OCR Psychology For A Level Book 1 sample

Conclusions The data show that moral reasoning develops with age in a fixed and invariant sequence. The sequence of stages was similar in all countries, showing that the stage sequence is not purely an American phenomenon. The only difference may be the rate of development. Middle-class and working-class children move through the same sequence but middle-class children move faster and further. A moral dilemma In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to make. He [the druggist] paid $400 for the radium and charged $4000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $2000, which was half of what the drug cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, ‘No, I discovered the drug and I’m going to make money from it.’ So Heinz got desperate and considered breaking into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife. Kohlberg (1981) Should Heinz steal the drug? Why or why not? Kohlberg collected qualitative data in his study. He gave participants one of his dilemmas, such as the Heinz dilemma described at the top of this page, and used questions such as the ones below so he could understand what people were thinking. 1. Should Heinz steal the drug? Why or why not? 2. Is it actually right or wrong for him to steal the drug? Why is it right or wrong? 3. Does Heinz have a duty or obligation to steal the drug? Why or why not? Try asking a person these questions and note the responses. Compare the responses you get with others in your class. Procedure American longitudinal study 1� Participants were first assessed when they were either 10, 13 or 16 years old. Thereafter, each boy was retested every three or four years up to the age of 24. 2� Each participant’s level of moral development was assessed by giving them a moral dilemma such as the Heinz dilemma above. 3� Participants were then asked a serious of open questions to explain the reasons for their choice (see examples in ‘Try this’ below). The focus was not on what the boys’ answer was to the dilemma but why , i.e. their moral reasoning. 4� The questions were adjusted depending on the previous answer. For example, if the participant said Heinz should steal the drug then the next question would be, ‘If Heinz doesn’t love his wife, should he steal the drug for her?’ but if the participant doesn’t favour stealing then the question would be, ‘Does it make a difference whether or not he loved his wife?’ 5� The oral interview took about 45 minutes and covered nine dilemmas. The cross-cultural sample 6� Kohlberg tested boys in two rural villages in Malaysia and Taiwan. He was helped to interpret their responses by a Chinese researcher. 7� The boys were asked about a story involving the theft of food: ‘ A man’s wife is starving to death but the store owner won’t give the man any food unless he can pay, which he can’t. Should he break in and steal some food? Why?’ 8� Kohlberg also tested boys in two isolated villages, one in Yucatán (Mexico) and one in Turkey. Results American longitudinal study 1� Kohlberg analysed the responses from two of the boys in his study. Their comments were on the moral issue of the ‘value of human life’. For example: • Tommy (aged 10) mixed up the value of a life with the property a person owned. Stage 1 reasoning. • Richard (aged 16) saw life as important for all humans but still dependent on someone else’s authority (God). Stage 4 reasoning. • Richard (aged 24) argued for absolute values of justice. Stage 6 reasoning. 2� Both boys showed a steady progression of moral reasoning, though Tommy’s was slower despite being a bright boy (IQ 120). Across cultures 3� At age 10 Stage 1 reasoning is the most common in all countries. 4� At age 16 in the USA the order was reversed with Stage 5 most common followed by 4, 3, 2, 1 and then 6. 5� The results in Mexico and Taiwan were similarly arranged from highest to lowest stages. However, development was slower, with Stage 3 most common at age 16. 6� The results from villages in Yucatán (Mexico) and Turkey showed a steady progress but Stage 1 was still the most common. 7� Stage 6 was rarely found in any culture. 8� Middle-class children were found to be more advanced than lower-class children. 197 A level only Developmental core study 3: Kohlberg on Moral development