Psychology - Core Studies - Kohlberg (1968)

aim of Kohlberg?

• to investigate the development of morality throughout adolescence and early adulthood,

• to assess the extent to which changes hold across cultures,

method of Kohlberg?

• Longitudinal using self-report,

• cross-sectional with groups from Mexico, Taiwan, Malaysia, UK, Canada + Turkey,

participants of Kohlberg?

• Longitudinal:

  • 75 Chicago boys,

  • started age 10-16, finished age 22-28 years,

• Cross-sectional:

  • varying ages from each country,

procedure of Kohlberg?

• asked a range of questions about moral problems,

• Kohlberg evaluated what stage they were at by analysing responses (quantitative),

Kohlberg stage 1 (L1)?

obedience and punishment orientation - well behaved in response to cultural norms but can behave immorally if authority structure is missing, wants to avoid punishment,

situation = is it better to save the life of one important person than a lot of unimportant people?

evidence = participant may have confused the value of a human being with the value of property he possessed

Kohlberg stage 2 (L1)?

self-interest orientation - behaves in a self-centred way, wonders what they will get in return,

situation = should the doctor ‘mercy kill’ a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?

evidence = participant thought the value of the women’s life partly rests on its value to the wife herself but even more on its instrumental value to her husband, who can’t replace her as easily as he can a pet,

Kohlberg stage 3 (L2)?

conformity to expectations and rules - child now seeking approval from others and begins to consider the intention of the act, what do other people say is right/wrong,

situation = should the doctor ‘mercy kill’ a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?

evidence = based on the husbands distinctly human empathy and love for someone in his family. equally clearly, it lacks any basis for a universal human value of the woman’s life which would hold if she had no husband or her husband didn't love her,

Kohlberg stage 4 (L2)?

authority and social order orientation - sees right behaviour as duty to show respect and maintain social order, laws are set in stone, must do what is right to respect others and make sure others do as well,

situation = should the doctor ‘mercy kill’ a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?

evidence = life is sacred in terms of its place in a categorical moral or religious order. the value of human life is universal for all humans it is however still dependant on respect for god and god’s authority - not an autonomous human value,

Kohlberg stage 5 (L3)?

social contract orientation - does what is right based on law as well as personal values and opinions seeing laws as changeable, difference between law and morality, promotes social utility

situation = should the doctor ‘mercy kill’ a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?

evidence = the value of life defined in terms of equal and universal human rights in the context of relativity and concern for utility or welfare consequences,

Kohlberge stage 6 (L3)?

universal ethical principles - bases judgement on universal human rights of justice, equality, reciprocity and respect for the individual, all individuals have value, avoid sacrificing one for the many,

situation = should the doctor ‘mercy kill’ a fatally ill woman requesting death because of her pain?

evidence = sees the value of human life as absolute and representing a universal and equal respect for the human as an individual, has moved step by step through a sequence culminating in a definition of human life as centrally valuable rather than derived from or dependant on social or divine authority,

results of Klohlberg’s cross-sectional?

clear cultural differences,

e.g., at stage 2 a Taiwanese boy would steal food to keep his family alive and how would he afford a funeral, a Malaysian boy would steal food because if his wife died, who would care for the family,

results of Kohlberg’s longitudinal?

USA:

up to 9 years - pre-conventional stage,

9yrs - adolescence - conventional stage,

adulthood - post-conventional stage,

Kohlberg results overall?

• stage 5 more common in USA cf Mexico or Taiwan,

• rate at which children move through stages differ but same order,

• middle class children move through quicker than lower class urban children and village boys,

• no difference between religions,

Kohlberg validity?

Face - aim aligned with conclusions,

Concurrent - tests were a new measure with stages not being compared to anything else,

Construct - subjectivity of what is moral and moral development,

Ecological - make moral decisions everyday, however usually more spontaneous, how they say the will act may be different to how they might actually, negated as Kohlberg mostly looked at justification of actions,

Temporal - later disproved by Lee et al (1997)

reliability of Kohlberg?

internal - different questions and situations provided similar results (stages attributed to each individual),

external - different responses showed progression through the stages of morality, each participant still fitted in within one of the stages,

usefulness of Kohlberg?

application - PSHE as to what is an appropriate curriculum, rules and authority within education, psychological tests (military, police etc training),

Kohlberg debates?

deductive, determinist, nature & nurture, situational (cross-sectional), reductionist & holistic,