23rd November 2023

Cognitive-Developmental Theories

Cognitive-developmental theories maintain that the reasons underlying behaviour, rather than the behaviour itself, make it right or wrong. Here, we shall discuss Piaget, Kohlberg and Eisenberg’s theory of moral development; all three are within the cognitive-developmental framework.

Piaget’s theory

Piaget argued morality develops gradually during childhood and adolescence. However, he categorically did not use the concept of the developmental stage in relation to moral development. Rather, he differentiated two types of moral orientations, namely heteronomous and autonomous. (Please note this is different from Piaget’s stages of cognitive development: Sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal operational).

Summary of Piaget’s theory of moral development

An evaluation of Piaget’s theory

Piaget’s theory has a gender bias towards male children, which is also apparent in Kohlberg’s theory. The change from heteronomous to autonomous morality occurs because of a shift at about seven years of age from egocentric to operational thoughts. This suggests cognitive development is necessary for moral development, and the latter lags about 2 years behind the former. Many of the age trends that Piaget described are supported by later research, including cross-cultural data, mainly from African countries.

Kohlberg’s theory

Kohlberg’s theory has dominated the field of moral reasoning for more than 30 years. He was greatly influenced by Piaget and, like him, believed morality develops gradually during childhood and adolescence. Also, like Piaget, he was more interested in people’s reasons for their moral judgement than the judgement itself. He assessed moral reasoning through the use of moral dilemmas, which typically involve a choice between two alternatives, both of which would be considered socially unacceptable. One of the most famous dilemmas concerns ‘Heinz’.

Kohlberg’s three levels and six stages of moral development 

Kohlberg’s original study (beginning in 1956) involved 72 Chicago boys (10-16), 58 of whom were followed up at three yearly intervals for 20 years. Based on the answers given by this sample to the Heinz and other dilemmas, Kohlberg identified 6 stages of moral development, spanning 3 levels of moral reasoning.

•  Level 1 Pre-conventional morality (7-12 years to middle childhood) – In this stage, the children decide right or wrong according to the consequences. If an action leads to punishment, it must be bad, and if it leads to reward, it must be good.

Stages: 

– Punishment and obedience orientation – Obedience to rules to avoid punishment.

– Reward orientation / Instrumental relativism – What brings rewards is right. ‘Tit for tat’ approach seen.

• Level 2 Conventional morality (approximately 13-16 years) – Here, the children believe that social rules and the expectations of others determine what acceptable or unacceptable behaviour is.

Stages:

– Concordance orientation – What pleases others is right. What the majority thinks is right. It’s also called good boy / nice girl orientation. Conforms to avoid disapproval and meet the expectations of others. Being good is as important as having good motives and showing concern.

– Social order or Authority orientation – Upholds laws and social rules to avoid the censure of the authorities and feelings of guilt about not doing one’s duty. Maintaining social order is the goal.

• Level 3 Postconventional morality (approximately 16-20 years) – Here, what is right is based on an individual’s understanding of universal ethical principles. These are often abstract and ill-defined, but it might include the preservation of life at all costs and the importance of human dignity.

Stages:

– Social contract or legalistic orientation – Actions guided by principles commonly agreed by one’s group as essential to public welfare (relative values) and democracy is upheld while an individual’s life is given more respect than written codes of law.

– Universal ethical orientation – Actions guided by self-chosen ethical principles. Laws and social principles are usually valid because they are based on these principles. Social rules can be broken if universal morality is not upheld.

Level 3 cannot be considered a part of the normal or expected course of development and instead represents a philosophical ideal. Only 15% of the adult population eventually achieve level 3.

An evaluation of Kohlberg’s theory

Research showed young children’s understanding of moral regulation is far more sophisticated than implied by Kohlberg’s stages. Children have experience of sharing food and toys with friends, which is translated into implicit principles. However, they have little experience in issues raised by Kohlberg in moral dilemmas, so their reasoning is rather muddled (Hart et al., 2013).

Kohlberg’s model is also accused of being Eurocentric and androcentric. Some researchers suggest male morality is based on abstract principles of law and justice and women’s is based on compassion and care (Gilligan’s theory of ethics of care). However, the claim was refuted by later research (Walker, 1996). It’s widely accepted that gender difference in morality is less important than the kind of dilemmas being considered.

The relationship between Kohlberg’s stages, Piaget’s types of moral development, and Piaget’s stages of cognitive development

Eisenberg’s theory of prosocial moral reasoning

Kohlberg’s concept of moral reasoning is prohibition-oriented. In the case of Heinz, for example, one prohibition (stealing) is pitted against another (allowing his wife to die). But not all ‘moral conflicts’ are like this. Eisenberg argued that if we want to understand the developmental change in helping or altruism, we need to examine children’s reasoning when faced with a conflict between their own needs and those of others in a context where the role of laws, rules, and the dictates of authority are minimal. This describes prosocial moral reasoning.

In a series of studies in the 1980s, Eisenberg presented children of different ages (and sometimes followed up to early adulthood) with illustrated hypothetical stories like the one below. Based on children’s responses to this and other similar dilemmas, Eisenberg identified six stages of prosocial moral reasoning.

 Role of emotion in prosocial behaviour

It’s been implicated that emotion, in particular empathy, has an important role in prosocial behaviour. People who respond to someone sympathetically / empathically (associated with lower heart rate) are more likely to help than those who experience personal distress (associated with accelerated heart rate).

There is a clear relationship between emotional regulation of parents and in their children, with sympathetic parents having sympathetic children. Democratic warm and reasoning parenting is associated with an increased capacity for children’s prosocial behaviour, and autocratic, cold, harsh and inconsistent parenting predicts children’s antisocial tendencies (Coie and Dodge 1998).

An important aspect of Eisenberg’s theory is that emotion is seen as the basis of moral development, moving away from Kohlberg’s theory and returning to Piaget’s, in which feelings of mutual respect and empathy were seen as central.

References

• Gross, R. (2020). Psychology: the science of mind and behaviour (8th ed.). Hodder.
• Piaget, J. (1965). The moral judgement of the child. New York: Free Press. (First published in London: Kegan Paul, 1932).
• Kohlberg, L. , & Candee, D. (1984). The relationship of moral judgement to moral action. In W. Kurtines & J. Gewirtz (Eds.), Morality, moral behaviour and moral development (pp. 52-73). New York: John Wiley.
• Eisenberg, N. , Lennon, R., & Roth, K. (1983). Prosocial development: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 19, 846-855.
• Coie, J. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behaviour. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Social, emotional, and personality development (pp. 779–862). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.