MORAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHEET, CHAPTER 8

docx

School

Eastern Washington University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

201

Subject

Psychology

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

3

Uploaded by ProfessorSpider1582

Report
PSYC 201, Life Span Development NAME: Hannah Shreve Instructor: Jackson Class Assignment: Moral Development Film (This assignment is worth 10 points) Another example of a Lawrence Kohlberg's original moral dilemma about "Heinz and the Pharmacist" was a reenactment of Dr. Stanley Milgram's 1960s experiment on authority and punishment. This experiment was conducted by Dr. David Rosenhan in the early 1970s. Your task is to track both the behaviors and the reasoning of each of the college participants in this video on Dr. David Rosenhan’s experiment. Answer the following questions for each level of moral reasoning: 1) Did the participant follow the instructions of the researcher? 2) What reasons did the participant offer for following (or not following) the instructions? 3) How did this reasoning demonstrate this level of moral reasoning? Level 1 (punishment/obedience stage) 1. Did the participant follow the instructions of the researcher? This participant had followed the instructions of the research, shocking the patient up to the highest voltage of 450mv. 2. What reasons did the participant offer for following (or not following) the instructions? His reasoning behind why he followed the instruction were because he said he was only following the dynamic of the experiment and doing what the researcher had told him to do said that he shocked the guy because the guy wasn't learning which he felt was the purpose of the experiment. 3. How did this reasoning demonstrate this level of moral reasoning? He said that if he had stopped then he wouldn't have been following the instructions the researcher had set and placed saying that he "had to do it" simply because he told him to. Level 2 (naïve hedonism stage) 1. Did the participant follow the instructions of the researcher? The participant had followed the instructions of the research up to 210 mV, before saying that he was finished, however when the researcher told him to continue, he was very reluctant but continued with the procedures as directed until finally he reached 450 mV. 2. What reasons did the participant offer for following (or not following) the instructions? When offering the reasons behind why he followed the instruction, he claims that he didn't have to shock him, but he says he was a part of the experiment and was paid to administer a shock to the guy when he had made a mistake.
3. How did this reasoning demonstrate this level of moral reasoning? Even though he felt really bad, he felt like he did the job and did what he was supposed to do and played his role in the experiment. Level 3 (good boy/girl stage) 1. Did the participant follow the instructions of the researcher? This participant delivered a shock up to 450 mV however feels guilty about the whole situation was very bothered about it and knew that that person was probably really hurt and even might have died from the deliverance of the shocks. 2. What reasons did the participant offer for following (or not following) the instructions? When explaining why they followed the instructions in the experiment he said that he figured the researcher had to have known what he was doing and because he was a psychologist and a person who is supposed to be deemed good would never do anything to hurt a person, he also reassures himself by saying that this experiment had to have been repeated over again and that other people have had to have had the same trouble as he did when he was shocking the guy and if he had stopped it would have ruined the experiment. 3. How did this reasoning demonstrate this level of moral reasoning? He was concerned with disappointing the researcher and had an overriding feeling of being nice. This stage is characterized largely by conformity. Level 4 (social order stage) 1. Did the participant follow the instructions of the researcher? This participant delivers the shock up to 450 mV, however, when doing it he just seems. like he's just trying to get the job done. He seems uncomfortable with the situation but not to the point where he's hesitant about delivering each shock. 2. What reasons did the participant offer for following (or not following) the instructions? When explaining his behavior, he says that he was told what to do and did it, but he figured he knew what the psychologist was doing because of his educational status, he thought that it took a lot of self-control to shock a guy like that. 3. How did this reasoning demonstrate this level of moral reasoning? His moral reasoning is more authoritative and is consistent with maintaining the social order and having respect for it by doing what he is supposed to
Level 5 (social contract stage) 1. Did the participant follow the instructions of the researcher? This participant delivers a shock of up to 300 mV. Throughout his deliverance of the shocks, he is very concerned with the learner on the other side of the wall, he finally stops and says that it’s way too much and he cannot proceed any further. 2. What reasons did the participant offer for following (or not following) the instructions? When explaining why he wanted to stop he says that he figured this was something that was good for mankind and society and wanted to know if that person is truly okay. 3. How did this reasoning demonstrate this level of moral reasoning? After the experiment, he experienced a great deal of discomfort. because he stressed the idea of social standards and the legal point of view. Level 6 (universal ethical stage) 1. Did the participant follow the instructions of the researcher? This participant when presented with the decision to shock the learner for answering the question. incorrectly, he second guesses even pressing the voltage button. He then begins to give back the money to the researcher after being pressured even more to continue with the experiment. 2. What reasons did the participant offer for following (or not following) the instructions? He explains this behavior by saying that he is sorry but doesn't feel that this experiment will accomplish anything by administering a shock just because a person answers the question wrong and doesn't think its morally right to harm people for the gain of knowledge and does not care if has authority or has a degree or what purpose of the experiment. 3. How did this reasoning demonstrate this level of moral reasoning? His reasoning was not based on society's standards, whereas moral reasoning is based on personal conscience and self-chosen reasons with respect for human dignity and human life.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help