Evaluation Of A Close Inspection Of Participants ' Responses

This paper will go over the two semi-structured interviews with an 18-year-old subject in order to evaluate the subjects Moral Cognition. To start off this paper will be the conceptual overview followed by two summaries of articles about the Moral Cognition of individuals. This paper will give a description of the subject, the area where this interview was conducted, and the procedure of the semi-structured interview. This will lead into the results, analysis and possible limitations that took place throughout the study. To end this research paper will be a quick overview/summary of the project.

As a future teacher, it will be part of my job to increase my students’ moral reasoning. Moral reasoning deals with how individuals think about moral issues. Lawrence Kohlberg developed stages of moral reasoning which researchers use to assess an individual. According to Steinberg (2014), the adults in an adolescent’s life can impact their moral development. Therefore, as their teacher, I will conduct activities in my classroom, such as Collaborative Reasoning, Think-Pair-Share, a line activity, and an online discussion board, which will foster my students’ moral development. In addition, I will monitor my students’ growth by conducting a pre-assessment as well as a final assessment. Through my classroom activities, I expect my students to

These participants were selected using a random digit-dial telephone survey. Phone numbers were randomly generated. Once the call was answered, the caller asked to speak with a person over 18 years of age who had the next birthday. Among the participants, 46% were Caucasian, 45% African American, 3% Latino/a, 4% Asian American, and 1% Native American. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 97 years (M = 45.37, SD = 19.91). When asked about highest level of education completed, 4% did not complete high school, 23% had completed high school or received a GED and 68% had spent 1 to 10 years in college. In regards to yearly income, 18% reported making less than $25,000, 29% less than $50,000, 17% less than $75,000, 8% less than $100,000, and 13% over $100,000. On average, participants had lived in South Carolina for 31.41 years (SD =

The studied group consisted of 253 participants. The participants’ characteristics were the following: (1) their average age was 9.4 years (with a standard deviation of 1.1 years of age), (2) 130 were female and 123 were male, and (3) 126 were in the third-grade and 127 were in the fifth-grade. Their Family Cultural Status (FCS) characteristics were the following: (A) Low: consisting of 86 participants (34% of the total pool of subjects)— (1) their average age was 9.5 years (with a standard deviation of 1.0 years of age), (2) 38 were female and 48 were male, and (3) 39 were in the third-grade and 47 were in the fifth-grade; (B) Moderate: consisting of 97 participants (38% of the

There was a total of 159 participants used for this in this study. They were recruited as a sample group in the University of Essex.

The average age of the participants was around 18.5 years of age, however, all were under the age of 21. The participants were selected from introductory psychology courses, all of whom received credit with a passing grade. The participants ranged in gender, 82% were Caucasian, 13% were African-American, and the remaining 4% identified as other.

Students enrolled in an advanced psychology class at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee recruited participants. Each student enrolled in the class was required to recruit a minimum of eight participants to complete an online survey. Extra credit was available for recruiting additional participants. A sample of 327 emerging adults between the ages of 18 and 24 (M = 21.82, SD = 1.68) took part in the study. The majority of participants were female (55%). Participants were predominantly Caucasian (77%) but also involved persons whom identified as African-American (9%), Asian (6%), Latina/o (4%), Mixed (3%), Middle Eastern (1%), Native American (1%) and Pacific Islander (1%).

Fifteen conveniently sampled students (9 females and 6 males) from Oregon State University agreed to participate in a survey questionnaire. Participants were selected from an upper division summer statistics course at OSU; no compensation was offered or given. Age range of the participants was 19-28, and ethnic backgrounds included Caucasian, Pacific Islander, and Asian. All participants were undergraduate students.

One hundred and seventy-one students from Monmouth University (100 women and 70 men with one participant refusing to provide their gender) aged eighteen and older (35 freshmen, 62 sophomores, 36 juniors, 36 seniors, and one graduate student) participated in this study through haphazard sampling. Two participants refused to provide their current year of education. Students from the Research Methods I classes approached four individuals on campus to participate in the study. All participants were asked to fill out three questionnaires. All participants provided informed consent. All participants were reassured that their answers would remain anonymous. The mean socioeconomic status of the participants was approximately

There were 425 participants that participated in this experimental study. Most of the participants were friends and family members of the students at Florida International University. Of these, 152 were male (36%) and 273 were female (64%) The age of the sample ranged from 14 to 76 (M = 29.05, SD = 11.88). This included 42% Hispanic (N =180), 27% African American (N = 116), 25% Caucasian (N = 108), and 3% Asian (N = 13), 1% other (N =6), and .5% Native American (N =2).

Stephen Thoma, W. Pitt Derryberry, and H. Michael Crowson published an article (2013) outlining the development and testing of an intermediate concept measure (ICM) of moral reasoning on an adolescent population, and one of the unexpected findings was the difficulty of research participants to accurately identify bad choices and justifications (Thoma et al., 2013). It is important to note that an analogous pattern was found in a previous study utilizing the ICM with young adults in their last year of dental school (Bebeau & Thoma, 1999). To the author’s knowledge, a similar study has not been conducted on a younger segment of the population. The purpose of this proposal is to assess whether children aged 9-11 also struggle when identifying bad choices and justifications.

United Kingdom, the participants were adolescents and adult women and men. The median age was 25.8 years

Lind, G., & Wakenhut, R. (1985). Testing for moral judgment competence. Moral development and the social environment. Studies in the philosophy and psychology of moral judgment and education, 79-105.

In this chapter, Rest et al. (1999—in Svara 2015, 131) presents four psychological components that altars ethical decision making and behavior. These four components are Moral Sensitivity, Moral Judgment, Moral Motivation, and Moral character. Rest et al. (1999) states that moral sensitivity is the awareness of an ethical problem or dilemma as well as acknowledging the consequences that different courses of action can have on persons involved in the situation. Moral judgment includes the standards that guide our behavior and determines whether something is right or wrong based on one's personal views of right and wrong, as opposed to what others consider ethical. The Next component was moral motivation, which represents the inclinations to

Moral decision making differs in men and women as outlined in the findings of theorists Kohlberg and Gilligan. Kohlberg had shown that the average female attained a moral judgment rating of stage three (good boy-nice girl), while adolescent males