University of Nebraska - Lincoln

DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln

Faculty Publications, Department of Psychology Psychology, Department of
9-1-2005
Moral Development in Adolescence
Daniel Hart
Rutgers University, daniel.hart@rutgers.edu
Gustavo Carlo
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, gcarlo@unl.edu
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Psychology, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has
been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications, Department of Psychology by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of
Nebraska - Lincoln. For more information, please contact proyster@unl.edu.
Hart, Daniel and Carlo, Gustavo, " Moral Development in Adolescence" (2005). Faculty Publications, Department of Psychology. Paper
8.
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/psychfacpub/8
Moral Development in Adolescence
anicl Hart, Rutgers University
and
Gustavo Carlo, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Tcmcs in thc papcrs in this spccial issuc ol thc JRA on moral dcvcl
opmcnt arc idcnticd. Vc discuss thc intcrscction ol moral dcvclop
mcnt rcscarch with policy conccrns, thc distinctivc qualitics ol moral
lilc in adolcsccncc that warrant invcstigation, thc multiplc connota
tions ol moral, thc mcthods typical ol moral dcvclopmcnt rcscarch,
and thc inucnccs that shapc adolcsccnt moral dcvclopmcnt. Sug
gcstions arc madc lor ncw mcthods and ncw dircctions in thc study
ol moral dcvclopmcnt.
Moral dcvclopmcnt in adolcsccncc has rcachcd maturity as an arca ol rc
scarch. Tis spccial issuc ol thc Journal of Research on Adolescence, which col
lccts somc ol thc vcry bcst invcstigations on adolcsccnt moral dcvclopmcnt, is
onc indication. xpansivc rcvicws ol thc largc litcraturc will also appcar in thc
Handbook of Moral Development (Killcn & Smctana, in prcss), thc Handbook
of Child Development (amon, in prcss), and in thc most rcccnt volumc in thc
Nebraska Symposium on Motivation scrics (Carlo & dwards, in prcss). Morc
ovcr, thcrc arc hundrcds ol rcscarch papcrs rclatcd to moral dcvclopmcnt in
adolcsccncc appcaring cach ycar, many ol which cscapc synthcsis in thc vari
ous rcvicws and collcctions just mcntioncd.
THE INTERSECTION OF MORALITY AND ADOLESCENCE
Vhy has moral dcvclopmcnt in adolcsccncc bccomc such a popular top
ic among rcscarchcrs: Tcrc arc political and thcorctical rcasons lor thc
From: Journal of Research on Adolescence, 15:3 (Scptcmbcr 2005), pp. 223233.
Copyright 2005 Socicty lor Rcscarch on Adolcsccncc.
doi:10.1111/j.15327795.2005.00094.x
Tc dcnitivc vcrsion is availablc at www.blackwcllsyncrgy.com.
:: n~v: a c~vio :ov~i uvvviov:vx: ix ~uoivscvxcv ::
attcntion paid to moral dcvclopmcnt. Tc political rcason is that rcscarch is in
ucnccd by public opinion particularly through lcdcral lunding ol rcscarch, and
thc public bclicvcs that adolcsccnts arc morally dccicnt. Vhcn askcd in a rc
ccnt national poll to dcscribc adolcsccnts, almost thrccquartcrs ol Amcrican
adults uscd words suggcsting moral shortcomings such as rudc, irrcsponsiblc,
and so on (uctt, Johnson, & Farkas, 1999). nly 15 ol adults in thc samc
survcy dcscribcd tccnagcrs positivcly (uctt ct al., 1999). Askcd to idcntily thc
most scrious problcm conlronting youth, Amcrican adults answcrcd that it is
thc lailurc ol adolcsccnts to lcarn moral valucs (uctt ct al., 1999). Givcn thc
pcrccptions that Amcrican youth arc morally dccicnt and that this shortcom
ing thrcatcns socicty (pcrccptions that arc surcly wrong, scc Youniss & Hart,
2002 lor an cxploration), it is not surprising that policy makcrs and rcscarchcrs
havc locuscd attcntion on moral dcvclopmcnt.
Vhilc thc burgconing ol litcraturc on moral dcvclopmcnt in adolcsccncc
has bccn drivcn in part by thc mistakcn bclicl that todays cohort ol youth is
particularly immoral, it is also a product ol thc rccognition ol thc gcnuinc thc
orctical opportunitics ocrcd by locusing on adolcsccnts moral capacitics. Tc
papcrs in this issuc capitalizc on this insight in various ways.
nc important thcmc in thc papcrs in this issuc is that adolcsccncc is thc
loundation lor adulthood. Matsuba and Valkcr suggcst that moral cxcm
plarsGandhi, lor cxamplccan bc undcrstood by studying thc dcvcloping
moral commitmcnts ol adolcsccnts and young adults. !mplicit in thcir articlc
is thc supposition that adult moral charactcr is givcn somc shapc in adolcs
ccncc. !n othcr words, by undcrstanding and cvcntually controlling thc inu
cnccs acting on thc adolcsccnt, adult moral charactcr dcvclopmcnt can bc sct
on thc corrcct path.
Tc samc thcmc is lound in thc articlc by Lawlord and collcagucs (Lawlord,
Pratt, Hunsbcrgcr, & Panccr). Lawlord ct al. suggcst that adult gcncrativity has
its roots in adolcsccnt cxpcricncc. Tc rcsults ol thcir work suggcst that young
adults who arc committcd to caring lor othcrs arc morc likcly than thosc lcss
committcd to havc had good rclationships with thcir parcnts and community
scrvicc cxpcricnccs in adolcsccncc. Similarly, Smctana and Mctzgcr suggcst that
civic cngagcmcnt, which rcccts adults moral obligations to thcir communitics,
is vitally conncctcd to cxpcricnccs within thc lamily and church.
A sccond thcmc lound in all thc papcrs is that adolcsccncc has qualitics
that makc it dcvclopmcntally distinct lrom childhood. As a rcsult ol thcsc dis
tinct qualitics, moral charactcr can bc translormcd bctwccn childhood and
adulthood. Ccrtainly, in many Vcstcrn culturcs, onc quality that gcncrally
scparatcs adolcsccnts lrom childrcn is that thc lormcr spcnd morc timc than
thc lattcr with pccrs. Morcovcr, adolcsccnts spcnd lcss timc with thcir parcnts
than childrcn. As a conscqucncc, adolcsccnts arc probably morc inucnccd by
thcir pccrs than arc childrcn. For this rcason, Pardini, Locbcr, and Stouthamcr
Locbcr locus particularly on thc contribution ol adolcsccnts pccrs on thc sus
tcnancc ol dclinqucncy. !n addition to thc promincncc ol pccrs, thcrc arc a
varicty ol othcr agcgradcd changcs that distinguish thc contcxts ol adolcs
ccnts livcs lrom thosc ol childrcn. Tcsc includc transition into largc schools,
thc world ol work, and romantic rclationships, to namc just a lcw. As a consc
qucncc, moral lilc has ncw challcngcs, opportunitics, and inucnccs.
Adolcsccncc brings with it not only distinctivc contcxts and cxpcricnccs
but skills as wcll. As iscnbcrg, Cumbcrland, Guthric, Murphy, and Shcpa
rd point out in thcir articlc, thcrc is a substantial rcscarch basc dcmonstrat
ing that a varicty ol skills and typcs ol cxpcrtisc rclatcd to moral lilc arc morc
dcvclopcd in adolcsccncc than thcy arc in childhood. For cxamplc, iscn
bcrg and hcr collcagucs rcvicw rcscarch suggcsting that thcrc arc improvc
mcnts in thc abilitics to inlcr thc pcrspcctivc ol othcrs, to undcrstand thc scll,
and to solvc social problcms. cvclopmcnt in most ol thcsc skills builds upon
childhood achicvcmcnts and, conscqucntly, adolcsccncc docs not constitutc a
uniquc psychological stagc sct apart lrom that ol childhood. Noncthclcss, thc
rcncmcnts in skills pcrmit adolcsccnts to cngagc in moral lilc morc ccctivc
ly than is typically possiblc lor childrcn.
Togcthcr, thc varicty ol contcxts and ncw skills makc adolcsccncc a partic
ularly intcrcsting pcriod in which to invcstigatc inucnccs on moral dcvclop
mcnt. Tc rcscarch in this spccial issuc cxamincs thc cccts on moral dcvclop
mcnt ol psychological proccsscs (iscnbcrg, Cumbcrland, Guthric, Murphy, &
Shcpard, Matsuba, & Valkcr), parcnts (Lawlord, Pratt, Hunsbcrgcr, & Panccr,
Smctana, & Mctzgcr), pccrs (Pardini, Locbcr, & StouthamcrLocbcr), social
institutions (Smctana & Mctzgcr), and cultural practiccs (c.g., voluntccring,
Lawlord, Pratt, Hunsbcrgcr, & Panccr). uring childhood, parcnts mcdiatc
childrcns contact with social institutions, monitor thcir contacts with pccrs,
and control thcir participation in cultural practiccs. Tc powcrlul inucncc ol
parcnts on childrcn makcs thc study ol moral socialization in childhood lcss
complcx, and pcrhaps lcss challcnging, than thc invcstigation ol thc lactors al
lccting moral growth in adolcsccncc.
Adults, likc adolcsccnts, livc in a rich milicu ol lamily, lricnds, institutions,
and cultural practiccs. Unlikc adolcsccnts, howcvcr, adults do not changc rap
idly. As Villiam Jamcs (1890, p. 121) notcd, !t is wcll lor thc world that in
most ol us, by thc agc ol thirty, thc charactcr has sct likc plastcr, and will ncvcr
soltcn again. Vhilc Jamcs probably undcrcstimatcd thc potcntial lor changc
::6 n~v: a c~vio :ov~i uvvviov:vx: ix ~uoivscvxcv ::
in adulthood, thcrc is littlc cvidcncc to indicatc that adulthood is as lcrtilc a
pcriod in which to cxaminc agcrclatcd changc as is adolcsccncc. !t is bccausc
adolcsccnts arc both (1) opcn to a rich varicty ol inucnccs and (2) changc
considcrably as a rcsult ol thcsc inucnccs that makc thcm particularly intcr
csting to study lor psychologists intcrcstcd in thc lactors inucncing moral
dcvclopmcnt.
WHAT CONSTITUTES MORAL IN THE STUDY OF
MORAL DEVELOPMENT?
Tcrc is broad agrccmcnt that intcrcst in moral dcvclopmcnt among psy
chologists was kindlcd by Kohlbcrgs (1984) work on moral judgmcnt. Kohl
bcrg sought to synthcsizc insights lrom libcral philosophcrs such as Raw
ls (1971) with thc cognitivcdcvclopmcntal psychology ol Piagct (1965) and
8aldwin (1902). Tc rcsult was a linc ol work that locuscd on thc dcvclop
mcnt ol undcrstanding ol moral issucs such as rights and justicc. Much ol
thc cld lollowcd Kohlbcrgs lcad, and as a conscqucncc a substantial body ol
work has accumulatcd ovcr thc last 40 ycars conccrning childrcns and adolcs
ccnts undcrstanding ol rights, rcsponsibilitics, and thc principlcs that can bc
uscd to adjudicatc among conicting claims.
Tc gradual claboration ol undcrstanding ol justicc and moral claims is not
all thcrc is to moral dcvclopmcnt, ol coursc, and in thc last 20 ycars many
thcorists and rcscarchcrs havc cnlargcd thc domain ol invcstigation by locus
ing on othcr topics. Tis cxpansion is cvidcnt in thc papcrs in this spccial is
suc. !n thcir contribution to this issuc, iscnbcrg and hcr collcagucs prcscnt
thcir latcst ndings on adolcsccnts prosocial rcasoning. iscnbcrg was onc ol
thc lcadcrs in thc movcmcnt to broadcn thc study ol moral dcvclopmcnt bc
yond thc boundarics ol thc study ol conicts ol rights and an undcrstanding
ol justicc (scc, lor cxamplc, iscnbcrg8crg, 1979), and thc work on prosocial
moral rcasoning in this issuc, and hcr rcscarch on thc cmotional componcnts
to moral lilc (c.g., iscnbcrg, in prcss), continucs this cort.
Likc iscnbcrg and hcr collcagucs, Matsuba and Valkcr locus on thc pro
social domain. Tcy scck to undcrstand thc roots ol sustaincd prosocial action
by cxamining thc lilc storics providcd by dcdicatcd voluntccrs, a linc ol rc
scarch much lollowcd by pcrsonality rcscarchcrs. Lawlord, Pratt, Hunsbcrgcr,
and Panccr study gcncrativity, which thcy dcnc as carc and conccrn lor thc
ncxt gcncration, a construct drawn lrom riksons (1968) inucntial thcory
ol psychosocial dcvclopmcnt, which has cvidcnt prosocial qualitics. Smctana
and Mctzgcr locus on civic participation, a lorm ol obligation to thc pub
lic good that is most lrcqucntly studicd by political scicntists (c.g., Putnam,
2000). Finally, Pardini, Locbcr, and StouthamcrLocbcr arc conccrncd with
bclicls about antisocial or dclinqucnt activity.
ach ol thc topics cxamincd in thc articlcs in this issuc bcars clcar con
ncctions to our cvcryday notions ol morality. Morcovcr, thc divcrsity ol thc
topics rcprcscnts wcll thc brcadth ol invcstigations in moral dcvclopmcnt, a
brcadth ncccssary to track thc complcxity ol rcal lilc. Tc conccrn lor practical
moralitycharity to othcrs, caring lor thc ncxt gcncration, dclinqucncy, civic
cngagcmcntmakc thc cld morc rclcvant to policy makcrs and thc gcncral
public than moral dcvclopmcnt rcscarch was 30 ycars ago, whcn its principal
locus was moral judgmcnt sophistication.
Tc cost ol this incrcascd rclcvancc is that it is di cult to abstract clcar
boundarics lor thc moral domain lrom thc collcction ol topics in this issuc.
!l thc study ol moral judgmcnt that dominatcd thc cld 30 ycars ago somc
timcs sccmcd irrclcvant lor undcrstanding moral lilc, it did ocr lairly clcar
critcria dcmarcating its subjcct mattcr. Tis clarity now sccms lost. For cx
amplc, it is di cult to rcad thc articlc by Pardini, Locbcr, and Stouthamcr
Locbcr on dclinqucncy and disccrn clcar conccptual links to thc rcscarch
on civic cngagcmcnt by Smctana and Mctzgcr. Similarly, onc could as casily
rcad thc papcr on gcncrativity by Lawlord, Pratt, Hunsbcrgcr, and Panccr or
thc articlc by Matsuba and Valkcr on thc lilc narrativcs ol moral cxcmplars
in an issuc on adolcsccnt pcrsonality as in an issuc likc this onc on moral dc
vclopmcnt.
!n our vicw, thcrc is conccptual bcnct in sccking thc csscnccs ol notions
likc morality cvcn il thc collcction ol topics in this issuc makcs cvidcnt how
di cult this scarch is likcly to bc. Tc outlinc ol topics within thc moral do
main ocrcd by 8crnard Villiams (1995, p. 551) is particularly usclul in this
rcgard. Villiams suggcsts that moral philosophy sccks answcrs to thrcc qucs
tions: Vhat is thc right thing to do:, How is thc bcst possiblc statc ol al
lairs achicvcd:, and Vhat qualitics makc lor a good pcrson: Tcsc thrcc
qucstions, which corrcspond to thc dcontological, utilitarian, and virtuc tradi
tions, rcspcctivcly, ovcrlap and yct, arc not idcntical to cach othcr. nc ol thc
bcncts ol a broad outlinc ol thc moral domain such as this onc is that it hclps
prcvcnt parochialism. Tc dcontological linc ol invcstigation, which gaincd
asccndancc in psychology as a rcsult ol Kohlbcrgs pionccring work, clicitcd
controvcrsy conccrning whcthcr it construcd morality corrcctly or incor
rcctly. !n rctrospcct, thc cncrgics ol thosc involvcd in thc dcbatc might havc
bccn bcttcr spcnt complcmcnting rcscarch in thc dcontological tradition with
invcstigations bcst lramcd within thc virtuc and utilitarian traditions.
::8 n~v: a c~vio :ov~i uvvviov:vx: ix ~uoivscvxcv ::
Villiams outlining ol thc moral domain not only alcrts rcscarchcrs in thc
cld to thc lull rangc ol issucs that mcrit considcration, it also hclps to distin
guish thc study ol moral dcvclopmcnt lrom invcstigations in thc rclatcd arcas
ol pcrsonality dcvclopmcnt, social dcvclopmcnt, cognitivc dcvclopmcnt, and
positivc psychology. For cxamplc, thc study ol positivc psychology, which has
grown rapidly ovcr thc last dccadc, has as its loci valucd subjcctivc cxpcri
cnccs such as happincss, positivc individual traits, and civic virtucs and thc
institutions which movc individuals toward bcttcr citizcnship (Scligman &
Csikszcntmihalyi, 2000, p. 5). Clcarly, thcrc is an ovcrlap in thc invcstigations
ol moral dcvclopmcnt and positivc psychology (thc study ol civic cngagcmcnt,
lor cxamplc, may lall within both). Noncthclcss, thc qucstions that thc two
lincs ol work scck to answcr arc quitc dicrcnt. Positivc psychology sccks to
answcr qucstions such as How can human ourishing bc promotcd:, whilc
moral thcorics, as wc notcd carlicr, scck answcrs to qucstions such as Vhat is
thc right thing to do:, Vhat is thc bcst possiblc world:, and Vhat quali
tics makc a morally worthy pcrson: Ncithcr sct ol qucstions can bc rcduccd
to thc othcr, both scts ol qucstions arc dcscrving ol rcscarch.
HOW IS MORAL DEVELOPMENT IN ADOLESCENCE
BEST STUDIED?
vcry primcr on rcscarch mcthods lor dcvclopmcntal psychology sug
gcsts that complcx psychological phcnomcna arc bcst undcrstood by using a
varicty ol mcthods. Mcthodological pluralism is di cult to obtain in prac
ticc, particularly so in thc study ol adolcsccnts. For cxamplc, all ol thc ar
ticlcs in this spccial issuc rcly on adolcsccnt scllrcports lor data, and most
ol thc articlcs rcly cxclusivcly on thcsc scllrcports. For cxamplc, Lawlord,
Pratt, Hunsbcrgcr, and Panccr tap adolcsccnts scnsc ol gcncrativity by ask
ing participants to judgc thc sclldcscriptivcncss ol itcms such as thcrs
would say that ! havc madc uniquc contributions to socicty. !n thc samc
study, adolcsccnts ratcd thc parcnting thcy rcccivcd rcsulting in a mcasurc
ol parcnting quality. Similarly, Pardini, Locbcr, and StouthamcrLocbcr rc
licd on adolcsccnts scllrcports conccrning thcir bclicls rcgarding dclin
qucncy and thcir pccrs, Matsuba and Valkcr clicitcd adolcsccnts narrativcs
conccrning thcir livcs, and iscnbcrg, Cumbcrland, Guthric, Murphy, and
Shcpard uscd scllrcport mcasurcs ol cmpathyrclatcd rcsponding and pro
social moral rcasoning. For lour ol thc vc articlcs in thc spccial issuc, thcn,
scllrcports wcrc thc primary sourccs ol data.
Scllrcport mcasurcs arc oltcn valid and rcliablc indicators ol attitudcs, bc
havior, bclicls, and othcr psychological attributcs. Morcovcr, it is oltcn di cult
to collcct othcr sorts ol data whcn participants arc adolcsccnts. For cxamplc,
it would bc vcry di cult to obscrvc thc pccr associations ol thc largc sam
plc ol adolcsccnts in thc study by Pardini, Locbcr, and StouthamcrLocbcr,
both bccausc adolcsccnts arc unlikcly to cxhibit thcir typical bchavior whcn
thcy know thcy arc bcing watchcd and bccausc such a study would rcquirc an
army ol traincd, sympathctic, obscrvcrs. Thc dcmonstratcd valuc ol scll
rcport mcasurcs combincd with thc di culty ol obtaining othcr sorts ol data
on adolcsccnt participants rcsults in a linc ol invcstigation rcliant on adolcs
ccnt scllrcports.
All ol thc studics in this spccial issuc arc corrclational in dcsign, with nonc
utilizing cxpcrimcntal proccdurcs. Tc lack ol cxpcrimcntal rcscarch sccms to
charactcrizc thc study ol adolcsccncc gcncrally (Hart & Markcy, 2004), and is
not limitcd to rcscarch on moral dcvclopmcnt.
Corrclational rcscarch has dcmonstratcd its valuc in thc study ol mor
al dcvclopmcnt. Piagcts (1965) work on agcrclatcd changcs in moral judg
mcnt crcatcd a modcl lor rcscarch that continucs to inucncc rcscarch today.
Rcscarchcrs in moral dcvclopmcnt havc bccn particularly attractcd to lon
gitudinal, corrclational dcsigns, lollowing altcr Colby, Kohlbcrg, Gibbs, and
Licbcrman (1983). !ndccd, lour ol thc vc studics in this spccial issuc arc lon
gitudinal. Tc gcncral advantagcs ol longitudinal rcscarch arc wcll known and
havc bccn rcvicwcd in mcthodology tcxts, and wc bclicvc that rcadcrs ol this
spccial issuc will bc convinccd that longitudinal dcsigns can contributc impor
tant knowlcdgc to thc study ol moral dcvclopmcnt.
Mcthodological pluralism should still bc an aspiration lor thosc involvcd
in moral dcvclopmcnt, bccausc cvcn wclldcsigncd corrclational, longitudinal
studics cannot by thcmsclvcs answcr all qucstions ol intcrcst. nc qucstion lor
which longitudinal, corrclational rcscarch may bc unsatislactory conccrns thc
dcsign ol largcscalc intcrvcntions. A numbcr ol rcvicwcrs (scc, lor cxamplc,
uncan, Magnuson, & Ludwig, 2004) havc pointcd out that cstimatcs ol thc
cccts ol dicrcnt inucnccs (c.g., parcnting, ncighborhoods, schools) on ado
lcsccnt dcvclopmcnt dcrivcd lrom corrclational, longitudinal studics arc both
pronc to statistical artilacts and bcar littlc corrcspondcncc to cstimatcs dcrivcd
lrom gcnuinc largcscalc intcrvcntions. Tis is not to suggcst that corrclation
al studics ought to bc abandoncd, as this typc ol rcscarch has, and will contin
uc to makc important contributions to thc study ol moral dcvclopmcnt. ur
point is that thcrc rcmains a nccd lor rcscarch ol othcr dcsigns, and that thcrc
may bc rcal opportunity lor invcstigators who vcnturc o thc bcatcn path.
:o n~v: a c~vio :ov~i uvvviov:vx: ix ~uoivscvxcv :+
WHAT ARE THE MAJOR INFLUENCES OF MORALITY
IN ADOLESCENCE?
Primarily bccausc ol thc contributions ol cognitivc dcvclopmcntal and
moral socialization thcorics, thc bulk ol rcscarch on thc inucnccs ol moral
ity has locuscd on moral cognitions and socialization agcnts (such as parcnts).
Tc study ol adolcsccncc rcminds us, howcvcr, that othcr agcnts ol changc arc
important to study.
As scvcral scholars havc notcd, thcrc is growing cvidcncc on thc biologi
cal basis ol morally rclcvant tcndcncics and bchaviors such as altruism and
aggrcssion (Carlo, in prcss, Coic & odgc, 1998, iscnbcrg & Fabcs, 1998).
Pubcrty signics thc rccmcrgcncc ol biologically bascd proccsscs that might
impact moral dcvclopmcnt during adolcsccncc. Tc physiological and physi
cal maturation changcs ol pubcrty might bc cxpcctcd to cnhancc cmotional
scnsitivity and intimacy, and conscqucntly carcbascd cmotions (c.g., cmpa
thy, sympathy) and social bchaviors. Convcrscly, thc hormonal changcs havc
also bccn linkcd to irritability and aggrcssivcncss (although thc ndings arc
mixcd), which might mitigatc altruism and lacilitatc aggrcssion (Fabcs, Car
lo, Kupano, & Laiblc, 1998). To our knowlcdgc, rcscarch on pubcrtal tim
ing and its possiblc links to moral proccsscs and bchaviors havc yct to bc con
ductcd. Howcvcr, othcr rcscarch suggcsts that spccic ncurotransmittcrs and
hormoncs might bc associatcd with prosocial bchaviors and aggrcssion (scc
Carlo & 8cvins, 2002). nc rcccnt study showcd spccic brain rcgions as bc
ing activatcd during moral dccision making (c Qucrvain, Fischbachcr, Trcy
cr, Schcllhammcr, Schnydcr, 8uck, & Fchr, 2004). !nvcstigations ol thc in
tcrplay ol biological and socialization inucnccs will providc morc powcrlul
modcls ol morality.
Although lamily (including parcnts) has bccn thc locus ol much ol thc so
cialization rcscarch, anothcr study arca ol importancc is pccrscspccially dur
ing adolcsccncc. Pccrs providc addcd rolctaking opportunitics and cxposc
adolcsccnts to novcl moral bchaviors (Hart, Atkins, Markcy, & Youniss, 2004,
Hart & Atkins, 2002). Furthcrmorc, moral dilcmmas can bccomc much morc
important and challcnging bccausc thcir moral conscqucnccs bccomc incrcas
ingly signicant and pcrsonally rclcvant to thc scll and to othcrs. For cxamplc,
thc dcvclopmcnt ol intimatc and romantic rclationships during adolcsccncc
can cxposc thcm to pcrsonally signicant dccision situations with larrcaching
implications about who thcy arc as a moral agcnt.
Adolcsccnts also havc morc opportunitics to bccomc agcntic in thcir social
rolcs and rcsponsibilitics. For cxamplc, thcir cngagcmcnt in work and commu
nity activitics (c.g., community scrvicc, cxtracurricular) and thcir incrcascd cx
posurc to socially rcgulatcd bchaviors (c.g., driving, smoking, alcohol, joining thc
military) lrcqucntly placcs adolcsccnts in moral dccisionmaking situations. Tc
mcdia (c.g., intcrnct, magazincs, lm) acccss and litcracy lcvcl among many ad
olcsccnts providc additional uniquc and signicant socializing cxpcricnccs that
cannot bc undcrcstimatcd. Not only do adolcsccnts havc acccss to novcl moral
inlormation but thcy arc also capablc ol crcating and promoting thcir moral bc
licls and actions to othcrs. No doubt, thc inucncc ol thcsc socializing cxpcri
cnccs is intcrtwincd with thc impact ol thc authority gurcs and thc pccrs who
arc part ol thc socializing spcctrum ol thcsc opportunitics.
WHAT IS THE MORAL CULTURE OF ADOLESCENCE?
Tc contributors to this spccial issuc prcscnt a divcrsc sct ol ndings that
providc a glimpsc ol thc complcx and multidimcnsional naturc ol thc moral
culturc ol adolcsccnts. Howcvcr, thc moral culturc ol thc adolcsccnt is likcly
to bc dicrcnt across dicrcnt socictics as a rcsult ol culturally bascd practiccs
that transmit moral mcssagcs. As ccocultural thcorists notc, parcnts lrom dil
lcrcnt culturcs crcatc uniquc opportunitics and practiccs to train thcir childrcn
in thcir own moral systcm (c.g., Vhiting & dwards, 1988). Although thcrc
may bc similaritics in thc changc proccsscs that occur, thcir mcanings and pcr
ccptions arc likcly to vary as a lunction ol thc uniquc social norms, morcs, and
bclicl systcms. !n turn, thcsc pcrccptions likcly impact thcir bchaviors. Tc dy
namic intcrplay among bclicls, norms, and pcrccptions crcatcs a moral atmo
sphcrc that is cmbcddcd in oncs culturc. Tus, thcrc arc likcly multiplc cul
turcs ol morality in adolcsccncc.
At thc lcvcl ol thc individual, undcrstanding thc multiplc contcxts (c.g.,
homc, school, ncighborhood, work) that adolcsccnts navigatc and thc various
agcnts ol inucncc (c.g., biological, lamily, pccrs, mcdia) bring us closcr to un
dcrstanding thcir complcxity. All adolcsccnts must lcarn to navigatc through
thcir own moral culturcs in thcir rcspcctivc communitics. Tcsc multiplc mor
al culturcs may comprisc thcir lamily dcmands, thcir pccr dcmands, and thc
dcmands placcd on thcm by thc broadcr socicty (c.g., school systcms). ach
ol thcsc culturcs prcscnts dicrcnt cultural norms, bclicls, and norms that im
pact thcir moral lunctioning. Tc task is to dcvclop thcorics and modcls ol
adolcsccnts moral dcvclopmcnt that considcr thcsc various lcvcls ol inucncc
and thcir multiplc contcxts. Tc rclcvancc ol thc rcscarch and policy making
on adolcsccnts moral dcvclopmcnt rcsts on our cxplicit acknowlcdgcmcnt ol
thcsc complcx issucs.
:: n~v: a c~vio :ov~i uvvviov:vx: ix ~uoivscvxcv :
Acknowledgments
Tc cditors would likc to thank a numbcr ol individuals without whom
this spccial issuc would not havc bccn possiblc. 8rad 8rown and Lisa Crock
ctt providcd cncouragcmcnt and support lor pursuing thc idca. Tc sta ol
JRA, including ctra avis, lliot Harik, and Laura PadillaValkcr, whosc
invaluablc assistancc (and pcrsistcncc) in kccping us on track, was much ap
prcciatcd. Finally, wc wish to acknowlcdgc thc timc and corts ol thc various
cxpcrt scholars who graciously rcvicwcd thc manuscripts.
Tc support ol thc V. T. Grant Foundation to thc rst author and lrom thc
National Scicncc Foundation (8NS 0132302) to thc sccond author, is gratc
lully acknowlcdgcd.
References
8aldwin, J. M. (1902). Social and ethical interpretations in mental life. Ncw York, NY:
Macmillan.
Carlo, G. (in prcss). Carcbascd and altruisticallybascd morality. !n M. Killcn & J. G.
Smctana (ds.), Handbook of moral development. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrcncc rlbaum
Associatcs.
Carlo, G., & 8cvins, R. A. (2002). Tc nccd lor proximal mcchanisms to undcrstand
individual dicrcnccs in altruism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences (Commentary), 25,
255256.
Carlo, G., & dwards, C. P. (ds.), (in prcss). 51st Annual Symposium on Motivation:
Moral development across the lifespan. Lincoln: Univcrsity ol Ncbraska Prcss.
Coic, J. ., & odgc, K. A. (1998). Aggrcssion and antisocial bchavior. !n V. amon
(Scrics d.) & N. iscnbcrg (\olumc d.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3: So-
cial, emotional, and personality development (5th cd., pp. 779862). Ncw York: John
Vilcy.
Colby, A., Kohlbcrg, L., Gibbs, J., & Licbcrman, M. (1983). A longitudinal study ol
moral judgmcnt. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 48
(12).
amon, V. (in prcss). Te handbook of child development. Ncw York: Vilcy.
c Qucrvain, . J.F., Fischbachcr, U., Trcycr, \., Schcllhammcr, M., Schnydcr, U.,
8uck, A., & Fchr, (2004). Tc ncural basis ol altruistic punishmcnt. Science, 305,
12541258.
uctt, A., Johnson, J., & Farkas, S. Kids thcsc days 99: Vhat Amcricans rcally think
about thc ncxt gcncration. Rctricvcd cccmbcr 31, 2003 lrom http://www.pub
licagcnda.org
uncan, G. J., Magnuson, K., & Ludwig, J. (2004). Tc cndogcncity problcm in dcvcl
opmcntal studics. Research in Human Development, 1, 5980.
iscnbcrg, N. (in prcss). Tc dcvclopmcnt ol cmpathyrclatcd rcsponding. !n G. Carlo,
& C. P. dwards (ds.), Te 51st Annual Symposium on Motivation: Moral motiva-
tion. Lincoln: Univcrsity ol Ncbraska Prcss.
iscnbcrg, N., & Fabcs, R. A. (1998). Prosocial dcvclopmcnt. !n V. amon (Scrics
d.) N. iscnbcrg (\olumc d.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3: Social, emo-
tional, and personality development (5th cd., pp. 701778). Ncw York: John Vilcy.
iscnbcrg8crg, N. (1979). cvclopmcnt ol childrcns prosocial moral judgmcnt. De-
velopmental Psychology, 15, 128137.
rikson, . H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. Ncw York: Norton.
Fabcs, R. A., Carlo, G., Kupano, K., & Laiblc, . J. (1999). arly adolcsccncc and
prosocial/moral bchavior !: Tc rolc ol individual proccsscs. Journal of Early Ado-
lescence, 19, 516.
Hart, ., & Atkins, R. (2002). Civic dcvclopmcnt in urban youth. Applied Developmen-
tal Science, 6, 227236.
Hart, ., Atkins, R., Markcy, P., & Youniss, J. (2004). Youth bulgcs in communitics:
Tc cccts ol agc structurc on adolcsccnt civic knowlcdgc and civic participation.
Psychological Science, 15, 591597.
Hart, ., & Markcy, C. (2004). Coming ol agc in thc study ol adolcsccncc |Rcvicw ol
thc book Handbook ol Adolcsccncc|. Contemporary Psychology, 49, 727729.
Jamcs, V. (1890). Te principles of psychology. Ncw York: Holt.
Killcn, M., & Smctana, J. (in prcss). Te handbook of moral development. Hillsdalc, NJ:
Lawrcncc rlbaum Associatcs.
Kohlbcrg, L. (1984). Te psychology of moral development: Te nature and validity of moral
stages. San Francisco: Harpcr & Row.
Piagct, J. (1965). Te moral judgment of the child. Ncw York: Frcc Prcss (riginal work
publishcd 1932).
Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone in America: Te collapse and revival of American com-
munity. Ncw York: Simon and Schustcr.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridgc, MA: Harvard Univcrsity Prcss.
Scligman, M. . P., & Csikszcntmihalyi, M. (2000). Positivc psychology: An introduc
tion. American Psychologist, 55, 514.
Vhiting, 8. 8., & dwards, C. P. (1988). Children of dierent worlds. Cambridgc, MA:
Harvard Univcrsity Prcss.
Villiams, 8. (1995). thics. !n A. C. Grayling (d.), Philosophy: A guide through the
subject (pp. 546582). Ncw York: xlord Univcrsity prcss.
Youniss, J., & Hart, . (ctobcr, 2002). Motivation, valucs, and civic participation.
Civic ngagcmcnt Vorking Papcr No. 1, Tc cmocracy CollaborativcKnight
Foundation Civic ngagcmcnt Projcct. Rctricvcd Fcbruary 15, 2003 lrom c
mocracy Collaborativc Vcb sitc: http://cbvps.tcmpdomainnamc.com/vhosts/dc
mocracycollaborativc.org/htdocs/rcscarch/citizcnship/survcy.html