Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Lee's study of cross-cultural moral reasoning - Coggle Diagram
Lee's study of cross-cultural moral reasoning
AIM
Western and Chinese cultures have differences in how they regard the moral behaviours of lying and truth-telling. Aimed to see this difference between two sets of pps
PARTICIPANTS
120 Chinese pps and 108 Canadian pps. equal gender split between the two groups and similar ages
CONDITIONS
the ethnicity of the child (Chinese or Canadian) 2. the age of the child (7, 9, or 11 years old) 3. the type of story (social or physical) 4. pro-social or anti-social settings
MATERIALS
four types of stories were used for the four conditions:
pro-social setting- truth (physical and social) stories
pro-social setting- lie (physical and social) stories
anti-social setting- truth (physical and social) stories
anti-social setting- lie (physical and social) stories
in the physical stories the children take pages our of a book, in the social stories someone either gets hurt (anti-social) or is helped (pro-social)
the children were asked if the act was right or bad and after the lie/truth was told, the children were asked if that act is good or bad
METHOD
children randomly allocated to either social/physical stories and were seen individually. they were given a rating scale of very very good to very very naughty
RESULTS
scale was converted into quantitative data:
very very good = 3
very good = 2
good = 1
neither = 0
naughty = -1
very naughty = -2
very very naughty = -3
also gained qualitative data by asking the children why they had chosen each rating
every good deed had a positive score and every bad deed had a negative score, however there were differences between truth and lies between the cultures
PRO-SOCIAL/TRUTH-TELLING: no difference between rating of pro-social behaviours however Canadian children gave similar ratings of truth-telling at each age, whereas Chinese children rated truth-telling less positively as age increased
PRO-SOCIAL/LIE-TELLING: children in each culture rated the lie-telling behaviour differently in the pro-social setting, Chinese children rating lying less negatively as age increased
ANTI-SOCIAL/TRUTH-TELLING: no difference between the children, both groups rated truth telling very +
ANTI-SOCIAL/LIE-TELLING: difference between the age groups, - ratings increased with age in both cultures
CONCLUSIONS
moral development is different in different cultures as a result of socio-cultural norms and practices, and not only as a result of cognitive development (as Kohlberg had suggested)
EVALUATIONS
METHOD: quasi as the main independent was naturally occurring, also cross-cultural and a snapshot study- increased representativeness
DATA: had both quantitative and qualitative data for ages, cultures, and genders. used a semantic rating scale which allowed easy comparisons
ETHICS: assumed that ethical guidelines were adhered to and that consent was given, however some of the stories may have made the children slightly upset
VALIDITY: tried to control as many variables as possible and reduced pp variables, also used a standardised procedure
RELIABILITY: followed a standardised procedure with a relatively large sample, also use of 4 different stories helped make it more reliable
SAMPLE: samples were carefully put together to ensure similar backgrounds and it was evenly split, however still misses out many other cultures
ETHNOCENTRISM: avoids trying to be ethnocentric however it is questionable as to whether children from Canada can represent all western cultures, and Chinese all eastern
FREEWILL/DETERMINISM: the culture we grow up in determines our moral thinking, however appears we have more of a choice in what we consider moral or not
REDUCTIONISM/HOLISM: suggests that our moral reasoning is not simply a series of predetermined cognitive stages and therefore takes a more holistic approach as it acknowledges the influence of society