History of American morality research, 1894–1932.

Abstract

Research on moral development existed long before the work of Piaget and Kohlberg. Early psychological opinions, along with empirical testing of moral judgments at the turn of the century, showed themes of the development of moral ideas in children and adults. After the appearance of Binet's intelligence tests, and guided by educational goals, moral testing began to reach its height, only to fail in reaching its objectives. These research endeavors did, however, provide some understanding of the nature of morality, the motives behind moral judgments, and the development of morality by using a scientific method.Nearly all of the research on moral development within psychology during the last 40 years has, in some way, been associated with the theoretical constructions and testing procedures devised by Lawrence Kohlberg (1963a). However, Kohlberg's research, begun while he was still a graduate student, offered a somewhat limited review of the existing literature on the psychology of morality and moral development. Like Piaget (1932/1960) before him, Kohlberg (1963b) was largely critical of, insensitive toward, or perhaps even ignorant of the fair body of American research conducted between 1894 (the date of the earliest published empirical study of morality) and 1932 (the date of publication of Piaget's landmark book).This disregard given by Piaget and Kohlberg-and perhaps many researchers since-is unfortunate. A researcher unfamiliar with the history of morality research might erroneously conclude that Piaget's (1932Piaget's ( /1960) and Kohlberg's (1963a) topic of inquiry was truly an original addition to the field of psychology. In fact, the quantitative, empirical study of morality and moral development has a rich and long history within the traditions of American psychology.Perhaps almost from its beginning, the psychology of morality and moral development has been deeply interested in providing and devising tests of an individual's moral values and development. However, these tests have varied in form and content over the years and can be classified into three main periods in which they were popular: (a) the years prior to the publication of Piaget's seminal work (1932/1960); (b) a period including the Piagetian model, the psychodynamic approach, and behavioristic models; and (c) a mid-century period during Craig A. Wendorf has taught statistics and social psychology in the Department of Psychology at Wayne State University. His primary research interests include the application of multilevel theory and statistical models to the understanding of issues of justice and fairness.Special thanks are extended to Susan H. McFadden for her comments and encouraging words on earlier versions of this article.

Upper Classes and Immorality: Ecological Validation of 50 Years of Power Research

“…Such thoughts have led to anti-slavery movements, women's emancipation, and the "right to pursue happiness" enshrined in the US constitution. Developmental psychologists also located the origin of moral thoughts either in a social contract or in the individuals' inner ability to reciprocate and treat others equally (for reviews see Gibbs, Basinger, Grime, & Snarey, 2007;and Wendorf, 2001). Piaget and Kohlberg recognized that, together with the cognitive development stages of children, emerges the ability to understand (culture specific) moral issues and to behave accordingly (Kohlberg, 1973(Kohlberg, , 1984Piaget, 1932Piaget, /1948.…”

Our responsibility to manage evaluative diversity

“…Psychologists have been publishing papers about evaluative diversity since at least 1894 [23]. Early studies culminated in bigoted paper-and-pencil tests designed to classify subjects by their "fitness" to make moral judgments.…”

Restoring Pastors Following a Moral Failure: The Effects of Self-Interest and Group Influence

“…Researchers have studied moral questions since the late 1800s (Wendorf 2001). Studies of morality include: moral development (Chiu et al 1997;Dunn et al 1995;Walker and Pitts 1998); moral judgment (Monin and Miller 2001;Wark and Krebs 1996;Weiner 1993); moral affect (Tangney 1991); empathy-induced altruism and moral judgment (Batson et al 1995;Shafer-Landau 1998); moral reasoning (Turner et al 2002); conceptions of morality (Chiu et al 1997); and moral rationalization (Tsang 2002).…”