CYBERPSYCHOLOGY & BEHAVIOR

Volume 11, Number 3, 2008

© Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0098

Cultural Differences in Morality in the Real and Virtual

Worlds: A Comparison of Chinese and U.S. Youth

LINDA A. JACKSON, Ph.D.,1 YONG ZHAO, Ph.D.,2 WEI QIU, M.A.,2

ANTHONY KOLENIC III, M.A.,3 HIRAM E. FITZGERALD, Ph.D.,1 RENA HAROLD, Ph.D.,4
and ALEXANDER VON EYE, Ph.D.1

ABSTRACT

In this research, we examined cultural differences in morality in the real and virtual worlds
and the relationship between the two. Approximately 600 Chinese and 600 U.S. youth, aver-
age age 12 years old, completed surveys assessing their moral attitudes and behavior in the
real world and the acceptability of a diverse set of morally questionable online behaviors.
Findings indicated that (a) Chinese youth considered good moral character to be more im-
portant than did U.S. youth, whereas U.S. youth considered exceptions to moral behavior that
advanced individual goals to be more acceptable than did Chinese youth; (b) Chinese females
had the highest level of moral behavior, followed by U.S. females and then Chinese and U.S.
males, who did not differ; (c) Chinese youth found morally questionable online behaviors to
be more acceptable than did U.S. youth, with the exception of videogame violence, which
U.S. youth, especially males, found more acceptable; (d) moral attitudes and behavior in the
real world predicted the acceptability of morally questionable online behaviors, whereas the
importance of good moral character and the extent of Internet and other technology use did
not. The more accepting youth were of exceptions to moral behavior that advanced individ-
ual goals, and the less moral their behavior in the real world, the more acceptable they found
morally questionable online behaviors. Cultural differences are explained in terms of differ-
ences in perceptions of cyberspace as a venue for expressing individual autonomy.

INTRODUCTION ciples, with nurture entering the picture to set the

C HILDREN AROUND THE WORLD are socialized into
the moral value system of their culture, a so-
cialization that helps them to do what is “right” and
avoid doing what is “wrong.”1,2 To some extent
there are cultural invariants in moral value systems
that promote the development of a universal set of
morally acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. In-
deed, evolutionary psychologists have recently ar-
gued that “we are born with abstract rules or prin-
parameters and guide us toward the acquisition of
particular moral systems.”3 This relatively new evo-
lutionary argument is consistent with an absolutist
perspective on morality which holds that some be-
haviors are never acceptable. At the same time, it
allows for cultural variation in the acceptability of
other behaviors, as well as situational influences on
acceptability (e.g., utilitarian perspective).4 For ex-
ample, although both Eastern and Western cultures
value honesty and discourage dishonesty, Eastern

1 Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

2 Department of Teacher Education, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.
3 Department of Cultural Studies, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.
4 Department of Social Work, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

279
280
cultures are more tolerant of dishonesty that helps
the group, whereas Western cultures are more tol-
erant of dishonesty that helps the individual.5–7
The most popular theory of children’s moral de-
velopment is Kohlberg’s cognitive-developmental
theory.8 According to Kohlberg, moral development
is primarily a matter of developing more sophisti-
cated cognitive structures—structures that are more
complex, differentiated, integrated, logical, orga-
nized, and based on superior perspective-taking
skills. These more sophisticated cognitive structures
give rise to more prescriptive, universal, and im-
partial moral decisions. With respect to moral rea-
soning and moral behavior, the assumption is that
the more advanced one’s understanding of why a
moral choice is correct (i.e., the more sophisticated
the cognitive structure), the greater the likelihood
of behaving accordingly.9
Research testing Kohlberg’s theory suggests
cross-cultural invariance in the developmental se-
quence and cognitive structures involved in moral
reasoning.10 However, cultural differences in moral
values systems have frequently been observed, par-
ticularly between Eastern cultures, such as China,
and Western cultures, such as the United States.11–13
At the conceptual level, it has been argued that
different cultures provide different sanctions for
children’s moral conceptions and behavior depend-
ing on what is most valued in that culture.5,6,13 East-
ern cultures value the group over the individual and
self-effacement and modesty over self-promotion
and pride.7 These values are rooted in the histori-
cal, political, and religious foundations of Confu-
cianism, Buddhism, and Taoism. In contrast, West-
ern cultures value the individual over the group and
self-promotion and pride over self-effacement and
modesty. These values are rooted in the “rugged in-
dividualism” and freedom of choice that are the
foundations of Western cultures.5–7 At the empiri-
cal level, ample research indicates that Chinese cul-
tural values, such as the maintenance of harmony,
obedience, and filial piety, do affect Chinese moral
judgments as do other cultural factors, such as con-
text, rules, and expectations. Gender also plays a
role in moral reasoning,14 although it is unclear
whether and how gender effects interact with cul-
tural effects.
Research has yet to consider the issue of moral-
ity in the virtual world. In some ways this neglect
is surprising given evidence that youth, especially
youth in Western, affluent nations, spend a signifi-
cant portion of their daily lives online15 where op-
portunities to engage in morally “questionable” be-
haviors abound. In particular, the anonymity of the
Internet, its 24/7 availability, and the plethora of
JACKSON ET AL.
“inappropriate” information and activities available
online clearly raise moral concerns for youth. For
example, it has already been well documented that
youth view pornography online (cyberporn), down-
load files illegally, bully friends and acquaintances
(cyberbullying), interact in “intimate” ways with
strangers, and “steal” information online, repre-
senting it as their own in the “real world” (i.e., pla-
giarism).16 Do such online behaviors raise moral is-
sues for today’s youth?
Perhaps the closest approximation to a consider-
ation of moral behavior online is the acceptable use
policy. Internet service providers and public and
private institutions that provide Internet access
(e.g., schools) typically require that users sign a
statement agreeing to refrain from unacceptable on-
line behaviors. Whether doing so is viewed as a
moral imperative to youth is unclear. Similarly un-
clear is whether morality that applies to the “real
world” influences beliefs about what constitutes
morally acceptable and unacceptable behaviors in
the virtual world and whether culture influences
these beliefs.
The present research is the first systematic cross-
cultural investigation of morality in both the real
and virtual worlds and how the two are related. Ap-
proximately 600 Chinese youth and 600 U.S. youth
completed surveys assessing their moral attitudes,
moral behavior in the real world, and the accept-
ability of a diverse set of morally questionable on-
line behaviors. This report focuses on four ques-
tions. First, are there cultural differences in moral
attitudes and moral behaviors in the real world?
Second, are there cultural differences in the accept-
ability of morally questionable online behaviors?
Third, do moral attitudes and behavior in the real
world predict the acceptability of morally ques-
tionably online behaviors? Fourth, does the extent
of Internet and technology use predict the accept-
ability of morally questionable online behaviors
across cultures? Also considered in addressing each
of these questions were gender differences and
whether gender interacts with culture to influence
moral attitudes and behaviors in both the real and
virtual worlds.
METHODS
Participants and procedures
Chinese youth were recruited from four public
schools in the Wuhua School District, Kunming,
China. Kunming is the capital of Yunnan Province
in southwestern China and has a population of over
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN REAL AND VIRTUAL MORALITY
4 million. The Wuhua School District includes both
urban and rural schools that are similar in terms of
student and teacher characteristics and resources.
Half the participants came from rural schools and
half from urban schools. Of the 602 participants,
52% were females. Average age was 12.16 years old,
with age ranging from 10 to 15 years old. Most par-
ticipants were Han (66%), the majority ethnic group
in China. The second largest group was Bai (29%),
with the remaining participants distributed among
11 other ethnic groups (e.g., Yi, Miao).
Surveys were administered in the classroom in
the presence of both a researcher and the homeroom
teacher. Students required approximately 30 min-
utes to complete the surveys.
U.S. youth were recruited from 20 middle schools
geographically distributed throughout the southern
lower peninsula of Michigan. An additional 100
youth were recruited from an after-school center in
Detroit, Michigan. Rural, suburban, and urban
youth were represented in the sample, with more
urban and suburban than rural youth. Of the 604
participants, 54% were females. Average age was
12.10 years old, with age ranging from 11 to 16 years
old. Racial/ethnic group membership was as fol-
lows: 57% White Caucasian; 29% African American;
5% Hispanic American; 2% Native American; 1%
Asian American; 6% Other.
Surveys were distributed by mail to children par-
ticipating in the Children and Technology Project, a 3-
year longitudinal study of the impact of technology
use on cognitive, social, psychological, and moral de-
velopment. The project is funded by a grant from the
National Science Foundation (http://www.msu.edu/
user/jackso67/CT/children/).
Materials
The Youth Survey was developed for the U.S.
sample based on questions from three sources: the
Josephson Institute Report Card on the Ethics of
American Youth,17 the Prosocial Moral Reasoning
Scale,18 and the HomeNetToo Project.19 The Joseph-
son Institute Report Card is a survey instrument de-
veloped biannually by the Institute to assess the
ethics of American youth. It includes a diverse set
of questions to assess attitudes about character,
cheating, trust, and other ethical issues (www.
josephsoninstitute.org/Survey2004/2004report
card_pressrelease.htm). The Prosocial Moral Rea-
soning Scale consists of 71 items designed to mea-
sure values and cognitions related to helping
behavior and harmonious relationships. The Home-
NetToo Project measures were developed to assess
attitudes about Internet behavior.
281
To assess moral attitudes, participants rated 23
statements on 4-point scales: 1, strongly disagree; 4,
strongly agree. To assess moral behaviors in the real
world, participants rated 10 behaviors on 3-point
scales: 1, never done this behavior; 2, done this at least
once; and 3, done this two or more times. To assess the
acceptability of morally questionable online behav-
iors, participants rated 34 behaviors on 3-point
scales: 1, never or almost never OK; 2, sometimes or usu-
ally OK; 3, always or almost always OK. All items are
described in the Results section.
The Youth Survey was translated into Chinese by
a bilingual graduate student. Both the Chinese
translation and the English version were then
checked by three bilingual speakers: one educa-
tional psychologist in the United States and two
psychologists in the provincial educational research
institute in China. Inconsistencies were discussed
and resulted in a few minor changes in the Chinese
wording. Two questions about religion were
deleted for two reasons. First, it was considered un-
likely that Chinese children would have a concept
of religion. Second, it would be more difficult to ob-
tain permission for the survey if questions about re-
ligion were included.
RESULTS
Culture, gender, and moral attitudes and behavior
Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVAs)
on the 23 moral attitude measures revealed signifi-
cant F ratios for culture [F(23, 913)  39.51, p 
0.001]; gender [F(23, 913)  2.55, p  0.001]; and
their interaction [F(23, 913)  1.69, p  0.05]. Signif-
icant F ratios for the univariate analyses ranged
from 3.90 to 157.04, dferror  935. Means for these
and all subsequent univariate analyses are available
from the first author.
Main effects of culture indicated that Chinese
youth were more likely than U.S. youth to agree that
(a) it is important to be a person of good character;
(b) their parents want them to do the right thing re-
gardless of cost; (c) being a good person is more im-
portant than being rich; (d) when it comes to doing
the right thing, they were better than most kids they
know; (e) trust and honesty are necessary in per-
sonal relationships; (f) trust and honest are neces-
sary in business and the workplace; (g) their par-
ents would rather they cheated than get bad grades;
(h) it is sometimes OK to hit or threaten someone
who makes you angry; (i) they are prejudiced
against certain groups; (j) in sports, if you are not
cheating, you are not trying hard enough; (k) they
282
frequently volunteer to help others or do charity
work.
U.S. youth were more likely than Chinese youth
to agree that (a) most adults in their life set a good
example; (b) a person has to lie and cheat sometimes
in order to succeed; (c) they sometimes lie to save
money; (d) it is important that people trust you; (e)
physical violence is a big problem in their school;
(f) people should play by the rules even if it means
they lose; and (g) they are satisfied with their own
sense of right and wrong.
Main effects of gender indicated that females
were more likely than males to agree that (a) being
a good person is more important to them than be-
ing rich; (b) trust and honesty are necessary in per-
sonal relationships; (c) trust and honesty are neces-
sary in business and the workplace; (d) it is
important that people trust them; (e) it’s not worth
it to lie or cheat because it hurts one’s character; (f)
they frequently volunteer to help others or do char-
ity work. Males were more likely than females to
agree that (a) they sometimes lie to save money; (b)
people who lie, cheat, or break the rules are more
likely to succeed than people who don’t; (c) their
parents would rather they cheated than got bad
grades; (d) it’s sometimes OK to hit or threaten a
person who makes you very angry; (e) physical vi-
olence (fighting, bullying, intimidation) is a big
problem at their school; (f) they are prejudiced
against certain groups.
Only 4 of the 23 culture by gender interactions
were significant. U.S. males and Chinese females
were more likely than U.S. females and Chinese
males to agree that in the real world successful peo-
ple do what they have to do to win, even if it means
cheating. Chinese females were least likely of all
groups to agree that it’s not cheating if everyone is
doing it. Chinese males were most likely and U.S.
males least likely to agree that in sports, if you’re
not cheating, you’re not trying hard enough. U.S fe-
males were more likely than U.S males to agree that
they frequently volunteer to help others or do char-
ity work. There was no difference between Chinese
females and males on this measure.
MANOVAs on the 10 moral behavior measures re-
vealed main effects of culture [F(10, 1,112)  11.42,
p  0.001]; gender [F(10, 1,112)  11.25, p  0.001];
and their interaction [F(10, 1,112)  3.78, p  0.001].
Significant F ratios for the univariate analyses ranged
from 6.44 to 68.07, dferror  1,121. Compared to Chi-
nese youth, U.S. youth more frequently (a) lied to a
parent about something important; (b) lied to a
teacher about something important; (c) copied an In-
ternet document for an assignment; (d) bullied,
teased, or taunted someone; (e) hit a person because
JACKSON ET AL.
they were angry; (f) cheated or “bent the rules” to
win in sports. The only behavior Chinese youth re-
ported engaging in more frequently than did U.S
youth was copying another person’s homework.
However, it is important to note that the mean moral
behavior rating for all items for all youth was closer
to 1 (never) than 2 (at least once), indicating that
youth never or rarely engaged in these behaviors.
Compared to females, males more frequently (a)
lied to a parent about something important; (b) lied
to a teacher about something important; (c) copied
an Internet document for an assignment; (d) bullied,
teased, or taunted someone; (e) used racial slurs or
insults; (f) mistreated someone who was in a dif-
ferent group; (g) hit a person because they were an-
gry; (h) cheated or bent the rules to win in sports.
Interactions between culture and gender were ob-
tained on 4 of the 10 measures of moral behavior.
Chinese males were more likely than Chinese fe-
males to have cheated during a test at school,
whereas U.S. males and females did not differ on this
measure. Chinese males were more likely than any
other group to copy another person’s homework.
Chinese females were less likely than any other
group to have bullied, teased, or taunted someone or
to have hit a person because they were angry.
Culture, gender, and the acceptability of morally
questionable online behaviors
Multivariate effects of culture [F(34, 960)  13.53,
p  0.001]; gender [F(34, 960)  3.14, p  0.001]; and
their interaction were significant [F(34, 960)  1.98,
p  0.001] in the analyses of the 34 morally ques-
tionable online behaviors. Significant F ratios for the
univariate analyses ranged from 4.98 to 266.41,
dferror  993. Chinese youth found it more accept-
able than did U.S. youth to (a) use a friend’s Inter-
net account without asking; (b) send an e-mail that
contains sexually explicit language to someone you
know, to a stranger, or to a chat room; (c) send an
e-mail that contains violent, threatening language to
someone you know, to a stranger, or to a chat room;
(d) delete files or other information that belongs to
someone else without asking; (e) download and
save pornographic, obscene, or sexually explicit ma-
terial; (f) hack into a government Web site without
permission; (g) intentionally spread a computer
virus; (h) e-mail strangers with the answers to a test
they have to take; (i) text message (using a cell
phone) your friends with answers to a test they are
taking; (j) e-mail strangers; (k) meet in real life some-
one you met on the Internet.
U.S. youth found it more acceptable than did Chi-
nese youth to (a) text message (using a cell phone)
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN REAL AND VIRTUAL MORALITY
your friends during class; (b) pretend to be some-
one else in a chat room; (c) play videogames that
contain violence against characters who are not peo-
ple; (d) play videogames that contain violence
against other people; (e) play videogames that con-
tain destruction of property; (f) play videogames
that contain sexual violence. However, once again
it is important to note that the mean acceptability
rating for all items for all youth was around 1, in-
dicating that youth found these behaviors unac-
ceptable (i.e., 1  never or almost never OK).
Compared to females, males considered it more
acceptable to (a) play videogames that contained vi-
olence against characters who are not people; (b)
play videogames that contained violence against
other people; (c) play videogames that contained de-
struction of property; (d) play videogames that con-
tained sexual violence. Females found it more ac-
ceptable than did males to (a) pretend you were
someone else in a chat room and (b) text message
(using a cell phone) your friends during class.
Culture by gender interactions were obtained on
all 4 of the 4 videogame measures but on only 3 of
the remaining 30 measures. On all 4 videogame
measures, U.S. males were most accepting of vio-
lence, followed by U.S. females, who were more ac-
cepting of violence than were Chinese males, who
were more accepting than were Chinese females.
U.S. females and Chinese males were more accept-
ing of keeping track of another person’s online ac-
tivities than were U.S. males and Chinese females.
Chinese males found it more acceptable to send e-
mails containing sexually explicit language to a
stranger than did any other group. U.S. females
found it more acceptable to text message other stu-
dents during class than did any other group.
Culture, gender, and Internet and other
technology use
Significant F ratios for the univariate analyses of
Internet and other technology use items ranged
from 4.55 to 637.20; dferror ranged from 1,050 to
1,192. Two questions assessed the extent of com-
puter use. “How long have you been using a com-
puter?”(1, I have never used a computer; 2, less than one
year; 3, about one year; 4, 1–2 years; 5, 2–5 years; 6,
more than 5 years) and “How often do you use a com-
puter?” (1, I don’t use a computer; 2, about once a
month; 3, a few times a month; 4, a few times a week; 5,
everyday, for less than 1 hour; 6, everyday, for 1 to 3
hours; 7, everyday, for more than 3 hours). U.S. youth
had been using a computer longer and used it more
often than had Chinese youth. The culture by gen-
der interaction indicated that Chinese males had
283
been using a computer longer than had Chinese fe-
males.
A similar pair of questions assessed the extent of
Internet use. U.S. youth had been using the Internet
longer and used it more often than did Chinese
youth. Culture by gender interactions on both mea-
sures indicated that Chinese males had been using
the Internet longer and used it more often than did
Chinese females.
Youth were asked how often they played
videogames (1, I don’t play videogames; 2, about once
a month; 3, a few times a month; 4, a few times a week;
5, every day, but for less than 1 hour; 6, every day, for
1 to 3 hours; 7, every day, for more than 3 hours). U.S.
youth played videogames more often than did Chi-
nese youth. Males played more often than did fe-
males. A culture by gender interaction indicated
that U.S. males played more than any other group
and Chinese females played less than any other
group. Chinese males and U.S. females did not dif-
fer in the extent of their videogame playing.
U.S. youth used cell phones more than did Chi-
nese youth. A culture by gender interaction indi-
cated that U.S. females used cell phones more than
did any other group and Chinese females used them
less than did any other group. U.S. males did not
differ from Chinese males in the extent of their cell
phone use.
Predicting the acceptability of morally questionable
online behaviors
Factor analyses (varimax rotation) were used to
reduce the number of variables for the hierarchical
regression. Factor analyses of the 23 moral attitudes
measures resulted in 2 factors, labeled Moral char-
acter (6 items; e.g., “It’s important for me to be a
person of good character,” “In personal relation-
ships, trust and honesty are necessary”) and Ex-
ceptions to moral behavior that advanced individ-
ual goals (4 items; e.g., “A person has to lie or cheat
sometimes in order to succeed,” “I sometimes lie to
save money”). Factor analyses of the 10 moral be-
havior measures resulted in 1 factor, labeled Moral
behavior. Factor analyses of the 34 morally ques-
tionable online behaviors revealed 5 factors, labeled
Intentional harm online (12 items; e.g., “Send an
e-mail that contains violent, threatening language to
someone you know,” “Delete files or other infor-
mation that belongs to someone else without ask-
ing”), Virtual-to-real world harm (8 items; e.g., “Use
the answers e-mailed to you from a friend to do bet-
ter on test you have to take,” “E-mail strangers with
the answers to a test they have to take”), Invasion
of privacy (6 items; “Read another person’s e-mails
284
without asking,” “Use a friend’s Internet account
without asking”), Videogame violence (4 items; e.g.,
“Play videogames that contain violence against
characters who are not people,” “Play videogames
that contain destruction of property”), and Con-
tacting strangers online (3 items; e.g., “E-mail
stranger,” “Talk to strangers in a chat room”). Com-
posite measures (arithmetic averages) were com-
puted for each factor just described. All had ade-
quate reliabilities (  0.65) for the Chinese, U.S.,
and combined samples.
Culture by gender analyses of variance were per-
formed for each of the composite measures. Signif-
icant F ratios for these analyses ranged from 5.43 to
243.89; dferror ranged from 1,052 to 1,159. Main ef-
fects of culture and gender on Moral character in-
dicated that having a good moral character was
more important to Chinese youth and to females
than to U.S. youth and to males respectively. The
reverse was true for Exceptions to moral behavior
that advanced individual goals. U.S. youth and
males found these behaviors more acceptable than
did Chinese youth and females respectively. Main
effects of culture and gender on the composite
measure of moral behavior were qualified by their
interaction. Chinese females were the most likely
of all groups to behave in moral ways in the real
world.
There was a main effect of culture on Intentional
harm online. Chinese youth found Intentional harm
online to be more acceptable than did U.S. youth. A
culture by gender interaction on Invading privacy
online indicated that Chinese males found this be-
havior more acceptable than did any other group.
Main effects of culture and gender and their inter-
action on Videogame violence indicated that while
U.S. youth and males found such violence more ac-
ceptable than did Chinese youth and females, re-
spectively, it was U.S. males who found this vio-
lence most acceptable. Lastly, a culture main effect
on acceptability of Contacting strangers online in-
dicated that Chinese youth found this behavior
more acceptable than did U.S. youth.
Regression analyses to predict the acceptability
of morally questionable online behaviors from
moral attitudes and behavior indicated that the
more youth considered exceptions to moral behav-
ior that advanced individual goals acceptable, and
the less moral their behavior in the real world, the
more likely they were to find acceptable all forms
of morally questionable online behaviors. Signifi-
cant standardized betas ranged from 0.07 to 0.38;
dferror ranged from 1,050 to 1,085. The importance of
moral character in the real world did not predict the
acceptability of any of these online behaviors. More-
JACKSON ET AL.
over, additional regression analyses indicated that
Internet and other technology use did not predict
the acceptability of morally questionable online be-
havior, with one exception. More videogame play-
ing predicted greater acceptability of videogame vi-
olence.
DISCUSSION
This research examined cultural differences in
morality in the real and virtual worlds among Chi-
nese and U.S. youth to answer four questions. First,
there are cultural differences in moral attitudes and
moral behavior in the real world. Second, there are
cultural differences in the acceptability of morally
questionable online behaviors. Third, for both cul-
tural groups, moral attitudes and behavior in the
real world predict the acceptability of morally ques-
tionably online behaviors. Fourth, for both cultural
groups, the extent of Internet and other technology
use does not predict the acceptability of morally
questionable online behaviors with one exception:
more videogame playing is associated with greater
acceptability of videogame violence.
U.S. and Chinese youth differed on 16 of the 23
measures of moral attitudes. Analyses of the two
underlying dimensions of these attitudes indicated
that Chinese youth believed that having a good
moral character was more important than did U.S.
youth, whereas U.S. youth believed that exceptions
to moral behavior that advanced individual goals
were more acceptable than did Chinese youth. Gen-
der differences in moral attitudes indicated that, in
general, females in both cultures valued good moral
character more than did males and were less ac-
cepting of exceptions to moral behavior that ad-
vanced individual goals than were males.
Cultural differences in real-world moral behav-
ior were obtained for 7 of the 10 items measuring
this construct. Chinese females were less likely to
engage in questionable moral behavior in the real
world compared to any other group. U.S. and Chi-
nese males did not differ in their real world moral
behavior, both groups being more likely than U.S.
females to engage in questionable moral behavior.
Cultural differences were obtained on 21 of the
34 morally questionable online behaviors. On 14
of the 21, Chinese youth were more accepting of
morally questionable online behaviors than were
U.S. youth. Analyses of the five dimensions under-
lying these behaviors indicated that Chinese youth
found it more acceptable to engage in intentionally
harmful online behaviors and to contact strangers
online. Other effects of culture depended on gen-
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES IN REAL AND VIRTUAL MORALITY
der. Chinese males found it more acceptable to in-
vade other people’s privacy online than did any
other group. U.S. youth and males found video-
game violence more acceptable than did Chinese
youth and females respectively. U.S. males found
such violence more acceptable than did any other
group.
Youth who engaged in morally questionable be-
havior in the real world, and youth who found ex-
ceptions to moral behavior that advanced individ-
ual goals more acceptable, also found all types of
morally questionable online behaviors more ac-
ceptable. In contrast, the importance of moral char-
acter in the real world did not predict the accept-
ability of morally questionable online behaviors.
Cultural differences in moral attitudes and be-
havior observed in our research are consistent with
theoretical perspectives arguing that children are
socialized into the moral value system of their cul-
ture1,2 and with empirical findings that these value
systems are different in Eastern and Western cul-
tures.5,7 Chinese children in our research, reared in
a collectivistic culture, placed greater value on good
moral character than did U.S. youth. In contrast,
U.S. youth, raised in an individualistic culture,
viewed exceptions to moral behavior that advanced
individual goals as more acceptable than did Chi-
nese youth. However, an interesting reversal occurs
in the virtual world.
In virtual reality, it was Chinese youth who found
morally questionable behaviors more acceptable than
did U.S. youth. The interesting question is why? Why
are Chinese youth, who clearly value moral charac-
ter in the real world, more accepting of morally ques-
tionable behavior in the virtual world? One explana-
tion is that for Chinese youth the virtual world
provides a venue for expressing autonomy that is not
available to them in the real world. In the virtual
world, Chinese youth can do as they choose without
concern about the impact of their behavior on others.
U.S. youth, in contrast, have more latitude in ex-
pressing their autonomy and behaving inappropri-
ately in the real world. Thus, they have less of a need
for or interest in doing so in the virtual world.
Our findings suggest several directions for future
research. First, future research should replicate and
extend our findings using other Eastern and West-
ern cultures and other measures of moral attitudes
and behavior, online and offline. Second, actual on-
line behaviors need to be measured to determine the
relationship between acceptability and actual be-
havior. Third, alternative explanations for cultural
differences in the acceptability of morally question-
able online behaviors need to be explored. For ex-
ample, do Chinese youth perceive the virtual world
285
as an arena for expressing individual autonomy that
they feel they cannot express in the real world? How
do U.S. youth perceive the virtual world with re-
gard to the expression of autonomy or other per-
sonal characteristics? What are the implications of
cultural differences in youths’ perceptions of the
virtual world as a venue for personal expression for
the development of new information and commu-
nication technologies?
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported in part by a
grant from the National Science Foundation
(HSD#0527064). Details about the Children and
Technology Project can be found at www.msu.
edu/user/jackso67/CT/children/
REFERENCES
1. Fu G, Xu F, Cameron CA, Heyman G, Lee K. Cross-
cultural differences in children’s choices, categoriza-
tions and evaluations of truth and lies. Developmen-
tal Psychology 2007; 43:278–93.
2. Miller J. (2001) Culture and moral development. In:
Matsumoto D, ed. Handbook of culture and psychology.
New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 151–70.
3. Hauser M. (2006) Moral minds: how nature designed our
universal sense of right and wrong. New York: Ecco
Press.
4. Sweetser EE. (1987) The definition of lie: an exami-
nation of the folk models underlying a semantic pro-
totype. In: Holland D, ed. Cultural models in language
and thought. New York: Cambridge University Press,
pp. 43–66.
5. Fu G, Lee K, Cameron CA, Xu F. Chinese and Cana-
dian adults’ categorization and evaluation of lie- and
truth-telling about pro- and anti-social behaviors.
Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 2001; 32:740–47.
6. Lee K Xu F, Fu G, Cameron CA, Chen S. Taiwan and
Mainland Chinese and Canadian children’s catego-
rization and evaluation of lie- and truth-telling: a
modesty effect. British Journal of Developmental Psy-
chology 2001; 19:525–42.
7. Bond MH. (1986) Lifting one of the last bamboo curtains:
review of the psychology of the Chinese people. Hong
Kong: Oxford University Press.
8. Kohlberg L. (1984) The psychology of moral development.
San Francisco: Harper & Row.
9. Kohlberg L, Candee D. (1984) The relationship of
moral judgment to moral action. In: Kohlberg L, ed.
The psychology of moral development. New York: Harper
& Row, pp. 498–581.
10. Colby A, Kohlberg L, eds. (1987) The measurement of
moral judgment. New York: Cambridge University
Press.
286 JACKSON ET AL.

11. Keller M, Edelstein W, Fang F-X, Fang G. Reasoning
about responsibilities and obligations in close rela-
tionships: a comparison across two cultures. Devel-
opmental Psychology 1998; 34:731–41.
12. Edwards C. (1994) Cross-cultural research on
Kohlberg’s stages: the basis for consensus. In: Puka
W, ed. Moral development: a compendium (Vol. 5). New
York: Garland, pp. 343–89.
13. Siegal M, Surian L, Nemeroff CJ, Peterson CC. Lies,
mistakes, and blessings: defining and characteristic
features in conceptual development. Journal of Cog-
nition and Culture 2001; 323–39.
14. Gilligan C. (1982) In a different voice: psychological the-
ory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Har-
vard University Press.
15. Pew Internet & American Family Life (2006) Teens
and the Internet. Findings submitted to the House
Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Inter-
net. www.pewinternet.org/ppt/Pew%20Internet%20
findings%20-%20teens%20and%20the%20inter-
net%20-%20final.pdf (accessed May 23, 2007).
16. Jackson LA. (2008) Adolescents and the Internet. In:
Romer D, Jamieson P, eds. The changing portrayal of
American youth in popular media. Annenberg Public
Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania. New York:
Oxford University Press.
17. Josephson Institute’s report card on the ethics of
American youth. (2002, 2004) www.josephsoninsti-
tute.org/reportcard/index.html (accessed May 30,
2007).
18. Carlo G, Eisenberg N, Knight GP. PROM (prosocial
moral reasoning). Journal of Research on Adolescence
1992; 2:331–49.
Address reprint requests to:
Dr. Linda A. Jackson
Department of Psychology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
E-mail: jackso67@msu.edu