EDS220| EDUCATIONAL

PSYCHOLOGY Assist Prof.Dr. Elif

MORAL DEVELOPMENT Öztürk

Educational Sciences, METU
SUMMARY OF LAST WEEK

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYCBdZLCDBQ
MORAL DEVELOPMENT
Changes in thoughts, feelings, and behaviors regarding standards of right and wrong
MORAL DEVELOPMENT
To understand moral development, we need to consider some basic questions:

1. how do individuals reason or think about moral decisions?

2. how do individuals actually behave in moral circumstances?
3. how do individuals feel about moral matters?
4. what characterizes an individual’s moral personality?
MORAL THOUGHT
How do individuals think about what is right and wrong?
Are children able to evaluate moral questions in the same way that adults can?

Jean Piaget’s Theory

Lawrence Kohlberg’s Theory
PIAGET’S MORAL
DEVELOPMENT
Lets think about these two cases:

1. A little girl is helping her mother to set the table for dinner. While doing that
glasses fell and three glasses were broken !

2. Another little girl were resisting to eat her dinner and intentionally she let a
glass and one glass was broken !
If we tell these stories to a child at around age 5, and ask who is
more guilty?
PIAGET’S MORAL
DEVELOPMENT
The First Stage (heteronomous morality) (4-7 years old)
For young children, rules simply exist.
If a rule is broken, punishment should be determined by how much damage is done !
(not by the intention of the child or by other circumstances)
Children think of justice and rules as unchangeable properties of the world

The state of moral realism

(morality of constraint)
PIAGET’S MORAL
DEVELOPMENT
The Second Stage (autonomous morality) (10 years old + )
As children interact with others, develop perspective-taking abilities so that be able
to make judgement about the intention of people.
Children understand people make rules and they can change them

Morality of cooperation

Transition from ages 7-10 years

PIAGET’S MORAL
DEVELOPMENT
How do these changes in moral reasoning occur?
Piaget argued that, as children develop, they become more sophisticated in thinking
about social matters, especially about the possibilities and conditions of cooperation.
Social understanding comes about through the mutual give-and-take of peer relations.

Parent- child relations, in which parents have the power and children do not, are less
likely to advance moral reasoning, because rules are often handed down in an
authoritarian way.
THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
TWO STATES !Morality of Constraints
(around 6 years old)
Hold single and absolute moral perspective
(behavior is righ or wrong)
Believes rules are absolute and can not be changed Believes people can make the rules and can
When rules are broken just the amount of damage
done is taken into account
Moral wrongness is defined in terms of what is
forbidden or punished
Believes an external authority should punish
agressive peers
Believes that rules come from authority
(parent/god etc) and are to be obeyed without a
question
Morality of Cooperation
(around 12 years old)
Aware of different view points regarding rules.
Different people have different rules.
change them
When rules are broken both the damage done and
the intention of the offender are taken into account
Moral wrongness is defined in terms of violation
of spirit and cooperation
Believes to punish agressive peer victim should
take his/her revenge
Consider rules critically and selectively applies
these rules based on a goal of mutual respect and
cooperation
KOHLBERG’S STAGES OF
MORAL DEVELOPMENT
There are 3 levels (6 stages) of moral development.
KOHLBERG’S STAGES OF
MORAL DEVELOPMENT
LEVEL 1- PRE-CONVENTIONAL STAGE
Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment
Children obey because adults tell them to obey.
People base their moral decisions on fear of punishment.

Stage 2: Instrumental Relativist

Individuals pursue their own interests but let others do the same.
What is right involves equal exchange.
They reason that if they are nice to others, others will be nice to them in return.
KOHLBERG’S STAGES OF
MORAL DEVELOPMENT
LEVEL 2- CONVENTIONAL STAGE
Stage 3: Interpersonal Relationships (good boy/nice girl)
İndividuals value trust, caring, and loyalty to others as a basis of moral judgments.
Children and adolescents often adopt their parents’ moral standards at this stage,
seeking to be thought of by their parents as a “good girl” or a “good boy.”
Stage 4: Authority and Social Order
moral judgments are based on understanding the social order, law, justice, and duty.
For example, adolescents may reason that in order for a community to work
effectively, it needs to be protected by laws that are adhered to by its members.
KOHLBERG’S STAGES OF
MORAL DEVELOPMENT
LEVEL 3- POST-CONVENTIONAL STAGE
Stage 5: Social Contract or Utility and Individual Rights
A person evaluates the validity of actual laws and social systems in terms of the
degree to which they preserve and protect fundamental human rights and values.
Stage 6: Universal ethical principles
At this stage, the person has developed a moral standard based on universal human
rights.
When faced with a conflict between law and conscience, the person reasons that
conscience should be followed, even though the decision might bring risk.
KOHLBERG’S STAGES OF
MORAL DEVELOPMENT
HEINZ DILEMMA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBop4yfH4pg
HEINZ DILEMMA
LEVEL 1- PRE-CONVENTIONAL STAGE
Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment
I would not steal the drug because I do not want to go to jail
(AVOID PUNISHMENT)

Stage 2: Instrumental Relativist

I would steal the drug because If I steal the drug and my wife lives, I will be
considered as hero !
(WHAT IS IN IT FOR ME?)
HEINZ DILEMMA
LEVEL 2- CONVENTIONAL STAGE
Stage 3: Interpersonal Relationships (good boy/nice girl)
I would not steal the drug because a good boy does not steal
I would steal the drug because a good husband steal to save his wife’s life
Stage 4: Authority and Social Order
I would not steal the drug because it is against the law
I would steal the drug because most honest people would steal to save their wife’s
life
HEINZ DILEMMA
LEVEL 3- POST-CONVENTIONAL STAGE
Stage 5: Social Contract or Utility and Individual Rights
I would not steal the drug because respect of property ownership is an important part
of maintaining laws and societal order.
I would steal the drug because a law can not justify losing a human life.
Stage 6: Universal ethical principles
I would steal the drug because saving the most amount of lives possible is always the
best decission.
Very little people fall in stage 6
KOHLBERG’S STAGES OF
MORAL DEVELOPMENT

Instrumental relativist

Good girl/nice boy

Law and Order

Ethical Principles
LET’S DISCUSS
COVID-19 Context
- You know that you are positive (you made a quick test at home) but you do not
have symptoms and you bought a flight ticket for a vacation.
- What you would do?
- Let’s write for each stage
Stag What you would do?
e
1 I wont go cause I do not want to pay the punishment fee

2 I will go I will have fun

3 I will tell my friends for sure cause they will tell me you are a really good friend

4 A good person don’t go to prevent others

5 Not going cause I would prevent the virus scattered to my friends and family

6 I am going cause there are a lot people in plane and friends around.
Stage What you would do?
1 I do not want to punished so I would go with PCR test
I would go vac. Because I do not want to be punished by staying at home
2 I will go to vac. To have fun. It is a benefit for me
I won’t go if I get caught , my vac. Will be ruined
no matter what happens i'm going on that vacation
3 A good girl let her friends know
4 If I am with corona, I should not go because there is a rule and it is inconvenient
for people with corona to walk around in society.

5
6
INFLUENCES ON THE
KOHLBERG STAGES
Levels and stages occur sequentially and are age-related
 Before age 9, children use stage 1 pre-conventional reasoning
 Most adolescents reason at stage 3 (good boy/nice girl)
 By early adulthood, a small number of individuals reason in post-conventional ways

Moral stages appeared somewhat later than Kohlberg envisioned

 Reasoning at higher stages, especially stage 6, is rare
INFLUENCES ON THE
KOHLBERG STAGES
advances in children’s cognitive development did not ensure development of moral
reasoning.
Instead, moral reasoning also reflects children’s experiences in dealing with moral
questions and moral conflict.
peer interaction is a critical part of the social stimulation that challenges children to
change their moral reasoning
KOHLBERG’S CRITICS
Moral Thought and Moral Behavior
Kohlberg’s theory has been criticized for placing too much emphasis on moral
thought and not enough emphasis on moral behavior.
Moral reasons can sometimes be a shelter for immoral behavior.
The cheaters and thieves may know what is right yet still do what is wrong.
KOHLBERG’S CRITICS
The Role of Emotion
Kohlberg argued that emotion has negative effects on moral reasoning.
However, increasing evidence indicates that emotions play an important role in
moral thinking.
KOHLBERG’S CRITICS
Culture and Moral Reasoning
Kohlberg emphasized that his stages of moral reasoning are universal, but some
critics claim his theory is culturally biased
Both Kohlberg and his critics may be partially correct.
As Kohlberg predicted, individuals in diverse cultures developed through first four
stages in sequence.
A research review revealed support for the qualitative shift from stage 2 to stage 3
across cultures
Stages 5 and 6, however, have not been found in all cultures
KOHLBERG’S CRITICS
Families and Moral Development
Kohlberg argued that family processes are essentially unimportant in children’s
moral development.
Most developmentalists emphasize that parents play more important roles in
children’s moral development than Kohlberg envisioned.
They stress that parents’ communication with children, their discipline techniques,
and many other aspects of parent-child relationships influence children’s moral
development.
KOHLBERG’S CRITICS
Gender and the Care Perspective (Gilligan’s Theory)
The most publicized criticism of Kohlberg’s theory has come from Carol Gilligan
(1982, 1992, 1996), who argues that Kohlberg’s theory reflects a gender bias.
According to Gilligan, Kohlberg’s theory is based on a male norm that puts abstract
principles above relationships.
In contrast with Kohlberg’s justice perspective, the care perspective is a moral
perspective that views people in terms of their connectedness with others and
emphasizes interpersonal communication, relationships with others, and concern for
others.
Girls consistently interpret moral dilemmas in terms of human relationships
 Base interpretations on listening and watching other people
CONSIDERING HEINZ DILEMMA: