WordPress.com



Lee et al. (1997)Area:Theme:Background to the topic:Truth telling is when ____________________________________________________________________________________________________Lying is when__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Why do people lie?State a statistic about the occurrence of lyingBelow is a space for you to make notes on ‘How bad is it to lie’Background:There has been a great deal of research into moral development. For example, research by Kohlberg found what about how we morally develop?There has been limited research into children’s moral development of lying. Any research which has been conducted on the moral development of lying has been done with children in Western countries. Why is this an issue? Why might results from Western studies into lying not be generalisable across cultures? Be specific in your answer (think of the British social norm)Aim:Lee et al. wanted to test the effect of _________ on children’s moral evaluations of ______________________, by comparing the moral judgements of Canadian children and Chinese children.Already, what are some of the key similarities between Lee’s study and Kolhberg’s based on the above?Sample:Two groups of participants:1) __________ children____ children40 were _-year-olds40 were _-year-olds 40 were _-year-olds60 boys and 60 girls2) __________ children:__ children36 were _ years old40 were _ years old 32 were __ years old58 boys 50 girlsMethod:No information on sampling methodEvaluate: Cross sectional studyDefine:Laboratory conditions________ measures design Define:In the study, participants are read two types of stories. In one story, the child carries out a _______ (pro-social). In the other story, the child carries out a _______ (anti-social).A social story involves…A physical story involves…In both stories, the characters are questioned by a teacher who asks who committed the deed, they either lie or tell the truth. The child participants were asked to evaluate the story characters deeds and verbal statements.Independent variablesWhether the participant heard the social story or the physical storyWhether the participant heard a pro-social or anti-social storyThe age of the childrenThe ethnicity of the childrenDependent variablesThe ratings given to the story character’s deedsThe ratings given to what the character saidChinese sample:Half took part in social storyHalf took part in physical storyCanadian sample:19 7-year-olds, 20 9-year-olds and 17 11-year-olds took part in social storyOthers took part in physicalAll allocation to groups was _________What are the strengths of this?Complete the grid below.Procedure:Children were read four scenarios: two were prosocial and two were antisocial. An example (a prosocial story with lie-telling is below):Alex’s class had to stay inside at recess because of bad weather. Alex decided to tidy up the classroom for his teacher. Question 1: Is what Alex did good or naughty?When the teacher returned after recess, she said to her students, “Oh, I see that someone has cleaned the classroom for me.” The teacher then asked Alex, “Do you know who cleaned the classroom?” Alex said to his teacher, “I did not do it.” Question 2: Is what Alex did good or naughty?left5267325Children were tested individually and the meaning of the words ‘good’ and ‘naughty’. Ratings of the deeds and verbal statements were on a 7-point rating chart:What are the strengths of using a scale to gather data?What are the weaknesses of using a scale to gather data?What type of data is collected here?Qualitative and/or quantitativeNominal, ordinal and/or intervalThe researchers altered the presentation of ‘good’ and ‘naughty’ in the questions.What is the benefit of this?The researchers also altered the order in which the stories were told.What is the benefit of this?What is this process called?At the end of the study participants were then involved in post-experimental discussions.Results: Prosocial Behavior/Truth-Telling Situations: Overall, children from both cultures rated the prosocial behaviors similarly. Canadian children at each age gave similar ratings to truth tellingHowever, Chinese children’s ratings became less positive as age increased. Lee suggested that this could have been due to culture. For example, Chinese people prefer modesty and keeping a low profile both in regard to their own achievements and status as well as their interactions with others. Traditionally, in the course of polite conversation, Chinese people will downplay their own positions and achievements while emphasizing those of others.What does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?Prosocial Behavior/Lie-Telling Situations: Overall, Canadian children rated lie telling negatively, but as age increased their ratings became less negative.Overall, Chinese children’s ratings of lie telling changed from negative to positive as age increased.What does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?Antisocial Behavior/Truth-Telling Situations: Children from both cultures rated the antisocial behaviors similarly. Children from both cultures rated truth telling in this situation very positivelyWhat does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?Antisocial Behavior/Lie-Telling Situations: Both Chinese and Canadian children rated lie telling negatively in this condition. Overall, negative ratings increased with age, regardless of culture. Chinese 7-year olds thought that it was worse to conduct a bad behaviour and tell a lie if the situation involved other people (social situation) than objects (physical condition)Canadian 7-year olds thought the opposite: it was worse to conduct a bad behaviour and then tell a lie if the situation involved objects (physical condition), than if it involved people (social situation)What does this mean in terms of Lee’s aim to see the effect of culture on children’s moral evaluations of lying and truth telling?Conclusions:?All children showed similar moral evaluations of lie telling and truth telling related to anti-social behaviour. Chinese children rate truth telling in prosocial situations less positively and lie telling in the same situations less negatively than Canadian children.Moral development is affected by the culture and environment in which individuals are socialised. For example, Chinese children’s moral judgements are affected by self-effacement and modesty.Specific social and cultural norms have an impact on children’s developing moral judgements, which are modified by age and experience within a culture.Evaluation:Research methodType of dataEthical considerationsValidityReliabilitySampling biasPractical applicationsEthnocentrism Complete the grid below, outlining the similarities and differences between Kohlberg’s study and Lee et al.’s study. You should add more rows when required.SimilaritiesDifferencesExam questions:Explain why Lee et al’s study into lying and telling the truth can be described as a cross-sectional study [2 marks]Describe the sample used in Lee [3 marks]Explain one strength of this sample [3 marks]Explain one weakness of this sample [3 marks]In Lee et al.’s study the experimenter varied the presentation of the words ‘good’ and ‘naughty’ in the questions. Give one reason why this would have been done [3 marks]Explain how the Lee study links to area it falls under [3 marks] Explain how the Lee study links to the theme it falls under [3 marks]Outline one similarity between the study of Kohlberg of moral development and the study by Lee into lying and telling the truth [3 marks] Outline one difference between the study of Kohlberg of moral development and the study by Lee into lying and telling the truth [3 marks] ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download