Mes Top 5 Ouvrages
Termes les plus recherchés
[PDF](+37👁️) Télécharger ERIC ED196963: Assessing Young Children's Moral Development: A Standardized and Objective Scale. pdf
A paired-comparisons measure of distributive justice development, the Distributive Justice Scale (DJS), was developed and validated in four studies. Pictures were drawn to represent the different stages of distributive justice for a given dilemma and the DJS was scored by selecting the child's preferred stage via the picture comparisons for each dilemma. In Study 1, 104 children from kindergarten, grades 2 and 4 were given the DJS and two Piagetian logical reasoning tasks. Age trends and a relationship with logical reasoning were found. In Study 2, 66 children from grades 1, 3, and 5 were given the DJS and a measure of verbal ability. Age trends and a low relationship with verbal ability were found. In Study 3, 88 children in grades 1, 3, and 5 from Kinshasa, Africa were given the DJS. The trends replicated Study 2. In Study 4, 56 children from lower and middle social classes in kindergarten and grade 3 were given the DJS. The lower class lagged behind the middle class in their DJS sTélécharger gratuit ERIC ED196963: Assessing Young Children's Moral Development: A Standardized and Objective Scale. pdf
ED 196 963
TM BIO 117
Enrightr Pobert D. ; And Others
Assessing Young Children's Moral Development: A
Standardized and Objective Scale,
31p,: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association (64thr
Boston^ MAr April 7-11, 1980).
MP01/PC02 Plus Postage,
Age Differences: *Attitude Measures; Correlation:
Cultural Differences : Developmental Stages;
Elementary Education: Foreign Countries; Grade 1;
Grade 2: Grade 3: Grade U: Grade 5: Kindergarten
Children : *Moral Development : Sex Differences: Social
Differences: *Test Reliability: ♦Test Validity;
Verbal Ability: Visual Measures
Africa: *Distributive Justice Scale; *Paired
Comparisons: Feabody Picture Vocabulary Test; United
A paired-comparisons measure of distributive justice
development, the Distributive Justice Scale (DJS) , was developed and
validated in four studies. Pictures were drawn to represent the
different stages of distributive justice for a given dilemma and the
DJS was scored by selecting the child's preferred stage via the
picture ccBFarisons for each dilemma. In Study 1^ 10U children from
kindergarten r grades 2 and U were given the DJS and two Piagetian
logical reasoning tasks. Age trends and a relationship with logical
reasoning were found. In Study 2r 66 children from grades 1r 3r and 5
were given the DJS and a measure of verbal ability. Age trends and a
low relationship with verbal ability were found. In Study 3, BB
children in grades 1r 3r and 5 from Kinshasar Africa were given the
DJS. The trends replicated Study 2. In Study 4^ 56 children from
lower and middle social classes in kindergarten and grade 3 were
given the DJS. The lower class lagged behind the middle class in
their DJS scores in both grades, implications for distributive
iustice research were drawn. (Author/RL)
* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made *
* from the original document. *
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ ♦♦♦4 4* 4*
Ul DEPARTMENTOF HEALTH.
EDUCATION A WELFARE
» NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO-
DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FHDM
THE PEHSDNDH DHG ANIZA T IDN OR lOIN-
ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS
•.^■^ STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPHE-
■ ^ iCNT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF
EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY
I — i
LlJ Assessing Young Children's hforal Development:
A Standardized and Objective Scale
•'PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS
MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY
Robert D. Enright ^ p fyir^Xa^Ur
Lesley A. Manheim
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Christina C. Franklin
William F. Enright
Florida Atlantic University
Running head: Iforal Development
Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Boston, April 1980.
A paired-comparisons measure of distributive justice development (IXTS) was
developed and validated in four studies. In Study 1, 104 children from kinder-
garten, second, and fourth grades were given the DJS and two Piagetian logical
reasoning tasks. Age trends and a relationship with logical reasoning were found.
In Study 2, 66 children fron first, third, and fifth grades were given the EJS
and a measure of verbal ability. Age trends and a low relationship with verbal
ability were found. In Study 3, 88 first, third, and fifth grade children fron
Kinshasa, Africa were given the DJS. . The trends replicated Study 2. In Study
56 children fron the lower and middle social classes in kindergarten and third
grade were given the EJS. The lower class lagged behind the middle class in
their DJS scores in both grades. Implications for distributive justice research
Assessing Young Children's Moral Development:
A Standardized and Objective Sudle
The development of moral judgment in children has been a popular area for
researchers since Piaget^s (1932) and Kohlberg's (1958) pioneering efforts in
this area. Recently, Damon (1975) has narrowed the broadly-<lef ined area of moral
judgment to assess children's understanding of distributive justice or the fair
allocation of goods in a group or society. Such a domain is impor'tcint to study
since this form of reasoning is part of "everyday" life, not only in childhood,
but throughout one^s life. People are faced far rrore often with distriL^utive
decisions — such as giving and receiving allowances, giving to charities, reinfor-
cing others' behavior — than with such Kohlbergian justice decisions as saving
a life through theft of an exorbitantly priced drug.
Distributive justice as one aspect of the Kohlbergian tradition anphasizes
structuralism and the development of stages through structural analyses. Damon *s
stages, which include distributive justice reasoning from early to middle child-
hood, are as follows:
0-A: The child believes ttet whoever wants the most money or goods should
0- B: The child bases distributive decisions on external characteristics.
The oldest one, for example, should get more than the others.
1- A: The child believes everyone should receive the same amount regardless
of other characteristics.
1- B: The child bases distributive decisions on behavioral reciprocity. In
other words, the child believes that those who work harder or do more
than the others should get more.
2- A: The child bases distributive decisions on psychological reciprocity.
That is, the child believes that those who are most in need should
receive rrore than the others.
The validity for Damon's stages includes both cross-sect iona;i and longitudinal
support, a relationship with Piagetian stages of logical reasoning, and a rela-
tionship with behavioral distributive decisions (Damon, 1975, 1977).
Although the validating evidence is encoui^aging, ther-e is a weakness. The
structuralist tradition has perpetuated the interview technique as the only viable dc
collection procedure (e.g., Danon, 1977; Kohlberg, 1976). Although such a proce-
dure leads to richness in data, there are several prcblens with the exclusive
use of this technique. For one, the interview is not standardized and, therefore,
each diild takes a sanewhat different "test." The lack of standardization leads
to a lack of replication since any two studies are likely to have different exper-
inenters with differing interview styles. Structural interviewing xnads to many
responses that are impossible to categorize (Rest, Note 1). Since interviews
are often lengthy, there can be a fatigue effect, especially in yo\ing children.
Transcriptions of tapes, training of interviewers and training of scorers are
time consuming and expensive. Finally, because of the reliance on verbal produc-
tion by the child, the interview my be confounded by verbal ability (see, for
example, the high correlations between social reasoning and verbal IQ in Keller *s
1976 work and Tumure's 1975 work).
If distributive justice in particular and structuralism in general is to be-
cOTie more scientifically precise, standardized and objectively scored instruments
must be developed. The purpose of the present work is to report on a standardized
instrument for assessing children's distributive justice development. The measure
is based on Damon's (1977) recomnendation that good assessment must include a
thorough sampling of the child's knowledge in the distributive area. In Damon's
interview, once a child generates a decision, other alteniatives are pt^esented to
pee if the cliild continues holding the original belief when facea with new possi-
bilities. With Damon's technique, the interviewer ir., in effect, presenting a
paired-item test, the pair at any time being the child's current distributive be-
lief and the interviewer's probe. Since an interview does not follow a fixed
fonrat, not all alternatives representing each stage may be presented to any given
child. For the present work, a standardized, paired-comparisons measure of dis-
tributive justice is described and validated in four studies.
Both distributive justice and Piagetian logical reasoning involve recipro-
city. In distributive justice, there is behavioral (stage 1-B) and psychological
(stage 2-A) reciprocity. In logical reasoning there is reversability as seen in
conservation tasks where the individual must be able to reverse operations to suc-
cessfully solve the problem. Both Seliian's (1976) and Selman and Damon's (1977)
speculations suggest that the logical operation of reversibility precedes the so-
cial operation of reciprocity. Given this speculation and the construct of dis-
tributive justice, the following were expected:
1) There will be a significant, linear increase in distributive justice
reasoning with age;
2) ffeles and females will progress as a similar rate in distributive justice
development since structuralisL theory assumes a similar progression
within a given cultural group.
3) There will be a relationship between logical and distributive justice
reciprocity with logical reciprocity preceding distributive justice re-
ciprocity in developnent.
Subjects . Cne-hundred-and-four children from kindergarten, second, and
fourth grade in a Midwestern United States city iwtici[^ted. Inhere were 36
kindergarteners, 17 males and 19 females ^ 33 second grdders participated, 18
males and 15 females; there were 35 fourth graders, 18 males and 17 females.
Parental permission was sought before the testing.
Instruments . For the Distributive Justice Scale (EJS), pictures like that
in Figure 1 were drawn to represent the different stages of distributive justice
for a given dilemma. Figure 1 refers to the following dilemma patterned after
Damon (Note 2):
These boys and girls all go the the same camp. This is Betty, she's
the oldest one at the camp; this is Jennifer whose family does not have
much money; this is David who made the most paintings; and this is Mat-
thew. One morning they all thought it would be a good idea if they got
out their paints and painted pictures of what they saw around the camp.
When they were done, Betty made 2 paintings, Jennifer made 2, David made
4 paintings, and ^fatthew made 2. After they did this, they asked the per-
son who runs the camp if he would like some of the paintings. He bought
all the paintings and gave sane nickels to the children. The children,
then, had to decide how to split up the nickles. What is the best way
to split up the nickles?
Figure 1 represents stage 1-A since all children get the same amount des-
pite David (lower left) doing more pictures than all the others.. Each picture
has a standardized statement with a decision and reason for the decision read to
the child as the picture is presented. For the stage 1-A example the experimen-
ter says, "In this picture, all children get the same number of nickels so they
won^t fight about who gets more." As another example, the stage O-A picture
shows Matthew with five nickles and the other children with one pach accompanied
by the stateraont, ''In this picture, Matthew gets the irost nicklefi b-»c!aiii:jo he
wanted those nicklLes ]mve than anything else in the whole world," iTie state-
ments representing each stage were balanced for niirnter of words, 'nie average
number of words for each stage (derived by adding both statenients for a given
stage across both dilenm^s and dividing) are as follows: 0-A=17; 0-B=17; 1-A=20;
Another dilemma with a different story and set of pictures was also given.
The second dilemma had the males at the top with a female in the lower left doing
the most. This reversal was done to control foi subjects' possible sex role bi-
ases influencing their responses. As Figure 1 shows, the drawings were done to
be as racially non-specific as possible.
For each dileirma, each stage picture and statement was paired with every
other stage picture in the paired-comparisons format creating ten pairs. For any
given pair, the experimenter places the two pictures in front of the cliild, says
the two statements corresponding to the respective pictures, and asks, 'Wiich
picture ends the story the best?" For each pair, a random ordering determined
which picture was presented first . The order of presentation for the ten pairs
was also determined through random selection.
Besides the ten pairs, three pairs have been randomly chosen which are re-
peated at the end of each dilemma to check for consistency. These repeated pairs
were presented in reverse order of the original pairings to control for primacy
or recency effects. If a recency effect were operating and the pair orders were
not reversed, the child would again choose the second statement presented, thus
appearing consistent. If the child fails to match on four of the six repetitions
across the two dilemmas, his cr her data are eliminated from the sample. In this
study, data of two kindergamers and one second grader were onaitted by this pro-
cedure. Total administration time for both dilemnss is approximatley 12-15
minutea pep c^hllcl,
The D.u:-itTibut:Lve JuB t loe Scale is Bcoi-ecl by selecting the child 'a preferred
stage via the picture comi^^xrisons for each dileiimva. For example, if the child
chose 1-A over all other stages, the child woiuld be aaaigned tiat stage for th<>
dilemma. A complication arises as in any paired -comparison test if a triangiilar
relationship exists such as 2-A > 1-B; 1-B > 1-Ai 1-A > 2-A. In this case the
lowest stage in the triangle is chosen since the child is most likely in transi-
tion, and, therefore, the only stage on which the child is consolidated is prob-
ably the lowest of the three. The final score is obtained by converting develop-
mental levels into numerical values (e.g., 0-A = 0.0, 0-B = 0.5, 1-A = 1.0, and so
forth) . A mean of the two dilemmas represents the total score . This score as-
sumes developmental levels are continuous rather than discontinuous. That is,
a value of 1.25 is interpreted as the individual being between 1-A (1.0) and 1-B
(1.5), showing evidence for both kinds of reasoning (see Flavell 1971 for further
discussion on the continuous /discontinuous controversy) .
For the Piagetian logical reasoning tasks, the classic tasks of liquid and
mass conservation (Flavell, 1963) were given to each child. Both were given so
the logical and social reciprocity relationship, if found with one Piagetian task^
could be replicated with the other.
Procedure . Each child was individually administered the tasks by one of
three university students. Prior to testing, the experimenters practiced giving
the tasks for one wee'c to a university student who had tested 30 students previ-
ously with the DJS. Within the Distributive Justice Scale, the order of dilemmas
was counterbalanced across subjects to control for order effects. Within logi-
cal reasoning, the liquid and mass tasks were counterbalanced. Ae presentation
of either logical reasoning or distributive justice was also counterbalanced.
Reau-lta and Di nonH^ion
Intarndi (XM^aiatenoy ral iahl l it:y ^^1- ^-b^^ IMf* ms exanuneil l^y [iiieamvin-
Drown fonmila whioh waa applleil l:o l:t)e oi)rro lrU: U)n l^t^lv/et-Mi ( va^ di lalll^^a^]
yielding a value of ,61, To ttvat U)V age of fool h], a lint^tp ttvnul aiialytu'ti wa^^
perM'otined on the EUS actx")f-i}3 the three grades, A tiilgnlfioanC , uiJWai\l Linear^ trend
Wcia found, F(l, I0l)-^23,rjr), j[) < •OOl. Meanii Miid r.iMndrU^l d«*vi/\l ionM aro in TatVle
1. To exanuLne mean differencou in age and sex effeotB, a two-way ANQVA wna per-
fomied on the DJS. As expected^ there was a Bignificant nuiin effect for grade,
F(2, 9B)=11.52, 2. < .001, but not for sex. Tiikey's post-hoc procedure showed that
the kindergarten DJS mean was significantly lowei> than either the second or fourth
grade means. The strength of that developmental relationship as measured by
Pearson r was .39. It was also found that consistency of performance on the IXJS
as measured by the six repeated items increased with grade level, r = .33,
£ < .001.
The next analysis examined the relationship between distributive justice re-
ciprocity and logical reciprocity. A point-biserial correlation could not be
perfonned here since the great majority of fourth graders had passed both con-
servation tasks, leaving no variability in these scores. To eliminate any ceil-
ing biases and to test the hypothesis that Piagetian logical reciprocity precedes
social cognitive reciprocity, contingency tables like those in Table 2 were con-
structed. Logical reciprocity is defined as the child passing a test of conser-
vation whereas social reciprocity is defined as t^ 'hi Id's distributive justice
total score being 1.5 or higher. Table 2 shows the presence or absence of both
logical and social reciprocity across age. The relationship is shown with both
liquid and inass conservation. The hypothesis to be tested is whether the child-
ren progress from lower right cell (showing neither kind of reciprocity) in
the vounfci,ebt givnip i^ilU the h«vgei' Idh: (tilu .v^iiig U'^i/u'^il t^^:i i-r^ i ( v i.iily) aiivi
Lhe i^Vcii' i'liiht. (UUU re.Miuv,v!i t itib) in the ^)U1tti» i^i^-ui-b, while, im( aM t-.r.:. i uy.
l:o ihci '♦cin'^a^** i^all iu i U^ wi^vax^ piglu ^^Uava d^'viial lu-i U'^^lmI l av ii-ivn i iv
atnv^tlon tUiiiiAcJtU: llui ttiKptH^i^al (peuil. '1^^ Unit Ihi^i, uiiil liiMiii^il aiuHV'^^^^i vv^a^
[>3i.>fomed on l.hd iti«.iioLi:>iu:)iib peM^-nurniri 4in\)Liu a^e hn' litiui^t .HHi^tipvat i.^ii aiui ^li:^-
(.ivi-buttvB Vi9t:.Lod, t'ii'tU:, the ytvUl tuiiu l.ti« Uiil U)^Uv-il vIikI lall ^AvHiial reuii>-
rvHnity cell t:o the tvnll ^(x^iaL but ivihm UigioaL oell wau ox^inlnetU ^I'hln wan
teatol by comivirlng the pmixn^i lot^ in each of thene Lva) c^hIU^ 4l Kin^loriryn'tan vh,
the proportion in fourth grvvN^ * A (^nnplet:B luitvisa protiedurt^ inciluMinM tH^mnd
grade was not done so that the alpha level could t^a-iLn at ]^ < -OB while at ill
examijning a mc^notonio trnnd. The z statistic nhowed aifinitioarice, 7.=9,09 (tha
critical value being 1.6H5). This suggests a nhift from paasinf^, norther kind of
reciprocity to passing only logical reciprocity with cige. The eta and eta coef-
ficients, interpreted respectively as strength of association between these pat-
terns and age and the amount of shared variance, were .36 and .14. Eta her^ was
derived via an associational extension of Marascuilo and Berlin's (1977) statis-
tic for examining interactions for dichotomous variables in a repeated measures
design. The next shift examined was from failing both in kindergaiTten to passing
both in fourth grade. Again, we find a significant shift in this direction with
age, z=9.m, eta=.UO, eta2=.16. The shift fran the lower left to upper left cell
was not significant. These multinonial analyses suggest that as children develop,
they develop logical reciprocity first or develop logical and social reciprocity
synchronously, but generally do not develop social reciprocity first.
It should be noted that sane children do show the unexpected pattern of so-
cial but not logical reciprocity. This pattern, however, is seen in only 14 out
of 104 children for the liquid conservation task. Whether this pattern represents
a U^ie .level. *t4ucitilai i^^ilciii iiucaovii t-j.-cut oi t x u ...lui.-l i-^: . k; t ci tul 4 .ovl Ucits. U
lO mitUl^^l 1^-== liic;aC3iitcgi.c:.iil .:liN.t V^h^U H U Hull iUU. . t I .Ic. I •^..l^C.b
while: lUc ..t.l^.altc lc:rj» .'f I . .r.oc.==a I U^b^— ^ « i'"' - - * 1 * o. ■ i ^ i v a i I
oall again iri lU^' rnu»)P
^U:)u1y 1 .MlHiwti tlvii young i^lii litmn^i Ui^Kual tNrianiMUn^', ^mu l^fcs a.sticiu^eil if\ a
Htvuularxllv'.tHl aiul oblmu Iva way U\ a i»t^lat Iv^ly Htunn i>eruxl iit rinia. Thw UffJ, a«
axpc^cttKl, uhowtHl atkxivuito ir\tumil ronriltttcnK^y t>iaiabtllty au wall aa niiwafxl lin-
ear clevolojmnU' in duitrlbutlvo )untice without Mt^x tUtootn, Also ati exixxitex!,
social recipixx^lty as moanured by the IMS in rtilated to logical ih^jc Ipixx^ity,
The next stt^p in the validation of the CXJS was to tH^plioato ago iUKl aex
effects as well as to assess the discriminant validation of the measure. Since
the structuralist tradition relies so heavily on verbal production, it is diffi-
cult to separate the effects of advanced social reasoning structures from an elo-
quent vocabulary. As Rubin (1978) has shown, measures of social reasoning devel-
opment often share as much variance with verbal ability measures as they do with
parallel forms of social reasoning. What is needed, then, according to Rubin,
are social reasoning measures which show less variance with IQ or verbal ability
than they show within themselves via internal consistency analyses. The purpose
of Study 2, then, is to assess. the relationship of the EJS and a valid measure of
verbal ability. It is expected that there will be upward, linear age trends, no
sex effects, and a low I'elationship between the DJS and verbal ability.
Subjects . Sixty-six children from the same school a:s Study 1 participated.
There were 22 children, half male and half female, from first, third, and fifth
g4:Hdes. Parental pemission was sought prior to testing. Only one child's (a
first grader's) data were cffuitted because of lack of consistency on the DJS. He
was subsequently replaced in the sample by another child.
Instruments . The DJS and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PP/T) were
used. Not only was the PPVT chosen because of its well-established validity,
but because of its shared method with the DJS. The PPVT, like the DJS, assesses
through picture recognition. Without a shared method, a discriminant validation
could be confounded by method differences rather than construct differences
which are responsible for the low relationship. With the PPVT, the examiner pre-
sents a picture with four objects. The examiner then names an object and the
child chooses the one picture that represents it. The test is stopped when the
child misses six out of eight consecutive presentations.
Procedure . The children were individually administered the tasks by three
university students. The DJS and PPVT were counterbalanced. Within the EJS, the
two dilemmas were again counterbalanced. '
Results and Discussion
The reliability of the two dilemmas via the Spearman-Brown fonnula was .68.
Age effects for the DJS were again tested via a trend analysis. There was a sig-
nificant, upward linear trend from first through fifth grades, F(l,63)=24.23 ,
£ < .001. The means and standard deviations are in Table 3. When the means are
conpared with those of Study 1, it can be seen that the linear trend seems to hold
across the six age groups frc^ kindergarten to fifth grade. A linear trend
analysis was performed to confirm this. Such an analysis could be done since all
siibjects were drawn from the sume population and were tested during the same,
general time period. This trend analysis again showed linear, upward developnent,
F(l,16i+) = 50,62, £ < .001.
To examine the mean differences on the DJS in Study 2, a two-way MOVA by
age and sex was performed. There was a significant, main effect for grade,
F(2,60)=12.59, £< .001, but not for sex. The post-hoc Tukey procedure revealed
that the first grade mean was lower than either the third or fifth grade means.
The strength of the DJS and age relationship was .51 via Pearson r. When PPVT
was partialled out, the correlation rerrained high, being .H9. As in Study 1,
consistency of performance also increased with grade level, r=.31, £< .01.
Age and sex effects were next examined for the PPVT via a two-way ANOVA.
There was a main effect for grade, F(2,60) = 26.2H, £ < .001, but not for sex.
Tukey 's procedure showed a significant mean difference between grades one and
three, between grades one and five, and between grades three and five. The
strength of the PPVT and age relationship was .68 via Pearson r.
To test the discriminat validity of the DJS, a Pearson r between EJS and PPVT
was performed. The correlation was .25, £< .02. While this relationship is in
the low range, the internal consistency is rather high (.68) suggesting that dis-
tributive justice reasoning as measured by the DJS is a domain which does not
overlap a great deal with verbal ability. When grade level was partialled out
there was no significant relationship between the DJS and PPVT, the partial cor-
relation being -.15, £< .12.
The age trends for the DJS again held, even when verbal ability was partialled
out, and the lack of sex effects was replicated. Even with a shared method, the
DJS is only related to verbal ability in the low range if age as a mediator is
not considered. Because the partial correlation could have partialled true as
well as extraneous variance, the conservation conclusion is that the EVJS shows a
low, but significant relationship with verbal ability.
To this point, the DJS as well as Dainon's interview have been validated only
in a Western culture. Since the DJS concerns the distribution of goods, the pre-
vious two studies may not have demonstrated distributive justice development as
much as they have shown that progression in a Western capitalist environment of
distribution. To test the generality of distributive justice development with
the DJS, a study was done in Kinshasa, Zaire, Africa.
Subjects and Culture . Eighty-eight Zairian children from the same school
took part. There were 29 first graders, 14 irales and 15 fenales; there were also
29 third graders, 15 males and 14 females; and there were 30 fifth graders, half
male and half female. One first and one third grader's data were omitted because
of lack of consistency. There is both a Belgian and African tribal influence in
the sample. The school is Belgian-owned but is run by native Zairians. The po-
litical structure at the time of testing was a dictatorship since the Zairian
leader was known as the "President for Life." The economic system was not clearly
defined at the time of the study since there was both a socialist influence in
that some businesses were nationalized and a capitalist influence in that sane
businesses were privately owned. With regard to socioeconcmic class structure,
there is a lower, middle, and upper class. The middle class individuals work in
businesses in Kinshasa. For this study, the middle class was chosen since the
Study 1 and 2 samples were American middle class.
Instruments . The DJS was translated into Lingala, the native language of
Kinshasa, and kept as close to the original as possible. The original pictures
were judged to be appropriate for the culture by a Zairian professor at the Uni-
versity of Zaire.
Procedure . A Zairian male adult conducted the assessments. Before the data
collection, he was observed assessing six children, two at each grade of this
study, by an American familiar with the DJS. The two dilemmas were counterbal-
anced across subjects. The experimenter was blind to the American findings be*
fore and during testing.
Results and Discussion
Reliability for the two dilemmas via the Spearman-Brown formula was .77. A
trend analysis for age effects showed a significant, linear trend of upward devel-
opment, F(l,85)=15.75, £< .002. Table 4 shows the means and standard deviations.
The two-way ANOVA by grade and sex revealed a significant, main effect for grade,
F(2,82)=8.09, £< .001, but not for sex. Tukey^s post -hoc proced^jr^ showed the
first grade mean to be lower than the third or fifth grade means. ne lUS and
age correlation was .40. As in the previous two studies, consistency of perfor-
mance increases with grade, r =.20, £ < .03.
The Kinshasa findings replicate the Study 2 DJS findings very closely. An
examination of Tables 3 and 4 shows the extent to which the two studies replicate
one another. Despite different social structures, the two cultures show the same
developmental progression througji middle childhood. The findings show that the
DJS can be used in cultures other than the American middle class.
Although no differences seemed apparent between the groups in Study 2 and 3,
this may be the result of middle class sampling. Several researchers have shown
that within a given culture social class differences in moral developsnent exist
(Cauble, 1975; Fleishman, 1974; Kohlberg, 1958). If such differences exist in
the general moral development construct they should also exist in distributive
justice. Study 4, then, examines social class differences in the DJS.
Sub j ects , Fifty-six children from an elementary school in southern Florida
participated. There were 28 children from kindergarten, half lower class and half
middle class. Of the 14 lower class, nine were mle and five were female. Of the
14 middle class, eight were male and six were female. There were also 28 chil-
dren from third grade, half middle and half lower class. There were six males
and eight females in the lower class while there were eight males and six females
in the middle class. Social class was measured by Hollingshead * s (Note 3) four-
factor index of social status. All children chosen were white so that social
class and race would not be confounded.
Instruments . The Distributive Justice Scale was used along with the
Stanford-Binet vocabulary (Terman g Merrill, 1973) to control for verbal differ-
ences confounding the distributive justice results.
Procedure . A graduate student conducted the assessments with each child.
All children were individually administered the tasks.
Results and Discussion
The internal consistency reliability of the DJS via the Spearaian-Brown formu-
la was .70. To test for grade and social class effects on the DJS, a two-way
ANOVA was run. A significant, main effect was found for grade F(l,52)=28.12,
£< .001, and for social class, F(l,52) = 20.41, £< .001. No interactions occurred.
The strength of the age and DJS relationship via Pearson r was . 53 . The strength
of the social class and DJS relationship via eta was .45, £ < .001. Means and
standaixi deviations are in Table 5.
Although the DJS and vocabulary correlated only .15 (£ < .15) when grade was
partialled out, an analyses of covariance of grade and social class on distribu-
tive justice controlling for vocabulary was performed in case the latter contrib-
uted to the DJS and social class relationship. The grade effect for distributive
justice was again significant, F(l, 51) = 18.91, £ < .001; social class was again
significant, F(l,51)=18.59, 2. < .001; and no interactions were found. The
strength of the DJS and age relationship remined strong (.42, £ < .001) when vo-
cabulary was partialled out; the DJS and social class relationship also renained
strong when vocabulary was partialled (.42, 2. ^ .001).
The grade and social class effects on vocabulary were next examined via a
two-way AMOVA. The grade effect was significant, F(l,52)=19 .00 , .001 (r=.51,
£< .001), but the social class main effect and the grade by social class inter-
action were not significant. While vocabulary went up with age, there were no
social class effects for this variable. The partial correlation of vocabulary
and age controlling for the DJS remained strong, .40, £ < .001.
As predicted, lower class children enter school with a developmental lag in
distributive justice development and that lag continues as the children advance
in the elementary grades. The data do not suggest that the differences are the
result of general cognitive deficits since no social class differences in verbal
ability occurred, nor do they suggest race differences as a cause since the latter
was controlled. A recently completed study which replicated this one has shown
that the social class differences are related to a lack of reciprocal peer inter-
action in school (Enright, Enright, Manheim, £ Harris, Note 5). In a sociometric
peer rating, lower class individuals were chosen most often for negative attri-
butes (does not play fair) while middle class children were chosen most often for
positive attributes (best friend) . The lack of reciprocal interactions may play
a part in the lower class children's non-reciprocal cognitions.
This series of studies was undertaken for two reasons: a) as a test of a
methodolo,;-/, and b) to learn something substantive about distributive justice de-
velopment in children. Fran the methodological viewpoint, the studies show that,
despite a structuralist tradition, it is possible to develop a reliable and valid
measure that leads to standardized assessment and objective scoring procedures.
The reliabilities for all four studies seem adequate for young children's res-
ponses which may not be as homogeneous as older individual's (see for example,
Flapan, 1968). With regarxi to validity for the measure, there are strong age
trends, no sex effects, a relationship with logical reciprocity, a discriminant
relationship with verbal ability, generality beyond a Western culture, and expec-
ted social class differences.
Given these psychometric properties, the methodological importance of the
DJS seems to be the followiiig: a) the standardization allows for direct canpari-
son of distributive justice reasoning in different parts of the country or world
by different researchers; b) the relatively quick procedure minimizes fatique in
young children; c) time and expense of transcriptions and training of scorers are
minimized; d) the paired-comparisions procedure assures that the child is exposed
to all the different alternatives of the distributive justice dilemma; and e) the
fonnat does not rely on verbal production. Not only may the latter be confounded
with verbal ability as previously stated, but also such production may obscure
actual abilities in less verbal or shy youngsters, especially when tested by an
unfamiliar adult. These studies certainly were not done to suggest the clinical
interview be abandoned. Instead, they were done to give researchers a choice of
methods. Rest (Note 4) has already done this successfully with the Kohlbergian
construct of moral developnent with adolescents and adults.
Fran the substantive viewpoint, the series of studies shows that with a rec-
ognition task in both Western and non-Western cultures those in early childhood
show evidence of 0-B and 1-A distributive justice thinking. They base decisions
on externals as well as on giving everyone the saine amount. Those in early ndd-
dle childhood, the second and third graders, show evidence primarily of stages
1-A and l^-B, the latter being a reciprocity of behavior where others are paid
back in kind for their acts. Those in middle childhood, the fourth and fifth
graders, show evidence of 1-B and 2-A reasoning, the latter being a psychological
reciprocity based on need. Such a progression supports Dajnon's hyped le-
sized sequence. The progression is independent of gender but not independent of
social class within the Anerican culture. The latter finding my be the; result
of non-reciprxx:al peer relations if Piaget (1932) is correct in speculating that
such relations are iiitportant or even necessary for the development of cognitive
reciprocity. This finding should be explored further if the lower class is to
benefit from social class-integrated schooling.
These studies further suggest that logical reciprocity precedes or parallels
the developnent of distributive justice reciprocity. The attainment of both kinds
of reciprocity is not yet complete by fourth grade since about half the children
possessed both reciprocities while the other half possessed only logical recipro-
city at this age. Finally, it seems that consistency of distributive justice
performance increases with age. Such a finding suggests there is a greater cogni-
tive integration as children mature in that they are more sure of the beliefs
they hold. Such development is consistent with Vfemer's (1948) assunptions of
integration regarding general cognitive development.
1. Rest, J. New options in assessing moral judgment and criteria for evaluating
validity . Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Re-
search in Child Development, Denver, April 1975 (available from the author
at the Department of Social and Psychological Foundations of Education;
Burton Hall; University of Minnesota; Minneapolis, MN 55455).
2. Damon, W. Social-moral interviews for young children. Unpublished manu-
script, Clark University, undated, (available from the author at the Depart-
ment of Psychology; Clark University; Worcester, MA 01610).
3. Hollingshead, A. Four factor index of social status . Unpublished manuscript;
Yale University, 1975 (available from the author, P.O. Box 1965; Yale Station;
New Haven, CT 06520) . •
4. Rest, J. ^fanual for the Defining Issues Test . Unpublished manuscript,
University of Minnesota, 1974.
5. Enright, R. , Enright, W. , Manheim, L. , 5 Harris, B.E. Distributive justice
and social class. Unpublished rranuscript. University of Wisconsin, February
Cauble, M. Interrelationships airong Piaget's fonral operations, Erikson's ego
identity, and Kohlberg's principled morality. (Doctoral dissertation,
Arizona State University, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International ,
1975, 3£, 773A-774A. (University Micro fiM No. 75-16, 255).
Damon, W. Early conceptions of positive j list ice as related to the development of
logical operations. Child Development , 1975, i£6, 301-312.
Danon, W. The social world of the child . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.
Flapan, D. Children's understanding of social interaction . New York: Columbia
University Press, 1968.
Flavell, J. The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget . New York: Van Nos-
Flavell 5 J. Stage related properties of cognitive development. Cognitive
Psychology , 1971, 2, 421-453.
Fleishman, H. The effect of age, socio-economic status and IQ on moral judgment
(Doctoral dissertation, Emory University, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts
International , 1974, 3L|^, 4404A-4405A. (University Microfilms No. 74-446.)
Keller, M. Developn>ent of role-taking ability: Social antecedents and conse-
quences for school success. Human Development , 1976, 19_, 120-132.
Kbhlberg, L. The development of modes of moral thinking and choice in the years
ten to sixteen . Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Chicago,
Kbhlberg, L. Moral stages and moralization: The cognitive-developmental ap-
proach. In T. Lickona (Ed.), Moral development and behavior. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, S Winston, 1976.
Marascuilo, L. , S Serlin, R. Interactions for dichotomous variables in repeated
measures designs. Psychological Bulletin , 1977, 84, 1002-1007.
Piaget, J. The moral judgment of the child . London: Routledge £ Kegan Paul,
Rubin, K. Role-taking in childhood: Some methodological considerations. Child
Development , 1978, 69, H28-H33.
SelJian, R. A structural approach to the study of developing interpersonal rela-
tionship concepts. In A. Pick (Ed.), Xth annual Mijinesota symposia on child
psychology . Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1976.
Selman, R. , & Damon, W. The necessity (but insufficiency) of social perspective
taJcing for conceptions of justice at three early levels. In D. DePalma 5
J. Foley (Eds.), Moral development . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso-
Terman, L. , & Merrill, M. Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: I^ual for the
third revision fom L-M . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Conpany, 1973.
Tumure, C. Cognitive development and role-taking ability in boys and girls frran
7-12. Developmental Psychology , 1975, 11, 202-209.
Werner, H. Ccmparative psychology of mental development . New York: Interna-
tional Universities Press, 19H8.
Figure 1. Example of a distributive justice picture shown to the
Study 1 Means and Standard Deviaf.ions for the Distributive Justice Scale
"N « 36
t>N » 33
Relationships between logical and distributive justice reciprocity
Liquid Conservation as Logical Reciprocity
Mass Consenation as Logical Reciprocity
pass fall I
Study 2 Means and Standard Deviations
for the Distributive Justice Scale & PPVT
*M - 22 per grade
Study 3 Means and Standard Deviations for the Distributive Justice Scale
First * Third Fif th^
Distributive X SD X SD X SD
1.00 .76 1.30 .53 1.A3 .64
.87 .55 1.A3 .72 1.69 .A8
Total .93 .65 1.36 .62 1.57 .56
*N ■ 29 for both first and third grade samples
- 30 '
Study 4 Means and Standard Deviations for
Distributive Justice and Verbal Ability
*N ■ 28 per grade; 14 per social class
Lire la suite
- 484.01 KB
Vous recherchez le terme ""