1. Cognition and Moral Development
Megan Kanatzar
and Katherine Wright

2. Where did we begin…
Moral Judgment of Piaget & Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Reasoning.
Specifically, does a child’s ability to conserve affect their score in Kohlberg’s moral reasoning??
We were interested in whether or not there is a correlation between the moral development of Piaget and Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Reasoning.
So we did research on Piaget and Kohlberg.

3. Piaget (1896-1980) Born in Switzerland Age 10 studied albino sparrow
Age 15 convictions lacked scientific
foundation.
Age 21 earned Doctorate – natural sciences
Age 23 came up with plan of action…
1920 decided to study children in Paris Laboratory
Interested in children’s wrong answers
Mainly observed children 4-12(spontaneous activities)
Methodology was greatly criticized
1960’s great revival of his work!
Jean Piaget was born in Switzerland in Tensions within the family caused him to find refuge in solitary research. At age 10 he became interested in an albino sparrow in the park. While in high school he did research on Mollusks which revealed him to many, and brought a job invitation as the curator of a museum. At the age of 15 Piaget realized that his religious and philosophical convictions did not have foundation in science. He began to read widely and write out his new ideas(which were originally intended for himself alone). While in the midst of this eager pursuit, Piaget managed to earn his doctorate in natural sciences at the age of 21. Still unsure of where he was going, at 23 Piaget decided to focus on child psychology. He would some use his research in “Genetic epistemology”, which for Piaget consisted of answering the questions concerning the origin of knowledge. In 1920 he began to work in a Paris lab. He soon found his interest in the answers of younger children, speculating that they might not be dumber than other children, but think in a totally different way. He was especially interested in their wrong answers. He wanted to observe children in spontaneous activities. Avoiding the standardized tests he made a more open-minded approach, along with hours observing children’s spontaneous activities. There was however difficulty in understanding his methods and many dropped his theories. What was important to Piaget was the rich thoughts of children, not so much their statistical summaries. And soon by the 1960’s there was a great revival of his work and now it is hard to find any research on the subject of children’s thinking without having a reference back to Piaget.

4. Piaget’s Stages: Four stages Sensorimotor (6 subsets -Infancy)
intelligence demonstrated thru motor activity without symbols
Object permanence comes - 6mnths
Pre-operational (2 subsets - toddler and early childhood)
use of symbols, language matures, memory/imagination develop
Egocentric thinking remains dominate
Concrete operational thought (7 types of conservation - elementary and early adolescence)
logical, systematic manipulation of symbols
operational thinking…egocentric thought diminishes
Formal operational thought (adolescence and adulthood)
Logical use of symbols related to abstract concepts
return to egocentric thought-early on
35% high school grads achieve Formal operations
In Piaget’s understanding of development, he names four main stages that contain several subsections in each. In an effort to gauge whether a child is in Stage II or Stage III, Piaget developed the theory of conservation. Specifically, in the experiment that involves the conservation of continuous quantities or liquids, the child is given two identical glasses of water. Then, they are asked to pour one of the glass’ water into a different shaped glass. The child’s development stage is determined by whether or not the child is able to recognize that each glass has the same amount of water in it. Piaget believed that children are able to conserve liquids at or around age seven.
Conservation of Liquids in the hardest to achieve.

5. What ages?
About what ages do kids transition from preoperational to concrete operations?
SENSORIMOTOR PERIOD Birth to 2 years
PREOPERATIONAL PERIOD 2-7 years
CONCRETE OPERATIONS 7-11 years
FORMAL OPERATIONS 11 years-adulthood
Conservation is the transition between the preoperational stage the concrete operational stage.
Age 7 is not a perfect age, it’s just about the average age that kids begin to grasp the idea of conservation.

6. How does Conservation relate to Piaget's stages?
Children are in considered in the Preoperational Stage if…
He or she is determined that one glass has more water than the other.
Children are considered in a transitional sub-stage if…
He or she can’t decide between the two glasses, or shows signs of beginning to grasp the concept, but does not yet get it.
Children are considered in Concrete operational if…
He or she clearly knows that the glasses still have the same amount of water. The child can also use the 3 arguments of – identity, compensation, inversion – to justify their opinion.
The way we can tell which stage there in is by testing them in conservation. Based on our observations if kid says one definitely has more they fail to conserve and fall in the preoperational stage. If they are confused/cant decide (they are beginning to see that height and width cancel out), but they fail to conserve, then they are considered in the transition between the two stages. If they definitely know that the two are the exact same they are considered in concrete operations.
Identity means the child grasps that the water did not change, it maintained its identity.
Compensation means that the child grasps that the height of one glass cancels out or compensates for the width in the other glass.
Inversion means that the child understands that you can ‘un-do’ the pouring of the water to show that nothing has changed.

7. Kohlberg (1927-1987) Hometown: Bronxville, New York
Attended the University of Chicago
He became interested in Piaget’s
work, specifically in his investigation
of moral judgments in children.
Kohlberg took Piaget’s brief work with moral development and expanded it extensively.
Lawrence Kohlberg – Grew up in Bronxville, New York And attended the University of Chicago, where He became interested in Piaget’s work, specifically in his investigation of moral judgments in children. Piaget’s investigation of moral judgment consisted mainly of what children thought about rules of a game, for instance. He noticed a difference between a young child’s understanding of fixed rules, and then around the age of 10, the kids took a more relativistic view of rules. However, Piaget did not go any farther than observations.
Kohlberg took Piaget’s brief work with moral development and investigated it thoroughly; he developed his own stages of moral development. He discovered that there were more intricate and elaborate stages than Piaget had noted at first.
“The result was his doctoral dissertation (1958a), the first rendition of his new stage theory” (Crain 157). He developed six stages of moral development that people go through to reach their full potential. ***

8. Kohlberg’s dilemmas Kohlberg tested children by presenting
the children with a moral dilemma,
and asking them questions to ascertain
their understanding of morality.
The ‘yes’/ ‘no’ responses were not the main criteria for placement in a particular stage of moral development.
The explanation of why the child holds a certain opinion that reveals how advanced their moral judgments are.
His Method:
Kohlberg tested children by presenting the children with a moral dilemma, and asking them questions to glean their understanding of morality. His most famous dilemma is ‘Heinz steals the Drug’ where a man with a terminally ill wife steal the drug she needs from the pharmacist who wanted to make an exorbitant profit. The questions are meant to ask whether the action was wrong, and why.
And to gauge the stage that a person was in, he developed nine dilemmas. While the person’s particular ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response was largely unimportant, the subjects reasoning behind why they chose a particular answer reveals what stage of moral development the person is in at that time. Kohlberg has also established a scoring method to gauge what cognitive capabilities a child has by looking at their reasoning behind their answers.
If the person’s reason consists of strictly the fact that the man will be punished, their moral development stage will be lower. If the person responds that society would face consequences if everyone stole what they thought was just to steal, they would be considered in a higher stage of moral development.
A child begins with a simple understanding that a person must obey the rules, ‘because they are the rules’ and ‘if you don’t you’ll get punished’ in Stage 1.
And a fully developed moral judge is able to determine what ideals lead to a just society, the good life. 
***And, while the stages are under 3 larger categories, we chose to focus on each individual stage for a deeper understanding of the stages, themselves.

9. Your Turn!
Dilemma:
Two young men, brothers, had got into serious trouble. They are secretly leaving town in a hurry and needed money. Karl, the older one, broke into a store and stole a thousand dollars. Bob, the younger one, went to a retired old man who was known to help people in town. He told the man that he was very sick and that he needed a thousand dollars to pay for an operation. Bob asked the old man to lend him the money and promised that he would pay him back when he recovered. Really Bob wasn’t sick at all, and he had no intention of paying the man back. Although the old man didn’t know Bob very well, he lent him the money. So Bob and Karl skipped town, each with a thousand dollars.
Read aloud?
Then pass out the handouts to the students, and make them answer the questions.
Give them like 5-10 minutes. And be sure to explain to them that answering the ‘why’ questions is very important. Put their name on the Conservation side, and then answer the questions…
PLACEMENT = before or after we explain all of Kohlberg’s stages!?

10. The Questions:
Which is worse, stealing like Karl or cheating like Bob? Why is that worse?
What do you think is the worst thing about cheating the old man? Why is that the worst thing?
In general, why should a promise be kept?
Is it important to keep a promise to someone you don’t know well or will never see again?
Why shouldn’t someone steal from a store?
What is the value or importance of property rights?
Should people do everything they can to obey the law? Why or why not?
We would like you to give us your papers, then scramble them up, and grade the answers. With kohlberg’s stages …

11. How Kohlberg Grades In Kohlberg’s dissertation,
he provided example answers
for each of the questions in this dilemma.
He also compiled a list of common trends and key words to look for in the children’s answers.

12. Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation
The child understands rules to be set and given by a higher authority.
Their main concern is with the consequences, whether the person will be punished or not.
Typically this stages is seen between the ages of 4 and 10.
For example, a stealing is wrong “because you can go to jail for a very long time. Plus you can get in serious trouble” -4th grade girl (age 9)
Obedience and Punishment Orientation: ages 4-10
Understands rules to be completely external. Something is bad because you will get into trouble.
Main concern is with the consequences, whether the person will be punished or not.
For example, a stealing is wrong “because you can go to jail for a very long time. Plus you can get in serious trouble” -4th grade girl (age 9)

13. Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange
Punishment is no longer ‘evidence’ that something is wrong. Instead, it is “a risk that one naturally wants to avoid” (Crain 160).
The idea of right and wrong is slightly more flexible, and the first priority is doing what is most beneficial for themselves.
For example, “stealing is worse [than
cheating] because you are more likely
to get in trouble for stealing than
cheating”. -6th grade girl (11)
Individualism and Exchange (ages 4-10)
Relative rules, punishment is “a risk that one naturally wants to avoid” (Crain 160). Meaning that the child will look for ways to get exactly what they want without getting punished. If they avoid it, that’s what they will do.
-their idea of right and wrong is more flexible, instead of the strict understanding that punishment means something is wrong.
Idea of “fair exchange” (Crain 161) – like Mrs. Khirallah’s example, previously- the children began to negotiate, ‘if you won’t tell, I won’t tell’. With an egocentric idea that what ever is best for me must be right.
For example, “stealing is worse [than cheating] because you are more likely to get in trouble for stealing than cheating”. -6th grade girl (11)

14. Stage 3: Good Interpersonal Relationships
Strong desire to win approval
from peers and adults.
Emphasis on avoiding
disapproval.
Kids tend to cite a person’s
intentions, or motives as proof
of right & wrong.
For example, cheating is wrong “because you’re always supposed to do the right thing”. -4th grade girl (age 9)
Good Interpersonal Relationships – ages 10-13
Strong desire to win approval from peers and adults.
And emphasis on avoiding disapproval and punishing those who are greedy, bad, …
People must live up to certain standards, “Good behavior…having good motives and interpersonal feelings…intentions” (Crain 161).
Motive = key! Greedy, nice, etc.
In the dilemmas, children tend to sight the person’s intentions as justification for their actions and whether something is right or wrong.
For example, cheating is wrong “because you’re always supposed to do the right thing”. -4th grade girl (age 9)

15. Stage 4: Maintaining the Social Order
Child becomes more concerned with society as a whole, and how the rules are made for a purpose.
‘people want to keep society functioning’ (Crain 162)
Can focus on the effect an action has on society.
For example, keeping promises is important because “when you promise something, you follow through with it, and hold your end of the bargain”. 6th grade girl (age 12)
Stage 4: (ages 10-13)
“Society as a whole… obeying laws” (Crain 162)
‘full-fledged member of society’ (Crain 162)
The authority is always the 1st priority, obeying the laws/rules, being a good citizen, respecting authority (Crain 156).
For example, keeping promises is important because “when you promise something, you follow through with it, and hold your end of the bargain”. 6th grade girl (age 12)

16. Stage 5: Tertiary Circular Reactions
The person is generally entering adolescence at this stage, and they are able to consider ‘the big picture’ or society as a whole.
They have respect for the laws not because they are told to, but because it is detrimental to society if they disobey.
For example, stealing is worse than cheating because “you are doing something bad, the cops will chase you could hurt someone in the process” –8th grade boy (age 14)
5) Social Contract and Individual Rights (adolescence, ages 14+)
What is a good society?
Theoretical, democratic
Right and Wrong – how does the action effect the society as a whole.
For example, stealing is worse than cheating because “you are doing something bad, the cops will chase you could hurt someone in the process” –8th grade boy (age 14)

17. Stage 6: The Beginning of Thought/ Universal Principles
The person considers how the characters
in the dilemma can best achieve a just
result.
The person also examines the parameters of the situation to see if they are most likely to promote a good outcome.
For example, when someone is given the Heinz dilemma, they might say that their should be laws forbidding price gauging in pharmacies.
6) Universal Principles (adolescence, ages 14+)
Defines the principles that will/can achieve justice (Crain 164)
By looking at the dilemma the person questions whether a certain idea or practice is just for that society. The person contemplates whether the rules achieve the desired effect or should be changed to create a more fair society.
For example, when someone is given the Heinz dilemma, they might say that their should be laws forbidding price gauging in pharmacies.
However, this stage is still considered theoretical, and how realistic this stage is, is still debated. “It is called a theoretical stage” (Crain 159)

18. Question / Purpose The purpose of our study is to discover
if Piaget’s and Kohlberg’s theories of
cognitive development complement each other.
“Do children who are able to conserve score higher or lower on Kohlberg’s moral development stages than children who fail to conserve?”
Piaget, Kohlberg And how they are related…how the two theorist worked together without even knowing it.
We would like to find out if the ability of a child to conserve is at all correlated with a higher stage in Kohlberg’s understanding of moral development.
In effect, both theorists came up with their own stages that contain different ages for each, and our question is to find out if they have a positive correlation. For instance, if a kid score higher in one, does that mean he is more likely to score higher in the other??

19. Hypothesis
If a child demonstrates the ability to conservation , he or she will also demonstrate more advanced moral reasoning than the children who could not conserve.
If both theories are known to be widely accepted as accurate, then they should relate to each other in some way.
Hypotheses (or educated thoughts) based on authoritative reading going into the study
If a child is in Piaget’s stage III, concrete operations, then he/she will be placed in a higher level of moral development compared to a child in Piaget’s stage II, the preoperational stage. Similarly, a child who can conserve will also demonstrate a more advanced moral reasoning capabilities.

20. Materials Worksheets for the Kids Two identically sized cups
One graduated cylinder
Water
Blue food coloring (optional)
And children ranging from ages 9 -14

21. Handouts On the first side of the handout was …
their age, grade, and gender
The questions regarding conservation – ‘which glass has more water in it?’
On the second side of the handout was…
One of Kohlberg’s dilemma
Questions that Kohlberg wrote himself for that particular dilemma.
Specifically showing what it is.
Have handouts for everyone in the room.

22. Our test subjects… Holy Family of Nazareth School
We tested children in grades 4, 6, and 8.
When Kohlberg performed his investigations, he tested kids at ages 10, 13, and 16.
Why did we choose these grades?
Also, Kohlberg, himself, tested children at ages 10, 13, and 16 to investigate their moral reasoning abilities. So we chose to test around the same age groups – 4th graders (9 and 10), 6th graders (11 and 12) and 8th graders (14).

23. Procedure 1. Children sat together in a group.
2. Hand out the pencils, and evaluation sheets.
3. Then, we will fill up two plastic cups with equal amounts of water.
4. Next, we will pour the water from one cup into a different size cup, taking all the water from one to the other.
5. Now ask them whether there is more or less water in the second cup compared to the first one. Have them record what they think on the worksheet,
6. Then, we will read the dilemma to them (which will also be written on the worksheet).
7. Then the students will answer the questions about the dilemma on their worksheets.
We tested the children to discover if they could conserve, and then, we gave them a dilemma.
They were asked to record their answers to Kohlberg’s own dilemma questions.

24. The children’s results
Overall, we compared the moral development level of the children who could conserve to those who could not conserve.
Each grades data was slightly different…

25. 4th Graders who CAN conserve:
Moral L E V
Fourth Graders

26. 4th Graders who can NOT conserve:
4th Grader (cont'd)
4th Graders who can NOT conserve:
Moral L E V
Fourth Graders
The ages of these children were 9 and 10, and all of them fell into the first stage of preoperational thought. This means they choose one glass over the other with a determined mindset. We found this to be different than what we expected in relation to Piaget’s conservation of liquids, in which childern master this around the ages of 7-8yrs.
Possible reason for this occurrence:
The way children are influenced today has greatly affected the growth of their minds.(Endangered Minds-possible reference?)
Of the 9 fourth graders, 6 were unable to conserve.

27. 6th Graders who CAN conserve: Moral L E V Sixth Graders
All of the Sixth graders could conserve, and these were there scores.

28. 8th Graders
There was only 1 eighth grader, and he was able to conserve. His Moral Reasoning level was determined to be in level 5.
How we got the final results!
Two stacks COULD and COULDN’T
Averaged the two

29. Next, the Overall Results…
Drum roll, please…

30. ******Overall Results*******
Average
Moral Development Levels
For this result, we added up all of the score of the kids, in all three grades, who could conserve- and found their average score.
Then we added up all of the scores of the kids who could not conserve, and found their average score.
Those who CAN Conserve Those who Can NOT Conserve

31. AVG. L E V
4th Grade th Grade 8th Grade

32. Those Who Can NOT Conserve…
AVG. L E V
(None) (None)
4th Grade th Grade 8th Grade

33. Evaluation of the Results
Overall, our hypothesis was confirmed.
The average stage of moral reasoning of the children who could conserve was slightly higher than the children who could not conserve.
However, given the limited amount of test subjects we were able to test, the results are not as adequate as we would have liked.

34. Looking Back,
If we could do the project over again what would we change?
Environment where the kids were tested was very loud and chaotic.
Accuracy of results?
If any errors were made, it is likely they were made in the grading of the children’s moral reasoning answers.
We would prefer a quieter and more peaceful environment.
Also, I would have preferred to test the children independently.
Possible Errors:
It was very difficult, even with the examples and explanations of the stages to grade each child’s brief answers into a specific category of moral development. The children did not write as elaborate of answer as we would have liked. And because their answers were so brief, it was even more difficult to figure out what the meant. (And what they wrote, their hand-writting was a little tricky too.)

35. Bibliography (Main Sources)
Crain, William C. "Piaget's Cognitive-Developmental Theory." Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. Boston, MA: Prentice Hall, 2011.
Kohlberg, Lawrence (1958). "The Development of Modes of Thinking and Choices in Years 10 to 16". Ph. D. dissertation, University of Chicago.
Kohlberg, Lawrence. The Philosophy of Moral Development: Moral Stages and the Idea of Justice. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981.