PSYC 3684 1st Edition Lecture 23 Outline of Last Lecture I. Cognition and Old AgeOutline of Current Lecture II. KohlbergIII. MoralityIV. Haidt, Koller and Dias StudyV. Infant MoralityCurrent LectureMorality:- ability to distinguish right from wrong- 3 components:o cognitiveo affectiveo behavioralKohlberg (1963; 1983)- the most influential theorist in morality- presented participants (n = 72 boys, ages 10-16) with hypothetical moral dilemmaso Heinz dilemma- Heinz asks for a cheaper cancer medication and he can’t get it sohe breaks into a store to steal it. Should Heinz have stolen the drug? (main question) Stealing a drug he could not afford to save his wives lifeLevel 1: Preconventional Morality: Middle Childhood (6-10)- morality based on individual needs and physical consequences of an action- least mature stageo Stage 1: obedience orientation An act is moral if it does not get punished “No he should not have because police and spies could be there.”o Stage 2: Instrumental OrientationThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. Grade Buddy is best Used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute. Look out of your own needs “Yes he should have because then he can be with his wife who he loves.” Growing awareness of other peoples perspectives- “You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours.”- Eye for an eye- yes because the drug cost too much anyways.Level II: Conventional Morality: 11- adolescence- self interest is subordinated to the interests of important people and society as a whole: psychological consequenceso Stage 3: “Good boy” or “Good girl” Win the approval of others by being good Intentions of others become importanto Stage 4: Law and social-order maintaining Obey rules and conform to society Trevon Martin caseLevel III: Postconventional Morality (Adolescence or Emerging Adulthood and Beyond)- Personal moral code based on a set of abstract moral principles that supersede society’s laws and normso Stage 5: Social contract to benefit all group members “It is unlawful but he is doing it for a good reason.”o Stage 6: Personal moral system that reflects abstract principles (justice, life, liberty, equality) Rare to hear stage 6- more of a hypothetical reasoning (Ghandi maybe?)- Stage 6 does not need laws or social contract to know what is good or bad.Moral Dilemma for Class:- brother and sister make love- questionso right or wrong?o Anyone hurt?o Bother you?o Why is it right or wrong?- Replicated Haidt, Koller and Dias (1993)Haidt (2001) Rationalism vs. Intuitionism:Plato and Kohlberg = rationalism- Moral judgments caused by reasonHume and Haidt = intuitionism- moral judgments caused by quick moral intuitions (often feelings) followed (when needed) by moral reasoningPlato vs. HumeKohlberg vs. HaidtHaidt continued:- social intuitionismo environment shapes the nature of one’s moral intuitionsHaidt, Koller and Dias (1993)- purpose: moral reasoning consequence or cause of moral judgments- Methodo N = 60 adultso Moral dilemmas that are offensive but harmless Eating dead pet dog Brother and sister make loveo Asked about harm, affective reaction, judgment and justificationResults:- actions were judged to be morally wrong and bothersome but harmless- affective reactions better predictors of moral judgments than assessments of harm- unable to justify responses: “morally dumbfounded”o “It’s wrong but I don’t know why.”Conclusion:- at least some moral judgments are made on the basis of intuition rather than reasonInfant Morality:- Hamlin, Wynn and Bloom (2007)- Purpose:o Can 6 and 10 month olds recognize good and bad behavior in other people?Hamlin, Wynn and Bloom (2007) continued:- Experiment 1:- Method:o Observation phase: Infants observe a puppet show of helping and hindering behavior until habituated (1/2 looking time of initial or 14 trials)- Habituated = when they start to get bored with ito Test phase: Choice paradigm: toy selection (choice of either the helper or the hinderer) Violation of expectations paradigm: looking time at climber approaching hinderer (surprising) or helper (unsurprising)Results:- choice: 6- and 10- month olds reached for helper; suggesting preference for helpero kind of surprising- Violation: 10 – but not 6 – month olds looked younger at the surprising event; suggesting younger infants did not attribute a preference to the climber- Controls:o Counterbalance position of choices, colors, shaped, order of helper and hinderero Parents could not interfereExperiment 2:- to ensure infants were responding to the social aspects, an inanimate figure was pushed up and down- not instances of helping or hindering but same physical trajectory as experiment 1- infants showed no preference for