Lecture 8: Adolescent Social Development II

1. moral development ; 2. antisocial behaviour ; 3. adolescent delinquency

‘introduction’ to morality

• morality as inherently social (guided by societal norms and structures) and as functional (for the purpose of social cohesion)

• many models of morality within and outside of psych

• cld argue purpose of morality is to elicit ‘moral behaviour’; consequentialism vs deontology

• moral values and behaviours value across time and cultures

moral reasoning vs moral behaviour (Jones, 1991)

identify moral problem → moral reasoning (cognition) → moral intent (plan for behaviour) → moral behaviour

• between moral intent and moral behaviour is intention-behaviour gap

feeding into moral reasoning and moral intent are social factors

there is also moral intensity

moral intensity

1. magnitude of consequences

2. social consensus

3. probability of effect

4. temporal immediacy

5. proximity

6. concentration of effect

social factors feeding into moral reasoning and moral intent

1. group dynamics

2. authority figures

3. socialisation processes

moral development

involves change of thoughts, feelings, intentions, and behaviours in response to standards of ‘right and wrong’

Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development

1. Preconventional Level

   • Stage 1: Punishment and obedience

   • Stage 2: Instrumental purpose

2. Conventional Level

   • Stage 3: “good boy/girl”

   • Stage 4: social order maintenance

3. Postconventional Level

   • Stage 5: Social contract

   • Stage 6: Useful ethical principles

Preconventional Level

• early to late childhood

• individual has no moral value

• worry about avoiding punishment by adults/more powerful people

• motivated by self interest

Stage 1: Punishment and obedience

Stage 2: Instrumental purpose

Stage 1 (Kohlberg)

• at the preconventional level

• punishment and obedience / obedience and punishment orientation

  • behaviour driven by avoiding punishment and obeying authority without question

Stage 2 (Kohlberg)

• at the preconventional level

• instrumental purpose/ individualism and exchange

  • right behaviour = acting in own best interests and recognising others also have their interests

Conventional Level

• adolescence

• individuals abide by certain standards, but they are standards of others

• concerned with meeting external social expectations

Stage 3: Good interpersonal relationships/ “Good boy/girl”

Stage 4: Social order maintenance

Stage 3 (Kohlberg)

• at the conventional level

• “Good boy/girl” / Good Interpersonal Relationships

  • good behaviour is about living up to social expectations and rules, and emphasising trust, caring, and loyalty to others

Stage 4 (Kohlberg)

• at the conventional level

• Social order maintenance / Maintaining social order

  • right behaviour involves fulfilling one’s duties, respecting authority, and maintaining social order

Postconventional Level

• late adolescence and onward, not reached by everyone

• morality is completely internalised

• concern for fidelity to self-chosen moral principles

• universal ethical principles

Stage 5: Social contract / Social contract and individual rights

Stage 6: Universal ethical principles / Universal principles

Stage 5 (Kohlberg)

• at the postconventional level

• Social contract/ Social contract and individual rights

  • moral behaviour understood in terms of individual rights and standards that have been agreed upon by the whole society

Stage 6 (Kohlberg)

• at the postconventional level

• Universal ethical principles/ universal principles

  • morality is based on abstract reasoning using universal ethical principles

  • laws valid only insofar they are grounded in justice

describe Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development in terms of changeability, individuals, etc

• stages not fixed

• can vary significantly depending on individual experiences, education, culture

• not all individuals will reach postconventional level as it requires advanced cog dev and specific opportunities to engage in deeper moral reasoning

what does it require to reach the postconventional level?

• advanced cognitive development

• specific opportunities to engage in deeper moral reasoning

describe morality during adolescence

• conventional level

• moral values + standards are internalised (become part of one’s identity)

• moral reasoning develops during adolescence as social experiences, autonomy, and cognitive functions increase (Malti & Latzko, 2010)

moral ____a____ develops during adolescence as __b__ ____b___, ____c_____, and ___d____ ___d____ increase. (Malti & Latzko, 2010)

a) reasoning

b) social experiences

c) autonomy

d) cognitive functions

explain morality during adolescence

• development of social cognition and executive functioning as a result of frontal brain development during adolescence → often linked to increased proficiency in moral reasoning (Vera-Estay et al., 2015)

criticisms of Kohlberg’s theory

• moral reasoning may NOT lead to moral behaviour → internal validity

• early research only w male Ps who were white and relatively privileged → unrepresentative sample → lack generalisability; WEIRD; bias; beta bias

• emphasises justice over other moral values (e.g. compassion, caring) → subjective; may overlook

• culturally biased: evidence suggests diff cultures move thru stages at diff rates + may focus on diff moral values → ethnocentrism; imposed etic; culture bound

factors influencing moral development

1. education

2. social media

3. cultural norms

4. peers & family

5. identity development

6. neural & cognitive development

are we born with brains hardwired for morality? idea of ‘the moral brain’

• no single neural network or structure can account for all aspects of moral reasoning and behaviour

• different aspcts of morality governed by different cortical and subcortical neural circuits and interact w life experiences

(Pascual et al., 2013)

neural correlates of moral decision-making

• activation in left middle temporal, cingulate, and medial frontal gyrus; left/right dg temporal gyrus; right precuneus → associated w/ moral decision making (Garrigan et al., 2016)

• regions are involved in self-referential processing, attention, WM, emotional recognition, empathetic arousal

→ suggests no single region responsible

antisocial behaviour: broad legal definition

behaviour which causes/is likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to non-same-household people

(Antisocial Behaviour Act, 2003; Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act, 2011).

antisocial behaviour: specific behaviours definition

in children/adolescence, can be characterised by:

• verbally and physically harmful to other people

• violating social expectations

• delinquency, vandalism, theft, truancy

• disturbed interpersonal behaviour

very heterogenous amongst young people

(Otto et al., 2021)

influential factors in adolescent antisocial behaviour

1. moral identity

2. self-regulation

3. moral disengagement

(Hardy et al., 2015)

explanation for high prevalence of antisocial behaviour during adolescence: morality + antisocial behaviour

• moral development coincides w sensitive period of cognitive and neural development

• + increased propensity to take risks, sensitivity to pos/neg stimuli, sensitivity to influence of peers

children who experience abuse and maltreatment are at risk of…

becoming violent offenders, developing conduct disorder, having antisocial personality

development of antisocial behaviour: NURTURE

risk:

• childhood maltreatment/abuse

protective:

• religiosity

• peers

development of antisocial behaviour: NATURE

risk:

• MAOA-l

MAOA gene

• low activity variant associated w/ increased aggression, some link to psychopathy

• linked to X chromosome

• produces protein MAOA which breaks down excess neurotransmitters including dopamine and serotonin

• excess neurotransmitters → increased propensity for aggression

• MAOA-l → reduced activity of MAOA enzyme/protein → higher levels of dopamine, serotonin, noradrenaline → higher aggression

interaction → antisocial

interactions between MAOA and childhood maltreatment predict later antisocial behaviour

only when genetic predisposition is combined with childhood maltreatment does it result in adult antisocial behaviour

→ environment protective

label the shades: white, grey, black

white- no maltreatment

grey- probable maltreatment

black- severe maltreatment

Prof. James Fallon: neuroscientist who discovered he was a ‘psychopath’

• possesses all characteristics of ‘psychopath’

• MAOA-l

• professor… not killer

  • concluded success partly due to psychopathic tendencies: manipulation, risk taking, etc

  • but, grew up in loving family → believes protected him from genetic predispositions

→ nature + nurture

protective factors against antisocial behaviour

1. religiosity

2. peers

religiosity as a protective factor against antisocial behaviour

adolescents who remain part of a religious community:

• less likely antisocial behaviour

• more involved w community service

• less misconduct

• lower rates drug and alc abuse

• less likely early sexual activity

peers as a protective factor against antisocial behaviour

• can act as models for prosocial (or antisocial) behaviour

• can provide support in presence of unsupportive or confrontational familial relationships

delinquency

according to acts prohibited by criminal law, such as theft, burglary, robbery, violence, vandalism, and drug use

(Murray, 2010)

→ NOT same as antisocial behaviour

what is linked to conduct disorder?

adolescent/ juvenile delinquency

conduct disorder

repetitive and persistent pattern of behaviour where the basic rights of others or major age-appropriate societal norms or rules are violated, as shown by at least 3/15 criteria in past 12 months

→ persistent delinquency

increasing and chronic trajectories of delinquent behaviour in childhood predicts outcomes for…

partner violence, risky sexual behaviour, and depression at age 19 for m and f (Miller et al., 2013)

adolescent delinquency stats

• 15,800 between 10-17 cautioned or sentenced in 2021, UK

• decreasing last decade UK

• rises over early and mid, declines

Murray and Farrington (2010: Risk of Delinquency and Conduct Disorder

Risk:

1. Social factors

   • SES

   • school area

   • community area

   • peer influences

2. Individual factors

   • impulsiveness

   • low IQ

   • low educational achievement

3. Family factors

   • parenting

   • child abuse

   • parental conflict and disrupted families

routes to adolescent delinquency

1. early onset

   • behaviour begins in childhood

   • biological risk factors and child rearing practice are combined risk factors

2. late onset

   • behaviour begins around puberty

   • conduct problems arise from peer context of early adolescence

path to chronic delinquency for adolescents with childhood onset antisocial behaviour

Early Childhood:

1. difficult temperament; cognitive deficits; ADHD-I

→

2. conflict-ridden home: lax and inconsistent discipline

→

Middle Childhood:

3. conduct problems: hostility, defiance, persistent aggression

→

4. academic failure and/or rejection by ‘typical’ peers

→

5. commitment to deviant peer group

→

Adolescence:

6. chronic delinquency

prevention and intervention of adolescent delinquency: Averdijk et al., (2016): study

• cluster randomised control trial

• 1675 children

• Switzerland

• one or two psychosocial interventions at 7 and 8 y/o:

  1. Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies (PATHS; socioemotional skills)

  2. Triple P (cog-beh parenting program)

• outcomes measured at 13 and 15

• 13 outcomes related to delinquency, substance use, and antisocial behaviour

prevention and intervention of adolescent delinquency: Averdijk et al., (2016): findings

• PATHS intervention only → significantly less police contact

• PATHS + Triple P → worse conflict resolution competence

• all other effects either non-sig or negligible size

factors that foster resilience in adolescence: Arthur et al., (2002)

1. belief in moral system and religiosity

2. high social skills

3. rewards and opportunities for prosocial family interactions (like the ones afforded by authoritative parents)

4. rewards and opportunities for involvement in the school and community

factors that foster resilience in adolescence: Farrington et al., (2016)

1. low neuroticism and few friends are promotive factors → predict low probability of delinquency

2. high intelligence and educational attainment → protect against risk factor of poor child rearing

3. high family income → protects against risk factor of convincted parent