Children’s Early Moral Development: An Analysis of Moral Language in Children’s Talk

MS Thesis ResearchJennifer Cole WrightUniversity of WyomingDepartment of PsychologySpring, 2004

Research Questions

When do children begin to engage in moral discussion with others?

How do children use moral language in these discussions? What kinds of things do they refer to?

Do we see change in children’s use of moral language over time?

Review of Moral Development TheoriesMoral knowledge: Innate, Learned/Adopted, or

Discovered/Constructed

Moral development: Early Sensitivity (Intuitionist/Sentimentalist) or Late Development (Rationalist)

Moral engagement: Passive, Active, or Both

Moral motivation: Internally Generated or Externally Generated

Moral salience: Well-being/Feelings, Social Norms, or Rules/Principles

Moral concepts: Context-Specific or Context-General

Participants

CHILDES (Child Language Data Exchange System, MacWhinney & Snow, 1990) on-line language database Archived transcripts of at home adult/child

conversations Transcripts used for:

Abe (age 2;4.24 – 5;0.11), 1st born, caucasian male, grad school family, MLU at 33-36 mo: 6.0; 45-48 mo: 8.0

Sarah (age 2;3.19-5;1.6), 1ST born, caucasian female, working class family, MLU at 33-36 mo: 2.3; 45-48 mo: 3.2

Target Words

The use of 99 words were analyzed across seven children. 33 were chosen as target words:

Evaluative: good, bad, right, wrong, nice, mean, kind, poor, friend

Deontic: must, should, better, suppose, trouble Emotion/Internal State: angry, sorry, worry,

sad, hope, happy, afraid, love, hate Verb/Action: hit, need, help, hurt, cry, give, kiss Virtue: brave, strong, gentle

Coding Scheme Used by: mother, father, other adult, child

Use form: declarative, interrogative, directive, narrative

Speaker order: initiator (of discussion), responder

Adult/Child use: to instruct/model (Y/N)to approve/disapprove (Y/N)to give/ask for reasons/explain (Y/N)to motivate obedience (Y/N)to communicate feelings (Y/N)to motivate perspective-taking (Y/N)to elicit sympathy (Y/N)

Coding Scheme Child role: passive, active- creative, active- reasoning

Reference to: feelings - of speaker or another (Y/N) welfare/needs - of speaker or another (Y/N) disposition/behavior - of speaker or another

(Y/N) damage to goods/property (Y/N) principles (e.g. fairness/justice/kindness)

(Y/N) (dis)approval - of speaker or another (Y/N) laws/rules or standards/expectations (Y/N) obedience/punishment (Y/N)

Motivation: none, internal, external

Context: context-specific, context-general

Results Of 11,061 target words there were

1,155 uses in a moral context (10.4%) Abe 188 (44.7%) of 421 uses Sarah 219 (29.8%) of 734 uses

Significant negative trend in use over time:

Abe Child Sarah Child

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

% M

ora

l Use

/# o

f T

arg

et

Wo

rds

40

30

20

10

0

Abe Child Sarah Child

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

% o

f M

ora

l Use

/# o

f W

ord

s in

Tra

nsc

rip

ts

2.0

1.5

1.0

.5

0.0

The same pattern was found with the adults:

Abe Adult Sarah Adult

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

% M

ora

l Use

/# o

f T

arg

et

Wo

rds

40

30

20

10

0

Abe Adult Sarah Adult

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

% M

ora

l Use

/# o

f W

ord

s in

Tra

nsc

rip

ts

.7

.6

.5

.4

.3

.2

.1

0.0

Target Words Used in Moral ContextSarah

# of

uses Abe

# of

uses

bad 56 hope 1 mean 39 afraid 2

hit 45mean 1 friend 17 sad 2

hate 19must 1 nice 13 hate 1

love 14 trouble 1 help 12 poor 1

better 11 angry 0 hurt 12wrong 1

good 10 brave 0 good 11 brave 0

poor 10 gentle 0 hit 11 gentle 0

help 8 happy 0 love 10 hope 0

cry 7 kind 0 sorry 10 kind 0

give 7 kiss 0 angry 9must 0

nice 6 need 0 bad 8 need 0

friend 5 peace 0 kiss 7 peace 0

hurt 5 right 0 cry 6 right 0

wrong 4 sad 0 give 5 strong 0

afraid 3 strong 0 better 4 suppose 0

sorry 3 suppose 0 should 4 trouble 0

should 2 worry 0 happy 3 worry 0

Total 215 Total 188

Categories Used in Moral Context

EvaluativeVerb/

ActionEmotion/

Internal St Deontic Virtue

Abe 47.9% 28.2% 19.7% 6.8% 0.0%

Sarah 42.0% 32.9% 18.3% 4.3% 0.0%

Adults (Abe) 45.6% 29.0% 16.9% 10.4% 0.5%

Adults (Sarah) 45.0% 31.1% 13.3% 8.1% 0.3%

Use – Children and AdultAbe

# of Uses

% of Moral Use Sarah

# of Uses

% of Moral Use

give reasons/explain 116 61.7% (dis)approve 112 51.1%

communicate feelings 92 48.9% motivate/deny obedience 88 40.2%

instruct/model 49 26.1% give reasons/explain 79 36.1%

(dis)approve 38 20.2% communicate feelings 72 32.9%

motivate/deny obedience 34 18.1% perspective taking 25 11.4%

perspective taking 27 14.4% instruct/model 24 11.0%

express sympathy 18 9.6% express sympathy 22 10.0%

Abe - Adults# of Uses

% of Moral Use Sarah - Adults

# of Uses

% of Moral Use

give reasons/explain 99 44.0% motivate/deny obedience 277 53.8%

(dis)approve 95 42.2% (dis)approve 255 49.5%

communicate feelings 83 36.9% instruct/model 168 32.6%

motivate/deny obedience 53 23.6% express sympathy 163 31.7%

perspective-taking 45 20.0% perspective-taking 160 31.1%

express sympathy 46 20.4% give reasons/explain 159 30.9%

instruct/model 43 19.1% communicate feelings 139 27.0%

Developmental Trends

Give/Ask Reasons - Child Motivate/Deny Obedience - Adult

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.55.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

% G

ive

/Ask

fo

r R

ea

son

s/#

of

Mo

ral U

ses

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

Abe Adults Sarah Adults

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.02.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

% M

otiv

ate

/De

ny

Ob

ed/#

of

Mor

al U

ses

100

80

60

40

20

0

Reference - Children

Abe- Reference# of Uses

% of Moral Use Sarah - Reference

# of Uses

% of Moral Use

disposition/behvr of another 109 58.3% disposition/behvr of another 124 56.6%

feelings of speaker 62 33.2% (dis)approval of speaker 88 40.2%

disposition/behvr of speaker 60 32.1% obedience/punishment 77 35.2%

welfare of another 45 24.1% disposition/behvr of speaker 66 30.1%

feelings of another 43 23.0% welfare of another 60 27.4%

(dis)approval of speaker 34 18.2% feelings of speaker 48 21.9%

obedience/punishment 21 11.2% welfare of speaker 38 17.4%

damage of property 12 6.4% standards/expectations 20 9.1%

welfare of speaker 12 6.4% feelings of another 18 8.2%

(dis)approval of another 11 5.9% (dis)approval of another 17 7.8%

rules/laws 5 2.7% damage of property 2 0.9%

standards/expectations 5 2.7% rules/laws 2 0.9%

principles 2 1.1% principles 1 0.5%

Reference - Adults

Adults (Abe) - Reference# of Uses

% of Moral Use Adults (Sarah)- Reference

# of Uses

% of Moral Use

disposition/behvr of another 170 75.6% disposition/behvr of another 412 80.0%

(dis)approval of speaker 79 35.1% obedience/punishment 253 49.1%

welfare of another 70 31.1% (dis)approval of speaker 224 43.5%

feelings of another 58 25.8% welfare of another 222 43.1%

feelings of speaker 43 19.1% feelings of another 101 19.6%

obedience/punishment 34 15.1% standards/expectations 73 14.2%

disposition/behvr of speaker 32 14.2% disposition/behvr of speaker 36 7.0%

standards/expectations 11 4.9% (dis)approval of another 29 5.6%

welfare of speaker 11 4.9% feelings of speaker 27 5.2%

rules/laws 10 4.4% damage to property 20 3.9%

(dis)approval of another 9 4.0% welfare of speaker 13 2.5%

damage to property 7 3.1% rules/laws 8 1.6%

principles 7 3.1% principles 7 1.4%

Reference to Motivation - ChildrenAbe: 88 internal/12 external, Sarah: 54 internal/32

external

Internal External

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

Ref

to In

tern

al M

otiv

atio

n/#

of M

oral

Use

s

1.2

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

0.0

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

Ref

to E

xter

nal M

otiv

atio

n/#

of M

oral

Use

s

.5

.4

.3

.2

.1

0.0

Context of Use - ChildrenAbe: 71 specific/16 general, Sarah: 49 specific/12

general

Context-Specific Context-General

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

Con

text

-Spe

cific

Use

/# o

f Mor

al U

ses

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

0.0

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

Co

nte

xt-G

en

era

l Use

/# o

f M

ora

l Use

s

1.2

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

0.0

Child RoleAbe Sarah

% of Total % of Total

Child Role # of Uses Moral Uses # of Uses Moral Uses

Passive 12 6.40% 38 17.40%

Active 108 57.40% 90 41.00%

Creative 41 37

Reasoning 67 53

Not Clear 68 36.20% 91 41.60%

Total 188 219

Passive Active-Creative Active- Reasoning

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

Pa

ssiv

e U

se/#

of

Mo

ral U

ses

.3

.2

.1

0.0

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

Act

ive

-Cre

ativ

e U

se/#

of

Mo

ral U

ses

.5

.4

.3

.2

.1

0.0

Abe Sarah

5.04.54.03.53.02.52.05.04.54.03.53.02.52.0

Act

ive

-Re

aso

nin

g U

se/#

of

Mo

ral U

ses

1.2

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

0.0

Review of Moral Development TheoriesMoral knowledge: Innate, Learned/Adopted, or

Discovered/Constructed

Moral development: Early Sensitivity (Intuitionist/Sentimentalist) or Late Development (Rationalist)

Moral engagement: Passive, Active, or Both (more Active than Passive)

Moral motivation: Internally Generated or Externally Generated

Moral salience: Well-being/Feelings, Social Norms, or Rules/Principles

Moral concepts: Context-Specific or Context-General

Conclusion The picture that emerges is of the young child

as someone who is both active in his discussion of moral issues with the adults in his environment and sensitive to the kinds of considerations that seem crucial to the development of genuine moral understanding.

Accordingly, the Kohlbergian cognitive-development approach seriously underestimates the moral capacities of young children. While reasoning abilities may play an important role in later moral development, it seems clear that they build upon a robust moral sensitivity that is already present in the child.

Examples - Abe(2;10.20) “it did hurt me then. it doesn't hurt me now. it

doesn't hurt you now too.”(2;10.20) “no because I’m a mean boy I’m gon (t)a get you

(be)cause you are a mean mommy.”(3;10.15) “because he’s nice to nice people.”(3;10.18) “yeah I’m going to cooperate unless my teacher’s

mean to me than I won’t cooperate.”(3;11.2) “you could you could have put it on the floor for me. I

asked you so you should have done it.”(4;0.25) “if the animals want to be loose the zookeepers let

em be loose. aren’t the zookeepers nice to the animals?”(4;2.19) “yeah friends could be still friends if they’re mad.”(4;8.27) “she doesn’t like Pudgy a bit. I don’t because he is so

mean.”(4;11.21) “I know I’m gon (t)a be good because I’m gon (t)a.”

Examples - Sarah(2;7.12) “a [a mouse] bite me. I hit him.”(2;9.29) “little girl spilled dat milk. girl bad too huh?”(3;2.16) “he's a ba(d) bear (a)n(d) tha(t) means. I put you in

the crib.”(3;2.23) “my cousin hit me. an(d) she a bad girl”(3;8.6) “I wa(s)n’t good. I was going to fight.”(3;8.25) “I should hit her with a pencil (a)n(d) a stick.”(4;2.1) “I hope I don’t hurt it” (a tree)(4;2.9) “I didn’t spill it last night uhhuh Mommy? because I’m

a good girl last night.”(4;2.16) “I did somethin(g) wrong in the dog house”(4;6.5) “don’t hit a girl with eye glasses.”(4;10.6) “when I get to have a broken toy I’m gonna give that

to him. I’m gonna give him a broken arm.”(4;10.27) “beat up my pony. xxx so bad. you know he’s

beatin(g) up the pony.” [engaging in pretend play]