New tools, new insights: Kohlberg’s moral judgement stages revisited

Dawson, Theo L.

doi:10.1080/01650250042000645

Cited by 76 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent scaling analysis of 996 moral judgment interviews scored with the Standard Issue Scoring System provided evidence for the specified developmental sequence and some evidence of structured wholeness in development from Moral Stages 3 to 5 (Dawson, 2002b). The instrument did not perform as well at the lower stages as it did at the higher stages.…”

Section: Standard Issue Scoring Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This meant that development should proceed from one stage to the next in an invariant sequence with no skipping of stages. A large body of longitudinal evidence supports the sequentiality in the acquisition of stages of development (Armon & Dawson, 1997;Case, Okamoto, Henderson, & McKeough, 1993;Colby, Kohlberg, Gibbs, & Lieberman, 1983;Dawson, 2002b;Fischer & Bullock, 1981;Kitchener, King, Wood, & Davison, 1989;Snarey, Reimer, & Kohlberg, 1985;Walker, 1982).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Stage Is a Stage Is a Stage: A Direct Comparison of Two Scoring Systems

Dawson

2003

The Journal of Genetic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Standard Issue Scoring Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Stage Is a Stage Is a Stage: A Direct Comparison of Two Scoring Systems

Dawson

2003

The Journal of Genetic Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As previously mentioned, numerous early validation studies failed to control for variance in moral development scores that could be attributed to education and IQ (Martin, Shaftro, & Van Deinse, 1977). Since these studies, researchers have found a significant association between moral development scores and IQ (Dawson, 2002;Taylor, 1978). In addition, not only do DIT scores increase as the number of years of education increase, but Coder (1975) found that scores increase more with special moral education programs than with non-moral education.…”

Section: Kohlberg's Model Of Moral Developmentmentioning

confidence: 94%

The Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure of Moral Orientation

Giammarco¹

2016

Personality and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers have found that when individuals are faced with moral dilemmas, they tend to approach the situations with the same general perspective. This general perspective is referred to as their moral orientation. Studies have shown that moral orientations tend to be either justice or care focused. A justice orientation refers to a focus on rights, rules, and objective decision making. In contrast, individuals using a care orientation are more likely to consider relationships, contextual factors, and minimizing harm to others. Although numerous studies have reported individual differences in these orientations, the literature has failed to consider how individuals with -abnormal‖ moral development approach these dilemmas. As such, the goal of present study was to develop a measure of moral orientation that was able to capture adequately the orientations of those individuals with more maladaptive tendencies. This was achieved by assessing a novel moral orientation, termed self-promotion. After developing and administering this scale to two independent samples, a series of item analyses were conducted and items that failed to meet acceptable levels of psychometric criteria were deleted. The reduced scaled was factor analyzed and the results indicated three distinct care, justice, and self-promotion factors emerged for some scenarios, but not others, suggesting that further scale revisions are necessary.Despite some potentially problematic items, preliminary validity evidence was found, with significant correlations in the expected direction observed between each of the moral orientation dimensions and various Dark Triad and HEXACO personality traits.

show abstract

“…Further, in their research assessing moral thinking in a sample aged 14 to 92 years, Pratt, et al found that their participants aged 75 or older showed significantly lower stages of moral development than did their younger participants. Overall, moral reasoning was strongly correlated with age in children, moderately correlated with age in young adults, and education had a significant impact on this relation in each age group (see also Dawson, 2002 …”

Section: Agementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Still other research has found a curvilinear relationship between age and moral philosophy (Pratt, Golding, & Hunter, 1984), with the selection of moral principles that are associated with higher levels of moral development increasing during adolescence and throughout early adulthood (see Armon & Dawson, 1997;Colby & Kohlberg, 1987;Dawson, 2002;Czyzowska & Niemczynski, 1996) and seeming to decrease somewhat in old age (Pratt, Golding, Hunter and Norris, 1988; see also Aldrich & Kage, 2003). Further, in their research assessing moral thinking in a sample aged 14 to 92 years, Pratt, et al found that their participants aged 75 or older showed significantly lower stages of moral development than did their younger participants.…”

Section: Agementioning

confidence: 99%

Resolving ethical dilemmas: Exploring the role of moral principles

Blais¹,

Thompsom²

2007

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

……..We sought to answer two questions via this exploratory study. First, we investigated whether or not individual differences in moral principle selection/preference existed in response to six moral dilemmas. Second, we sought to find out whether they were related to the demographic variables of sex and age. As part of a larger study on moral decision making, 64 participants read and reflected upon six ethical dilemmas, rated the extent to which 5 moral principles influenced their decisions regarding these dilemmas, and selected their preferred courses of action in response to each dilemma. Results of multilevel analyses suggest that there was significant within-and between-subjects variability in the extent to which the participants relied on various moral principles to resolve the dilemmas. That is, clear individual differences existed in the moral principles that the participants reported had guided their moral responses to the dilemmas. We also found that different moral principles were invoked to differing extents depending on the domain of the decision (non-moral, military moral and non-military moral). Of the individual difference variables assessed here, results revealed that age was a significant predictor of moral principle preference, with older adults being more likely to use virtue-and care-based principles than did younger adults. Sex was not significantly associated with moral principle selection. We discuss the potential implications of individual differences in the use of moral principles and offer directions for future research in this area. Résumé ….....La présente étude exploratoire visait à répondre à deux questions. En premier lieu, nous avons voulu savoir s'il existait des différences d'un individu à l'autre dans les préférences ou le choix de principes moraux utilisés dans la prise de décision face à six dilemmes moraux. En second lieu, nous nous sommes demandé dans quelle mesure, lorsque de telles différences existent entre les individus, celles-ci sont-elles liées aux variables démographiques que sont l'âge et le sexe. Dans le cadre d'une étude plus vaste portant sur le processus de prise de décision morale, 64 participants ont lu six dilemmes éthiques afin d'y réfléchir et d'évaluer dans quelle mesure cinq principes moraux influençaient leur décision face à ces dilemmes. Ils ont ensuite indiqué quelles étaient leurs lignes de conduite de prédilection face à chacun des dilemmes. Les résultats des analyses à niveaux multiples suggèrent qu'il existait des variations chez un même sujet et entre les sujets en ce qui a trait à l'importance qu'accordaient les participants à la portée des différents principes moraux pour résoudre ces dilemmes. Ce qui signifie qu'il existait des différences claires d'un individu à l'autre dans les principes moraux que les participants disaient avoir utilisés pour guider leur réponse morale à chacun des dilemmes. Nous avons également découvert que différents principes moraux ont été évoqués dans différentes mesures selon le domaine de décision (non lié...

show abstract

New tools, new insights: Kohlberg’s moral judgement stages revisited

Cited by 76 publications

References 26 publications

A Stage Is a Stage Is a Stage: A Direct Comparison of Two Scoring Systems

A Stage Is a Stage Is a Stage: A Direct Comparison of Two Scoring Systems

The Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure of Moral Orientation

Resolving ethical dilemmas: Exploring the role of moral principles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About