Evaluate level of moral reasoning

Strength is evidence supports the role of moral reasoning

Palmer and Hollin (1998) compared moral reasoning of offenders and non/offenders in a SRN-SC scale (11 moral dilemmas)

Offenders showed less mature reasoning than the non offenders group e.g not taking things that belong to someone else)

This is consistent with Kohlberg theory, and suggest his theory of criminality has validity.

Limitation is moral reasoning may depend on type of offence

Thornton and Reid (82) found that people whose crimes were for financial gain were were more likely to show preconventional level than if impulsive crime like assault

Pre-conventional moral reasoning tends to be associated with crimes in which offenders believe they have a good chance of evading punishment

This suggests that Kohlbergs theory may not apply to all forms of crime

Thinking vs behaviour

Kohlberg theory provides insight into the criminal mind offenders may be more childlike and egocentric when making moral judgments.

However moral thinking is not the same as moral behaviour. Moral reasoning may be used to explain behaviour but only afterwards.

This suggest that understanding moral behaviour may be more useful may be more useful as not everyone who has criminal thoughts will act on them

Shake

Shake