Explain and Evaluate Two Approaches to Explaining Moral Development Essay

Moral creation is what we consider to be right, incorrect, good or bad.

It really is developed from infancy right through to adulthood and is the principles we all use to figure out what is right or perhaps wrong, good or unjust. Each individual has their own own comprehension of what morality is, however generally this can be determined mainly by the lifestyle or world we stay in and the guidelines that we adapt to within this contemporary society. In psychology there are many ideas around the beliefs of moral expansion, and how morality is produced from years as a child to adult life. The reason for the various theories is because of the methods, techniques for study followed by the psychologists to study human behaviour.

These theories enable us to compare and share us a chance to take into consideration most views and ideas rather than to settle for just one argument or perhaps approach surrounding this subject. (http://www.sid.ir/en/VEWSSID/J_pdf/97420082403.pdf) The aim of this assignment is look at the two different approaches to moral expansion, firstly the cognitive explanation to meaning development by simply Jean Piaget. Then moving on to the interpersonal learning theory, and Bandura’s contribution to how morality develops. Criticisms of these hypotheses will be reviewed and critiques based on the 2 studies will be made.

Piaget was the 1st psychologist to analyze cognitive development in children. His function dates back to 1932 fantastic findings mentioned that values develops through childhood and adolescence. He believed that children pass through different levels of morality in accordance to their intellectual development. Piaget conducted a number of experiments and from these tests figured children up to the age of 3 or 4 could not generate moral judgements as they were not able to understand rules at this age.

He explained, if the kids were unable to comprehend the rules and they were disregarding then they were unable to make ethical judgements. He believed that once kids could be familiar with rules, and they were breaking them then this was the age that ethical development started out. From his research, this kind of started when justin was about 8-10 years old.

Timber B, (2004 pg. 72) Piaget believed that moral development in children with this age happens in two stages. Stage one- heterononmous morality identified as morality made from outside. This is when kids see the guidelines as been made by parents, teachers or God and they are unchangeable.

Morality at this stage is based on moral punishment, you are doing something wrong and will also be punished. This kind of stage can be described by simply Piaget as the pre-operational stage of development where child is merely able to help to make his judgement based on the consequence of the action. The second stage- Autonomous values described as values which is depending on the child’s own rules is obvious when the child is able to decentre and identify the intent behind the action combined with consequence with the action.

It is the stage at which children are capable to understand that guidelines are adaptable to change and according to the condition. Woods N, (2004 pg. 72) From Piagets tests he was in a position to conclude that morality is dependent on the amount of intellectual development, just how intelligent the first is.

The strengths of Piaget’s theory happen to be that while conducting his experiments he did concentrate on children exclusively as scholars. He added hugely to the understanding of education and presumed that this was your key to conserving our contemporary society. Piaget’s ethical theory was described by simply his experiment with children that involved rules whilst playing a game of marbles.

Children under the age of five showed they had no rules, children aged between ages five to ten saw the guidelines as fixed and kids 10 and above noticed the rules and in addition adopted these people by common consent. Moral dilemmas were presented to children by simply Piaget to formulate his theory further. He gave kids a pair of stories where there initially child purposely caused a bit of damage as a result of his actions.

The second kid caused considerably more damage yet his activities were a consequence of an accident. Piaget asked the youngsters to describe which will character well deserved to be reprimanded in his try to understand children’s reasoning in their answers. His conclusion coming from his experiment was that youngsters focused even more on effects, whilst the older ones took into consideration intent.

Via Piaget’s theory we have the understanding on the influence of mental techniques on behavior, we have better understanding in perception and thinking. Together with the above, Piagets theory has received practical rewards such learning skills to improve memory and improving find solutions to problems skills. Dwyer D & Charles C (2006 pg318) Both of these experiments have been criticised. Additional theorists possess claimed that games of marbles tend not to represent a child’s complete perception of morality. Piaget’s use of moral dilemmas is criticised.

It is often claimed that younger children only focused on outcomes because the history was told about, however the outcomes may not have been the same if the stories were watched in video. Youngsters may have been better able to consider motives if we were holding. Other advocates conducting comparable research identified that, even though younger children experienced some getting pregnant of objective, they still preferred to judge in terms of outcomes because that they found this kind of easier.

Piaget’s theory is criticised to get culture specific. It has been said that it is based upon moral universals. It has been claimed that the meaningful development of kids in low western cultures may differ from that of the children Piaget looked at. (http://everything2.com/title/Piaget%2527s+theory+of+moral+development) Authorities of Piaget’s theory have stated that his study was not very scientific, that his conclusions were biased as he performed alone. Experts conducting clinical experiments must have two or more experts; Piaget observed and mentioned his results alone. Having been criticised for making generalisations along with his findings by being culture certain and not taking into consideration background, tradition and parental input of each child.

An example of this is using clinical interviews to examine the thinking about children. His sample size was rebuked for being too small and would not give much consideration to social understanding. Due to every one of the criticisms previously mentioned regarding Piagets work we can evaluate his theory since weak hence leading to mistakes in his results.

Haralambos Meters & Rice D. (pg 522). Interpersonal learning theory approach to meaningful development is based on the idea that ethical development takes place as a result of noticing and imitation. Albert Bandura 1977 examined this concept and came up with studies that concluded that children study through acknowledgement, reward and punishment. Social learning theorist, focus especially on learning from observation, imitation, reputation and praise. Woods N, (2004 pg.

126) Bandura conducted a number of experiments noticing children’s behavior towards an inflatable girl doll also called a Bobo girl doll. The children were separated in to groups plus the first viewed an adult performing aggressively towards this inflated inflatable girl doll. This was the aggressive version conditioning. The second group of kids, the mature played with the other toys and games and was the low aggressive unit condition. In addition to a control group, which included kids from the group who had observed an adult becoming violent and aggressive for the Bobo girl doll.

This group was in that case left within a room having a number of toys and games but not in order to play with them in an attempt to increase the children’s frustration. The kids were later on left within a room and results were known. The children who also witnessed the adult being aggressive for the Bobo doll imitated this kind of behaviour and others from the low aggressive style displayed decrease levels of hostility and violence, hence showing that children learn through imitation. (http://psychology.about.com/od/classicpsychologystudies/a/bobo-doll-experiment.htm) Bandura likewise believed that children study from their social environment, this he assumed provides models of behaviour and expectations of appropriate actions.

He assumed that kids learn through observation, fake and strengthening which are every closely associated. Woods B, (2004 pg. 126) Along with Piaget’s theory, Bandura’s theory has its criticisms. Bandura’s cultural learning theory takes into mind cognitive learning but concentrates more upon the idea that values is created through positive reinforcement, fake and the social environment. Hardwoods B, (2004 pg.

71) When evaluating Bandura’s, experiment in make an attempt to understanding moral development, it is necessary to point out the experiments were conducted in a laboratory thus the results may not be authentic in the real-world. Critics have also pointed out that there can be selection prejudice as the youngsters in the test were all from the same socio monetary background, producing the benefits invalid and never true to society. The long term a result of this research is unfamiliar as the results were noted immediately, plus the reality is different to an research. Even though the children displayed violent behaviour for the doll that is not prove that they might be violent towards someone else.

The children can also have demonstrated this behaviour to please the adult, once again making the findings of the experiment inaccurate. (http://psychology.about.com/od/classicpsychologystudies/a/bobo-doll-experiment.htm) The purpose of this dissertation was to make clear and assess Piaget and Bandura’s theory. Both the advocates have written for understanding of meaning development in today’s contemporary society and either face criticisms to their function. The main elements that have been mentioned and open to attack are that equally Bandura and Piaget possess given small consideration to feelings, lifestyle and spiritual beliefs.

Presently there sample was small certainly not allowing basic conclusions and findings to become widely satisfactory. There experiments have been bitten for not being scientific. That they failed to recognise that meaning development offers different content and meaning in different cultures and ethical judgement is usually hugely motivated by society’s common rules and traditions. Parents function and child nourishment happen to be vital in how children and adolescents develop morally. Both Piaget and Bandura failed to have these important points into consideration when executing their analysis.

Piaget offers studied intellectual development and his contributions are invaluable inside the development of today education and the human advancement theory. Bandura looked even more at social learning version one is among one of the most powerfulk psychologists of our time. (http://www.sid.ir/en/VEWSSID/J_pdf/97420082403.pdf)