Transcript Nelson powerpoint

“This presentation contains copyrighted
material under the educational fair use
exemption to the U.S. copyright law”
Nelson (1980) Study on Morality
AICE AS Level Psychology
Lecture 1

Factors Influencing Young Children's Use of
 Motives and Outcomes as Moral Criteria
Nelson (1980) Study

AICE Psychology- Developmental Unit
Classic Scenario…




A man’s wife is dying
There is a new trial drug that may save his wife
The drug costs too much for the man to buy and
the company that created the drug will not sell
the drug at a price low enough for the man to
afford
The man has become desperate and considers
stealing the drug.
Background to the Study




Jean Piaget’s theory of moral development
Piaget noted that morality develops
gradually during childhood
Based on observation and interviews with
children
Moral development is a function
of cognitive development
Background to the Study

Piaget asserted that:
 birth to 5yrs- basically it is ok to do if they
don’t get in trouble
 6-10 yrs- Moral judgments are based on
outcomes (consequences) and not on motives
 10-13yrs- Judgments are based on motives
(rather than outcomes)
Contrary to Piaget’s belief…



Research in the 1970s demonstrated that moral motives
and outcomes can be understood in children at 6 years
rather than at least 10
Studies used single hypothetical stories where the
motives and outcomes were systematically varied and
analyzed through quantitative measures
Sparked wave of research into how young kids use (or
do not use) motives & outcomes as part of their
moral criteria
Aim of the Study

To demonstrate that the children as
young as 3 years old use motives and
outcomes as relevant criteria for making
moral judgments
Hypothesis of the Study
Children as young as 3 years old use both motive
and outcome in making moral judgments.
Additionally, the mode of presentation that makes
both motives and outcomes salient, explicit, and
available at the time of judgment will allow 3 year
olds to demonstrate sensitivity to motives and
outcomes.
CUE 1: In your own words, explain
the hypothesis of the study.
Design of the Studies







Experimental lab study (total of 2 studies)
Independent measures study
Participants:
Study 1- 90 kids total, 60 3-4 yrs. & 30 6-8 yrs
1:1 M:F, middle class, mostly white urban
parental consent was received
Study 2: 27 kids, 3-4 yrs old (same makeup)
CUE 2: Describe one strength and
one weakness concerning the
participants in the study.
Variables within the studies

IVs:



Age of the Ps
-story condition (4 possible as listed)

motive + outcome +, motive + outcome –

motive - outcome +, motive - outcome –
-Presentation condition


(verbal, verbal + picture implicit, verbal + picture explicit)
DVs:



overall moral judgment
judgment of motive and outcome
recall of story
N = 60
30 boys & 30 girls
Picture-motive
implied presentation
n =20
Verbal presentation
n =20
Picture-motive
explicit presentation
n =20
All 4 studies
1.Good motive, good outcome
2.Good motive, bad outcome
3.Bad motive, good outcome
4.Bad motive, bad outcome
CUE 3: Explain one strength of using an independent measures design
Study 1 Methodology
Stories (4):
In each story, a boy acting with a good or bad
motive throws a ball toward a friend, resulting in a
good or bad outcome
1.
2.
3.
4.
Children hear story with good
motive and good outcome
Children hear story with good motive and bad
outcome
Children hear story with bad
motive and good outcome
Children hear story with bad
motive and bad outcome
Study 1 Methodology





Participants randomly assigned to a story presentation
condition (verbal, verbal+ picture implicit, or
verbal+picture explicit)
20/group for the 3-4 kids & 10/group of the 6-8 kids
Each child heard all 4 versions of the story (order of
presentation was also random)
Each child was interviewed after hearing the story
Each child was familiarized with the rating scale (smiley
faces!) with practice stories and were told that they would
have to describe back the real stories
Study 1 Methodology




After each story, the child was asked if the boy in the
story was good, bad, or ok & they had to rank the boy’s
goodness/badness using the smiley face system
In both picture presentation conditions, drawings were
introduced 1 by 1 and laid next each other and
remained while child made the moral judgment call
After judgments were made, the pics were removed
and the child had to recount the story
If the child skipped motive or outcome
info of the story, the researcher
prodded for it

“This presentation contains copyrighted
material under the educational fair use
exemption to the U.S. copyright law”

Nelson (1980) Study on Morality
 AICE AS Level Psychology
 Lecture 2
Study 1 Methodology
Story Example (motive + outcome -)
This boy was playing with a ball. His friend did not have
anything to play with. He wanted to throw the ball so
he and his friend could play catch together with the
ball. He threw the ball but his friend did not catch the
ball. The ball hit his friend on the head and made him
cry.
Study 1 Methodology
Motive Statements:

(1) Good Motive:
This boy was playing with a ball; his friend did not
have anything to play with. He wanted to throw the
ball to his friend so they could play catch together
with the ball.
(2) Bad Motive:
This boy was playing with a ball;
he was very mad at his friend that
day. He wanted to throw the ball
at his friend so he could hit him
on purpose.
Study 1 Methodology
Outcome Statements:

(1) Good Outcome:
The boy threw the ball. His friend caught the ball and
was happy to play with it.
(2) Bad Outcome:
The boy threw the ball. His friend
did not catch the ball; the ball hit
his friend on the head and made
him cry.
Study 1 Methodology

Pictures of the stories:

2 sets of black and white line drawings
Each set contained a series of drawings illustrating the
motive, the behavior, and the outcome in each story
First set: motives are implied by the facial
expressions. (implied pictorial presentation)
Second set: motives are conveyed explicitly by
presenting thought bubbles
(explicit pictorial presentation)



Example Story Pictorial

CUE 4: This picture is an example of which testing
condition?
Study 1- DV: Child’s Judgement



Response
 “Is the actor good or bad?”
 “How good/bad?”
 → scale 1 to 7
After the child’s judgement, they were asked to tell
the story exactly as they had heard it.
Why did they do this?
They were checking for errors
of valence by the kids
Study 1 Results

p827
By story condition (remember 4 possible)
 Motive made little difference
 Outcome had a greater effect on moral judgements in the
‘explicit motive’ condition
 Outcome information was used more (i.e. made more
difference to judgements) in ‘bad motive’ stories in the
two picture conditions than verbal only condition
Study 1 Results

p826
By age – compare the 3-y/o and 7-y/o
3 y/o (n=60)
7 y/o (n=30)
+ motive - motive + motive - motive
+
outcome
6.55
2.27
6.20
3.46
outcome
4.17
1.60
4.47
1.56
Compared to 7-y/o children, 3-y/o children judged the actor
worse after one negative cue (whether motive or outcome)
Study 1 Results

Recall
 Inter-coder reliability = 97%
 3-y/o children made more errors than 7-y/o



More recall errors in motive than outcome
Fewer recall errors in picture presentations
Do all children make more valence errors when
information is conflicting (good motive bad outcome)?
 3-y/o
7-y/o
CUE 5: What is inter-coder reliability?
Study 1 Discussion
•
•
It could be possible that children learn the concept
of bad before the concept of good (like Piaget
asserted)
It could be possible that young children define the
concept of good as the absence of bad, e.g. “being
good is not lying”

“This presentation contains copyrighted
material under the educational fair use
exemption to the U.S. copyright law”

Nelson (1980) Study on Morality

AICE AS Level Psychology

Lecture 3
Study 2 Background





There was an unexpected finding in the 3yr. old
verbal only condition- it yielded that the motive was
greater than the outcome in judgment calls
In study 1, many kids only made a positive judgment
when no negative cue was encountered
Just one negative cue was sufficient to produce
negative judgements
3-year-olds’ judgements in bad motive stories were
affected by motive but not by outcome.
Were these results because motive was presented
first?
Study 2: Aim


To investigate the possibility that emphasis
given to motive by the 3yr-olds in Study 1
reflects confounding information about valence
of cues with order of presentation of sources of
the cues (huh?)
Basically wanted to see if presenting the
outcome before the motive would yield the
same results.
Study 2: Methodology
Sample:



27 preschool boys and girls
Mean age: 3.8 years
Material:



Same as before
In all stories, outcome preceded motive
Procedure:



In all stories and conditions, outcome preceded motive
The rest was the same as before
Study 2 Results


p828
As in study 1:
 When one cue is negative, the other cue had less effect
 Children made more recall errors when cues were
inconsistent
As predicted:
 Judgements in Verbal only condition were less affected by
motive than in picture conditions
 So...?
Overall Discussion

…what does it all mean?
 how the story is presented affects the judgments
of motives and outcomes in young children
 kids make judgments relying on either motive or
outcome at different times (that are influenced by
the concepts of good and bad)
 children’s use of motive/outcome info
Overall Discussion




For 3-y/o, one negative cue → negative judgement
In verbal presentations, children tend to focus
more on the first cue they encounter
Judgements are primed for any of negative
valence, whether motive or outcome
Kids justified evaluations by motive and outcomethus they have an awareness of morality
Overall Discussion


Making moral judgments requires an
understanding of good and bad (motive) and the
relationship between motives and outcomes
Preschoolers (3-4 yrs) put more emphasis on
negative valence of cue, supporting idea that in
terms of nurture, children develop concept of ‘bad’
before ‘good
Strengths of the Study

Strengths of the study:



Lab experiment which allows replicability
Good control of variables
Pilot study (practice stories) for kids’ understanding
Weaknesses of the study

Weaknesses of the study:





Low ecological validity
Use of child participants could skew results
Reductionist view of morality
Non-representative sample
Stories/pictures may have been known or foreign to the
participants
Ethics of the Study

Parental consent was obtained



right to withdraw not mentioned but assumed?
Long-term effects really not an issue
Overall though not much going on…
CUE 6: Describe two issues of ecological validity within the
Nelson study.
CUE 7: How can the Nelson study be considered useful?
CUE 8: How can the developmental approach be applied to the
Nelson study?