Written Report

InChild and Adolescence

Development(Moral Development in Late Childhood)

Morality came from the Latin word moralitas which means manner, character, proper behavior. It is to know right from wrong behavior and to engage in the former. It is also the quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct

Theories on Moral Development

Jean Piaget

In his book 'The Moral Judgement of the Child' (1932), Piaget states that 'all morality consists in a system of rules.'  Piaget, therefore considers morality to be akin to justice and fair play. 

Piaget used two methods of investigation:

1. Games of marbles

Piaget would watch children between the ages of 3 and 12 playing marbles, and get them to explain the rules, and the reasons for the rules.

Piaget believed that rules were the key to moral understanding and marbles was ideal since children played the game without adult interference.

His findings showed that at ages 4 to 9, children saw rules as unchangeable – particularly with regard to traditional games. To change a rule would show disrespect for the ancestors. However, around 10 to 11, children alter rules to fit unusual situations and may invent new rules to cover special circumstances. A higher level of moral reasoning enables children to view rules as changeable.

2. Moral stories

A little boy who is called John is in his room. He is called to dinner. He goes into the dining room. But behind the door was a chair, and on the chair there was a tray with 15 cups on it. John couldn’t have known that there was all this behind the door. He goes in, the door knocks against the tray, bang go the fifteen cups, and they all get broken!

One day a little boy called Henry tried to get some jam out of the cupboard when his mother was out. He climbed onto a chair and stretched out his arm. The jam was too high up and he couldn’t reach it. But while he was trying to get it he knocked over a cup. The cup fell down and broke.

Who is the naughtier one? Explain the reason.

Piaget’s Three Stages of Moral Development

Pre-moral (up to 4 years)

Children simply do not understand the concept of rules and have no idea of morality. During this time, children have little conception of what a rule is and what purpose it serves.

Heteronomous Morality or Moral Realism (4 to 9 or 10 years)

Moral Realism is characterized by the assumption on the part of children that rules are external, absolute, and unchanging. Children in the moral realism stage tend to judge behavior in absolute terms; behavior is totally right or totally wrong. Moreover, the young child feels that everyone sees and judges the morality of people and behavior exactly the same way he or she does. Further, children see themselves as inferior to adults and, form a mixture of fear, affection, and admiration; they adopt their parents’ moral beliefs unquestioningly. In the process they adopt an inflexible moral code based on obedience.

Autonomous Morality or Moral Relativism (from 9 to 10 years onwards)

The shift from moral realism to moral relativism occurs primarily as a result of changes in cognitive ability as well as the child’s broadened social experience. As may become members of a group, their moral judgments may become less absolute and authoritarian and more dependent on the needs and desires of the group; when that occurs moral relativism replaces moral realism. A higher level of moral reasoning, noted Piaget, enables children to view rules as changeable. Crucial differences include the idea that the punishment should be tailored to fit the crime and the ideas that it is intentions rather than consequences that determine the severity of the crime.

Heteronomous Morality Autonomous MoralityRules are fixed and cannot be changed or broken.

Rules are more flexible and can change so long as everyone agrees to the change.  Child recognises that at times it is necessary to tell fibs as this may prevent greater upset etc.

Rules are created by older children, adults or even by God.

Rules are in fact created by people just like themselves.

Outcomes are seen as being more important than intentions.  For example John is seen as naughtier because he breaks more cups

 

Intentions are now considered more than outcomes.  Older children see Henry as being naughtier because he was misbehaving.

Consequences determine the severity of the Intentions determine the severity of the crime,

crime, e.g. John is naughtier than Henry because he broke more cups.

e.g. Henry is naughtier than John because he was misbehaving at the time.

 Expiatory punishment: no attempt to fit the punishment to the crime

Reciprocal punishment: attempts to fit the punishment to the crime. 

Lawrence Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development

Level II:

Convention

al Morality

Seen in a few

older

elementary

school students,

some junior

high school

students, and

many high

school students

Stage

3:

Good

boy/gi

rl

People make decisions based on

what actions will please others,

especially authority figures and

other individuals with high status

(e.g., teachers, popular peers).

They are concerned about

maintaining relationships through

sharing, trust, and loyalty, and

they take other people's

perspectives and intentions into

account when making decisions.

In Stage three (interpersonal accord and conformity driven), the self enters society by filling social roles. Individuals are receptive to approval or disapproval from others as it reflects society's accordance with the perceived role. They try to be a "good boy" or "good girl" to live up to these expectations, having learned that there is inherent value in doing so. Stage three reasoning may judge the morality of an action by evaluating its consequences in terms of a person's relationships, which now begin to include things like respect, gratitude and the "golden rule". "I want to be liked and thought well of; apparently, not being naughty makes people like me." Desire to maintain rules and authority exists only to further support these social roles. The intentions of actors play a more significant role in reasoning at this stage; one may feel more forgiving if one thinks, "they mean well ...”

Nancy Eisenberg’s model of Pro-social Reasoning

Social psychologists in the 1970s became more interested in the reasoning behind people’s actions, as well as the actions themselves, and in moral development this trend was manifested by Eisenberg’s theory of pro-social reasoning. Crucially, as implied by the name, her theory also concentrates on positive behaviours and the reasoning behind them, rather than focusing on negative actions.

Method:

On her way she comes across a child who has fallen and suffered an injury. The dilemma being, does Mary stop and help and as a result miss the party, or does she ignore the injured person and continue on her way?

Eisenberg identified five main levels of pro-social reasoning:

Age 0 to about 7 (pre-school and primary school children)

1. Hedonistic (self-focused) orientation (pre-school children)

Child only cares only for itself. Any apparently altruistic behaviour is motivated by selfishness for example 'I’ll help them because they’ll help me in future’ (reciprocity), or simply because the child likes the person they are helping.

2. Needs of others orientation (some pre-school and primary school children)

The needs of others are being recognized but only to a limited extent. The needs of the specific situation are being addressed rather than a genuine sense of empathy. When asked the child offers simple explanations for their positive behaviour without referring to guilt or self reflection.

Age about 7 to adolescence (primary to secondary school children)

3. Stereotyped approval-focused orientation (primary and many high school children)

The child acts in a way that will make them liked. For example lending a helping hand in order to impress others. When asked to explain their behaviour they tend to use stereotyped portrayals of good and bad behaviour.

Adolescence onwards

4. Empathic orientation (a few high school children and most secondary school children)

The child now starts to show genuine empathy by putting themselves in the shoes of others and begins to report feelings of genuine guilt when considering their own actions.

4b. Transitional level (a few secondary school children)

The child’s actions are now explained in terms of wider social values and the need to protect the dignity and self-esteem of others.

5. Internalized orientation (rare in children)

The child now has a full set of values and understands their responsibilities towards others. They have self-respect that they can only maintain by behaving with a duty of care towards others. The person’s desire to live up to their own set of principles is also a motivating factor.

Developing Empathy

Empathy is frequently defined as a largely involved response to the emotional cues from other people or their situations. It is not simply to understand the feelings of others but to act o that understanding through thoughts and deeds to benefit the other. Before children can develop emphatic ways of responding to others, they need to have developed an awareness that people may have responses to a situation that differ from their own (Eisenberg, 2000). Empathic behavior takes many forms including sharing, helping, and comforting others in distress.

Teaching empathy is a more matter of reinforcing a certain perspective on good deeds. For example, when the child does something nice to a friend, instead of saying, “Oh, what a good boy you are to share the toy with Jimmy,” ask the child to connect his sharing the toy with how he has made Jimmy feel. Playing games such as imagining what it is like to be in certain situations ( a child looking for his lost puppy; not being invited to a party) and what children can do or say to make the person feel better help children gain stronger sense of morality (Shaffer, 1998).

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality Retrieved: January 7, 2014

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/morality Retrieved: January 7, 2014

http://psychology4a.com/cognitive_development.htm#Moral development Retrieved: February 18, 2014

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg's_stages_of_moral_development Retrieved: February 18, 2014