemmas every 3 years to see how MR had progressed
4) later looked at ps from taiwan, mexico, canada, turkey & UK & compared their results with sample from US
11
Q
STAGES - findings
A
- all ps progressed through stages in fixed order, no one went backwards
- as they got older, ps progressed through stages
- each boys stage of thinking could be used to explain/ linked to one of 25 aspects
- when challenged with view of a P from higher level, would often agree with view & progress 2 next stage
12
Q
COUNTRIES - findings
A
- 13 yr old taiwanese boys tended to favour st.2 thinking
- 10 yr old m/c urban boys from taiwan, mexico & USA showed that stages progressed in terms of difficulty & maturity
- for american sample, at age 16 had rarely reached st.5 & 13 yr olds hadn’t reached st.3
- st.5 thinking tended to be more prevelant in USA 16s than taiwanese 16s
13
Q
CLASS & RELIGION - findings
A
- m/c ps tended to be at a higher stage than matched l/c
- this was NOT because m/c ps favoured some superior thinking BUT did progress through st. faster & further
- was no diff between developement of MR for diff religions eg: protestant, catholicsm, buddhism, judaism, hinduism & islam (religous values seemed to go through same st. as moral ones)
14
Q
conclusion
A
- stages are universal, invariant & gone through one stage at a time in a fixed order BUT some don’t reach final stage
- m/c class ps tend to go through stages faster & further
- religous, cultural & social factors don’t significantly influence stages but may affect speed at which peeps progress through them
15
Q
RIGHT TO WITHDRAW - ethics
A
- were quite young at beginning of study so may not have understood that they could withdraw from study if no longer wanted to participate
- at younger ages, more likely to see kohlberg as an authority figure & so feel pressured to continue answering his questions even if they didn’t want to anymore
- older ps may have felt pressured to continue taking part if they felt like withdrawing from study would make their previous yrs of participation a waste of time
16
Q
CONSENT - ethics
A
- at beginning of study were too young to consent so was gotten from their guardians and/or teachers
17
Q
HARM - ethics
A
- were asked hypothetical so much less distressing than if they were in a real life situation where they were pressured to respond
- BUT some of dilemmas may have been distressing for ps to think about & theme could have triggered traumatic memory (eg: fatally ill)
18
Q
CHILDREN - ethics
A
- had to be more careful, esp. with initial sample as were children so were more emotionally vunerable
- addressed this well as gave ps diff dilemmas depending on their age to try ensure that subject matter was approriate
19
Q
CULTURE BIAS - low pop validity
A
- CULTURE BIAS: (didn’t really know characteristics of ps from other countries &) mainy looked at western cultures so more likely 2 reflect w.c’s justice based individualism
- overlooks moral values favoured by eastern, collectivist
- iwasa 1992 for heinz dilemma found that preconvential ps from USA felt heinz should steal drugs for his dying wife but ones from japan thought he shouldn’t so he could mantain a clean, pure life
20
Q
reliability
A
- set of dilemmas & stage coding system K used to intepret p’s answers made it easier for others to replicate study & many who did also found evidence support k’s stages of MR
- eg: iwasa 1992: found similar moral development after giving ps modified version of heinz dilemma
- GOOD as reliability of findings has meant that k’s theory has been able to be applied to areas like education to help teachers develop better methods for dealing with problematic bev in classroom by helping them understand their students’ moral reasoning
21
Q
background
A
- inspired by paiget’s theory of cognitive
may mocks psych
flashcards
Decks in class (6)
# Cards
