Download Level I - Missouri State University

Piaget’ss Stages & Moral Reasoning
Piaget
Stages & Moral Reasoning
Unit 7
• Objective Responsibility
• Subjective Responsibility
Moral Character and
Aggression
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral
D
Development:
l
An
A O
Overview
i
• Level I: Preconventional Level
– Stage 1
– Stage 2
• Level II: Conventional Level
– Stage 3
– Stage 4
• Level III:
Postconventional Level
– Stage 5
– Stage 6
100
Levels of Moral Thinking by Age
Levels by age
Levels by age
Preconventional
90
80
70
60
50
%40
30
Conventional
20
10
Postconventional
0
7
10
13
Age
16
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral
Development
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral
Development
• Level I: Preconventional Level
Level II: Conventional Level
3. Good boy/nice girl
orientation
1. Obedience &
punishment
avoidance stage
2. Exchange of Favors
•
Instrumental relativist stage
(Naive instrumental
hedonist)
4. Law & social order
orientation
• (maintaining authority)
Milgram’s Results
100
Duties of a Law‐abiding Citizen
90
% obey
ying the experim
ment
Eichman: • Act
Act in such a way that the Fuhrer, in such a way that the Fuhrer
if he knew your action, would approve it. (conscience)
• Guilt, confessing his sin to superiors for exceptions
• Saw Becher & Himmler allowing Saw Becher & Himmler allowing
Jews to buy a passport out as the ultimate evil.
• Fanatical rush to kill more when defeat approached
(
(seeking
ki
approval,
l
interpersonal
expectations)
p
)
Milgram results
Milgram results
Victim pounds
the wall
80
70
60
%T
Total
t l
Obedience
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
45
90
135
180
225
270
SHOCK LEVEL
315
360
405
450
Kohlberg’s
Kohlberg
s Stages of Moral Development
Level III: Postconventional (Principled) Level
5. Social contract
• (contractual legalistic)
• Greatest good of
greatest number
6. Universal ethical
principles
Self chosen
D i d through
Derived
th
h reflection
fl ti
and abstract reasoning
Parenting for Moral & Character Development
l
Kohlberg Questions
1)) Validity
y above 4?? Is
there a stage 7?
2) Cultural Bias?
3) Sex Bias?
g performance
p
4)) Reasoning
may vary across
dilemmas.
5) Relationship to
behavior?
The Moral Development group:
(Just Community)
Why does it work?
• Harsh Punishment delays
• Reasoning and explanation
– perspective taking reasoning
– inductive reasoning
– developmentally appropriate dialogue
• Democratic
Democratic and authoritative and authoritative
styles
• Modeling
• reasoning slightly above
current level
• non-indoctrination
• social context
• relevant
Bullying Preventing
Bullies
Bullies Victims Victims
•
•
•
•
Hyperactive
Overreact to others
Belief it enhances status
Belief it enhances status
Target weaker, smaller, less popular
less popular
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Immature
Anxious
Socially withdrawn
Socially withdrawn
Friendless
Low self esteem
Low self‐esteem
May have disability
Relatively defenseless
Relatively defenseless
Aggression
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Actively shaping their culture. Empathy training
Modeling the right behavior
anti‐bullying rules zero tolerance
classes on how to deal with bullying skills
classes on how to deal with bullying, skills
Moral Development approaches
Non‐aggressive
Non
aggressive classroom management style
classroom management style
Understanding and mitigating aggression
Theories of Aggression
• Intent to harm a living being
• Instrumental Aggression:
• Hostile Aggression:
– uncommon before 5
– Bullying
Catharsis Models
Instincts:
– Freud: Death instincts;
– Ethologists: territoriality
Theories of Aggression
Catharsis Models
• Frustration Aggression:
– need or g
goal thwarting
g --> frustration
energy
– aggressive
gg
cues:
• weapons effect
Theories of Aggression
Theories of Aggression
• Learning
– Operant Conditioning
• Boy toughening games
– Classical Conditioning
– Social learning theory
• obse
observational
at o a learning:
ea
g
– Corporal punishment
Does Catharsis Work?
• disinhibition:
Television
• By 16, avg. child views 18,000 televised killings
• violence in 94.3% of cartoons at a rate of
25‐32 violent incidents per hour
• 70% of Saturday morning programming; 90% of Prime Time
• rates are not improving
• research shows not necessary for attention
research shows not necessary for attention
Effects of TV
• Modeling
– Observational Learning
– Disinhibition
– Desensitization
– Violent imagery
– fearfulness; f f l
• over estimate dangers
– arousal
– cues
Eron’s 22 year Longitudinal study of Violent TV and Aggression
50
45
40
35
Seriousness of 30
Criminal 25
Offenses at 30 20
15
10
5
0
Low <1hr
Medium1-3
High >3
Frequency of Daily TV viewing at 8
Evidence
• Longitudinal Study supports causal relationship
• Randomized experiments support short term effects
• Canadian town TV introduced in 1973, a 160% increase in aggression, hitting, shoving, and biting was documented h i
d bi i
d
d
in 1st and 2nd‐grade, with no change in two control communities (Centerwall 1992)
• In school, teacher promoted TV removal (Stanford curriculum) 40%
removal (Stanford curriculum) 40% reduced violence & bullying
• Increased violence 15 yrs after TV is y
introduced. JAMA(6/10/92).
Theories of Aggression
Theories of Aggression
• Low social skills
– Hostile attribution bias
– assertiveness skills
• Self-concept related
– Low academic
achievement
– bullies
b lli
– deviant identity
Theories of Aggression
Theories of Aggression
•
•
•
•
Affect disorder
Neurological:
Organic:
Genetics
• Situational
– Personal Space:
p
– Environmental Stress: