Different stages of Piaget’s theory of moral reasoning?
Premoral stage→ 0-5yo
- little understanding of rules
- no concept of right/wrong
Heteronomous Stage→ 5-10yo
- rules are fixed and unchangeable
- intentions don’t matter
- morality as obeying parents or authority figures
Autonomous Stage→ +10yo
- rules can be changed by social agreement
- intentions matter
- consider moral principles before acting
Different stages of Kohlberg’s theory of moral reasoning?
Preconventional Moral reasoning
3-7yo→ based on external consequences
- avoid punishment from authority figures
- gaining rewards
- same as heteronomous morality
Conventional Moral Reasoning
8-13yo→ based on social rules and expectations
- maintaining social order and norms
- gaining approval from others
Postconventional Moral Reasoning
+13yo→ based on personal principles and values
- not everyone reaches this stage
- focus on universal principles (fairness, justice…)
- critically evaluate rules conflicting with universal principles
- same as autonomous morality
What would someone in the preconventional moral reasoning stage answer to the Heinz dilemma?
- “Heinz should not steal the drug because stealing is illegal and he could get caught and get in trouble.”
- “Heinz should steal the drug, because he needs it for his wife to get better , and then he can be happy.”
What would someone in the conventional moral reasoning stage answer to the Heinz dilemma?
- “Heinz should steal the drug because a good husband would do anything to save his wife’s life and people would understand why he did it.”
- “Heinz shouldn’t steal the drug because stealing is against the law. If everyone was stealing, society would fall apart.
What would someone in the postconventional moral reasoning stage answer to the Heinz dilemma?
- “Heinz should steal the drug because human life must be preserved and life is worth more than money or personal property.”
- “While stealing is generally wrong, the intention to save someone makes it justifiable in this case. Laws should be flexible enough to account for such situations.
Which study proves that Piaget and Kohlberg underestimated children’s ability to infer intentions?
Study with 21months old->-Adults offer toys to child
-Negative intention: adult pulled the toy away
-Positive intention: adult watched in surprise as the toy rolled away from the infant
–>infants than more likely to help adult with positive intention
–> same if both positive intentions but one negative outcomes
–>infants care more about intentions than outcomes of action
What is the difference between empathy and sympathy?
Empathy→ Understanding and sharing the emotional state of another
person
Sympathy→ Feeling of concern for another person in response to their emotional state
How do infants engage in pro-social behaviours?
Before 18 months→ react to others’ distress with self-focused distress
- ex: cry in reaction to another infant crying
18-24months→ prosocial behaviour appears and increases
- natural tendency towards prosocial action
- help less if start to gain reward for helping
—>due to capacity to feel empathy and sympathy
- emergence of sense of self around 18months
—>prosocial behaviour is innate
Toddlers help selectively depending on…
- how trustworthy, friendly the other person is
- type of help→ struggle with self-sacrifice
how similar the person is to them→ same gender
What are the sources of individual differences in prosocial behaviours?
no consistent cultural differences
genetic-> oxytocin and temperament
-proneness to distress→ better emotion regulation associated with helping and greater empathy
-shyness→ high shyness associated with less helping
Socialization by Parents
-Modelling of prosocial behaviour
-Parenting style
- authoritative parenting→ more prosocial behaviour in kids
- need sympathy-inducing reasoning focusing on effects on other
- ex: donate money because people need it VS because it is good
-Providing opportunities for child
- asking child to help in household chores
- lead to children feeling competent in taking on prosocial tasks
Two types of aggression?
Physical Aggression
Begins around 18months and increases until 3yo
- toddlers lack perspective-taking skills
-especially in boys
- usually conflicts over possessions with peers and siblings
—>declines after 3yo because increases in language skills and emotion regulation
Relational Aggression
Def→ type of nonphysical aggression in which harm is caused by hurting someone’s relationships or social status
- emerges at 3yo and continues into adolescence
-especially in girls
- increases with language and social cognition
What are the origins of aggression in an individual?
Genetics->Difficult temperament associated with higher aggression
- impulsivity, difficulties with attention and proneness to anger are predictive of aggression
—>but not enough to explain aggression
—>simply predisposition
Social Cognition factor
Hostile attribution bias→ tendency to assume that other people’s ambiguous actions stem from malicious intent
- vicious cycle
Family origins->Parental model aggression
- parental conflict, spanking
- serve as negative role model
-Authoritarian and uninvolved parents
- increased risk for aggression
- harsh physical discipline lead to hostile attribution bias
Parental monitoring
- reduce likelihood of deviance and antisocial peers
Abuse
Physically abused children→ better able to recognize angry facial expressions
- react more quickly as well
—>BUT harsh parenting seems to play bigger role than genes
- harsh parenting is enough to lead to aggressive children even without genetic predisposition
Peer Influences->Deviancy training
