Transcript Moral Development - University of Dallas

Objectives
College students wanting to learn about
theories of moral development will be able
to:
Outline the stage theories of Lawrence
Kohlberg and Carol Gilligan
Tell the difference between a justice
orientation and a care orientation
Describe the study conducted by Stephanie
Cain and Sylvia Tellez regarding Kohlberg
and Gilligan’s theories.
Moral Development
Does gender make a difference?
Lawrence Kohlberg
Vs.
Carol Gilligan
Online Biography
Online Biography
Lawrence Kohlberg
Born October 25, 1927 in Bronxville, NY
Obtained his bachelor’s degree after one year of
study at the University of Chicago in 1948
Earned his doctoral degree in 1958 from the
same university after writing a dissertation
outlining stage theory of moral development
Taught at the University of Chicago (beginning in
1962) and Harvard University (beginning in
1968)
Performed cross-cultural studies of moral
development in Israel and Belize
Kohlberg’s Stage Theory
Preconventional
Conventional
Postconventional
{
Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment
Orientation
Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange
{
Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships
Stage 4: Maintaining Social Order
{
Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual
Rights
Stage 6: Universal Principles
Stage 1: Obedience and
Punishment Orientation
There is a strict set of rules that must always
be followed
The ideas of punishment and permission are
key
Preconventional thought expressed
Stage 2: Individualism and
Exchange
Now there is not one
right way of doing
things; everything is
relative
Fair exchange policy
The role of
punishment weakens
Stage 3: Good Interpersonal
Relationships
“Good Boy/Nice Girl” Orientation
People should live up to the expectations of
community
Characters’ traits and motives are examined
Stage 4: Maintaining the Social
Order
There is an emphasis on
obeying laws, respecting
authority, and performing
one’s duties so social order
is maintained
Perspective changes to
society as a whole
Not only does the child say
a certain action is right or
wrong, they explore the
reasons why
Stage 5: Social Contract and
Individual Rights
An individual’s moral
judgment is motivated
by community
respect, respecting
social order, and
respect for
legally/determined
laws
Thoughts consider
the rights and values
a society must uphold
Stage 6: Universal Principles
Involves universal
principles of justice
that apply to all
people
We treat the particular
dilemma through
unbiased and
impartial eyes
We can only reach
this stage by looking
at a situation through
someone else’s eyes
Carol Gilligan
Born in 1936
Student of Lawrence Kohlberg
Obtained an B.A. in English Literature, a
master’s degree in Clinical Psychology, and a
Ph.D. in Social Psychology
Has taught at Harvard University, University of
Cambridge, and New York University. She
currently teaches at the University of Cambridge.
Focused most of her studies on gender-related
development
Gilligan’s View of Kohlberg
Justice orientation/perspective
“draws attention to problems of inequality and
oppression and holds up an ideal of reciprocity and
equal respect.”
Care orientation/perspective
“draws attention to problems of detachment or
abandonment and holds up an ideal of attention
and response to need.”
Gilligan states that “Two moral injunctions – not
to treat others unfairly and not to turn away
from someone in need – capture these different
concerns.”
Gilligan’s Stages of Development
(relating to the Ethics of Care)
Transition from
selfishness to
responsibility to others
{
Transition from
goodness to truth
{
•Preconventional – Striving for
individual survival
•Conventional – Good things come
out of self-sacrifice
•Postconventional – Principle of
nonviolence toward oneself and
others
Our Problem:
When given moral dilemmas, do both
groups of children, male and female, follow
Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of
development?
Is there a difference in orientation in moral
decision making between the two genders
as Carol Gilligan suggests?
Are females more inclined to choose care
over justice and males justice over care?
Our Hypothesis:
We believe that girls
are more inclined to make moral
decisions based on ideas of care
and relationships,
whereas boys
will base their decisions on justice.
Our Study
We selected three moral dilemmas often used in
Kohlberg studies to present to 15 fifth grade
students (8 girls and 7 boys) at Holy Family of
Nazareth school.
Before using the dilemmas, we made sure we felt
both care and justice responses could be given to
each.
Each dilemma was presented to the children with a
series of questions for them to answer.
“The Heinz Dilemma”
In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind
of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought
might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist
in the same town had recently discovered. the drug
was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging
ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid
$400 for the radium and charged $4,000 for a small
dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz,
went to everyone he knew to borrow the money and
tried every legal means, but he could only get together
about $2,000, which is half of what it cost. He told the
druggist that his wife was dying, and asked him to sell
it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said,
"No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make
money from it." So, having tried every legal means,
Heinz gets desperate and considers breaking into the
man's store to steal the drug for his wife.
“Heinz Dilemma”
1.Should Heinz steal the drug?
1a. Why or why not?
2. Is it actually right or wrong for him to steal
the drug?
2a. Why is it right or wrong?
3. Does Heinz have a duty or obligation to
steal the drug?
3a. Why or why not?
“Dad Dilemma”
Joe is a fourteen-year-old boy who wanted to go to
camp very much. His father promised him he could
go if he saved up the money for it himself. So Joe
worked hard at his paper route and saved up the
forty dollars it cost to go to camp, and a little more
besides. But just before camp was going to start, his
father changed his mind. Some of his friends
decided to go on a special fishing trip, and Joe's
father was short of the money it would cost. So he
told Joe to give him the money he had saved from
the paper route. Joe didn't want to give up going to
camp, so he thinks of refusing to give his father the
money.
“Dad Dilemma”
1.Should Joe refuse to give his father the
money?
1a. Why or why not?
2. Does the father have the right to tell Joe to
give him the money?
2a. Why or why not?
3. Does giving the money have anything to do
with being a good son?
3a. Why or why not?
“Theft Dilemma”
Two young men, brothers, had got into serious trouble. They
were secretly leaving town in a hurry and needed money.
Karl, the older one, broke into a store and stole a thousand
dollars. Bob, the younger one, went to a retired old man who
was known to help people in town. He told the man that he
was very sick and that he needed a thousand dollars to pay
for an operation. Bob asked the old man to lend him the
money and promised that he would pay him back when he
recovered. Really Bob wasn't sick at all, and he had no
intention of paying the man back. Although the old man didn't
know Bob very well, he lent him the money. So Bob and Karl
skipped town, each with a thousand dollars.
“Theft Dilemma”
Which brother was more wrong?
Why would you say that?
What do you think is the worst thing about
cheating the old man?
Why is that the worst thing?
Kohlberg Rubric
Defined by Kohlberg
Stage 1: Obedience
and Punishment
Orientation
Stage 2: Individualism
and Exchange
Stage 3: Interpersonal
Relationships
Stage 4: Maintaining a
Social Order
Stage 5: Social
Contract and Individual
Rights
Stage 6: Universal
Principles
Statements we expect to receive with regard to a
given dilemma
Concern on a fixed set of unchanging rules
We worry about what authorities will permit and punish
Punishment=wrong
“It’s bad/wrong to…”
“You’ll get punished”/ “You won’t get punished”
“It’s a sin to…”/ “It is against the
Commandments…”
Everything is now relative; punishments are now a risk
Individuals are seeking favors
Fair exchange policy
“Just because one person thinks it’s right, someone
else might not”
“This person may think it’s good/right for him”
“It was unfair”/ “The fair way would have been…”
“Good Boy/Nice Girl” Orientation
Now there is a look at motives of each party involved
The children now see the multi-dimensional aspect to a
problem
Character traits are described
“ This person had the right idea”
“His intentions were good, but…”
This person was “greedy, selfish” or “caring and
loving”
Emphasis on obeying laws, respecting authority, and
performing one’s duties so social order is maintained
Not only do we say it’s wrong, but we explore the
reasons why it is so
“Stealing or breaking the law is never right, even
though it is understandable why the person did it”
“What would happen if we all did that”
“It’s against the law to…because…”
Stress on basic rights and democratic procedures to
change unfair laws
Strong language is used; the idea of right to life
“The person has a right to live”
“Laws are social contracts that everyone agrees to
uphold”
Look at problems through all eyes- clear concept of
universal principles
We decided no child would reach this stage at age
10 or 11
Kohlberg Overall Results
Name
Gender
Alex
F
Becky
F
Chichi
F
Jackie
F
Katherine
F
Kelsey
F
Nallelie
F
Rebekah
F
Chris
Heinz Dilemma
Dad Dilemma
Theft Dilemma
Overall Kohlberg Stage
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 3
Conventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 3
Conventional
Stage 3
Conventional
Stage 3
Conventional
Stage 3
Conventional
M
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Craig
M
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Joseph
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Keith
M
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Kevin
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 3
Conventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Montana
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Sergio
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 2
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1
Preconventional
Stage 1 (Preconventional)
“No. Because stealing is bad.” (female)
“Yes. Because he is his dad and you
should obey his dad.” (male)
“Yes. So he could not get grounded.”
(male)
Stage 2 (Preconventional)
“Yes. So his wife could live a longer life.”
(female)
“No. Cause his father could give it to him
with more” (female)
“NO. IT’S HIS MONEY.” (female)
Stage 3 (Conventional)
“No. Because he’s your father. Think of all
the things he has done for you.” (male)
“Yes. Because Joe was counting on his
father and looking forward to the camping
trip.” (female)
“His wife is dying and the guy’s a jerk.”
(female)
Stage 5 (Postconventional)
“Yes. It dose not mater who it is all that
maters is it is a life of a person.” (female)
Gilligan Rubric
Concept
Language
Actions are done with
intent of helping
themselves survive or
feel better.
Reference to the
feelings/well-being of
the person making the
decision in a dilemma.
Conventional
Willing to give of
themselves for the
goodness of others.
Words such as "help"
and reference to the
feelings/well-being of
people other than the
person making the
decision
Postconventional
Want to prevent harm
to themselves and
others; everyone is a
person.
Weighing the safety
and well-being of
everyone involved in
the dilemma
Preconventional
Preconventional Responses
“It is wrong because you might save your
wife but the gilt for stealing would haunt
you forever.” (male)
“Both of them are wrong. Karl brock one
of the comaments ther forth he will go to
Hell. Bob soled and ther forth braking two
comamemnts. I think Bob is worst.”
(female)
“Yes. Because he wants to go to camp.”
(male)
Conventional Responses
“Yes. Because he is helping his wife.”
(female)
“No. Because he’s your father. Think of
all the things he has done for you.” (male)
“Yes. Because if he gives him the money
then he would do a good thing.” (female)
Postconventional Responses
“It is right because it is to save a life.”
(female)
“Yes. It dose not mater who it is all that
maters is that it is a life of a person.”
(female)
Kohlberg and Gilligan
Compared
Name
Alex
Becky
Chichi
Jackie
Katherine
Kelsey
Nallelie
Gender
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Overall Kohlberg Stage
Overall Gilligan Stage
Kohlberg or Gilligan?
Stage 1
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Stage 2
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Stage 1
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Stage 2
Preconventional
Preconventional/
Conventional
Equal
Stage 2
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Stage 2
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Stage 1
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Conventional
Equal
Rebekah
F
Stage 3
Conventional
Chris
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Craig
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Joseph
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Keith
M
Stage 2
Preconventional
Conventional
Gilligan
Kevin
M
Stage 2
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Montana
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Sergio
M
Stage 1
Preconventional
Preconventional
Equal
Preconventional/
Conventional
Preconventional/
Conventional
Preconventional/
Conventional
Gilligan
Gilligan
Gilligan
Conclusion
Our hypothesis ended up being
incorrect. Through our study, we
found that boys and girls rated
almost equally on both Kohlberg’s
and Gilligan’s scales. If anything,
(though even this was questionable)
the boys slightly favored the care
orientation – not the girls, as we
predicted.
Possible reasons for our
incorrect judgment:
Males and females may differ in
orientation at different points in their life.
At this point, they just happen to be the
same.
Most of the studies we read about Gilligan
involved women in college, not children.
If moral development is related to
cognitive development, 5th grade students
may be mostly equal in levels of cognition.
Limitations
Written responses rather than verbal
Difficulty interpreting data
Only using one age group of children
Questions we have after our study:
Do males and females differ in orientation at
different ages?
Does cognitive development make a difference
in care or justice orientation?
How does the differing role of females in society
today versus during Kohlberg’s studies affect
moral development?
Or does the cultural role of women affect
development at all?
Would the children have answered differently if
they had been shown an image such as the clip
art on our PowerPoint?
Where would Kohlberg and Gilligan
fall on the Nature vs. Nurture line?
Kohlberg
Rousseau
Gilligan
Vygotsky
Locke
NURTURE
NATURE
Piaget
Erikson