1. Lee et al. (1997) Area: Developmental area Theme: Moral development

2. Background:
There has been a great deal of research into moral development. For example, research by Kohlberg found _____________________________________
However, there has been limited research into children’s moral development of lying. Any research which has been conducted on the moral development of lying has been done with children in Western countries. This is an issue because a British social norm is “It’s wrong to tell lies”. This may not be the case across cultures.

3. Aim:
Lee et al. wanted to test the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling, by comparing the moral judgements of Canadian children and Chinese children.
Sample:
Two groups of participants:

4. 1) Canadian children
120 children
40 were 7-year-olds
40 were 9-year-olds
40 were 11-year-olds
60 boys and 60 girls
2) Chinese children:
108 children
36 were 7 years old
40 were 9 years old
32 were 11 years old
58 boys 50 girls

5. Method:
Laboratory conditions
Independent measures design
In the study we will look at there are two types of stories involved. In one story, the child carries out a good deed (pro-social). In the other story, the child carries out a bad deed (anti-social).
In both stories, the characters are questioned by a teacher who asks who committed the deed, they either lie or tell the truth. The child participants were asked to evaluate the story characters deeds and verbal statements

6. Social story = social environment, involving other individuals
Important terms:
Social story = social environment, involving other individuals
Physical story = physical environment, involving objects

7. IVS
Whether the participant heard the social story or the physical story
Whether the participant heard a pro-social or anti-social story
The age of the children
The ethnicity of the children

8. Chinese sample:
Half took part in social story
Half took part in physical story
Canadian sample:
19 7-year-olds, 20 9-year-olds and year-olds took part in social story
Others took part in physical
All allocation to groups was random

9. Physical story
Social story
Pro social + truth
Anti-social + truth
Pro social + lie
Anti-social + lie

10. DVS
The rating given to the story character’s deed
The rating given to what the character said – both ratings ranged from very, very good to very, very naughty.

11. Procedure:
Children were read four scenarios: two were prosocial and two were antisocial. An example (a prosocial story with lie-telling is below):

12. As a way of counterbalancing, the words good and naughty in the questions were alternated, as were the orders of the stories; this reduces order effects. At the end of the study participants were then involved in post-experimental discussions.

13. Results:
Prosocial Behavior/Truth-Telling Situations:
Overall, children from both cultures rated the prosocial behaviors similarly.
Canadian children at each age gave similar ratings to truth telling
However, Chinese children’s ratings became less positive as age increased.
What does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?

14. Results:
Prosocial Behavior/Lie-Telling Situations:
Overall, Canadian children rated lie telling negatively, but as age increased their ratings became less negative.
Overall, Chinese children’s ratings of lie telling changed from negative to positive as age increased.
What does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?

15. Results:
Antisocial Behavior/Truth-Telling Situations:
Children from both cultures rated the antisocial behaviors similarly.
Children from both cultures rated truth telling in this situation very positively
What does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?

16. Results:
Antisocial Behavior/Lie-Telling Situations:
Both Chinese and Canadian children rated lie telling negatively in this condition.
Overall, negative ratings increased with age, regardless of culture.
Chinese 7-year-olds rated lie telling less negatively then older children in the physical story condition, while Canadian 7-year-olds rated lie telling less negatively than older children in the social story condition.
What does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?

17. Conclusions:
There is a close relationship between socio-cultural practices and moral judgements.
Specific social and cultural norms have an impact on children’s developing moral judgements, which are modified by age and experience within a culture.
Chinese children rate truth telling in prosocial situations less positively and lie telling in the same situations less negatively than Canadian children.
All children showed similar moral evaluations of lie telling and truth telling related to anti-social behavior.
Moral development is affected by the culture and environment in which individuals are socialised. For example, Chinese children’s moral judgements are affected by self-effacement and modesty.