Show simple item record

Gender differences in moral development

dc.contributor.authorHoffman, Lois Wladisen_US
dc.contributor.authorDonenberg, Geri R.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2006-09-11T16:13:49Z
dc.date.available2006-09-11T16:13:49Z
dc.date.issued1988-06en_US
dc.identifier.citationDonenberg, Geri R.; Hoffman, Lois W.; (1988). "Gender differences in moral development." Sex Roles 18 (11-12): 701-717. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/45582>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0360-0025en_US
dc.identifier.issn1573-2762en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/45582
dc.description.abstractSixty-nine Midwestern middle-class children and adolescents were tested on justice and care orientations when reasoning abstract and interpersonal moral dilemmas. Nona Lyons' (“Two Perspectives on Self, Relationships and Morality,” Harvard Educational Review, 1983, 53, 125–145) scoring method was used to score subjects' responses. A 2(sex)×2(age) analysis of variance run on the total justice and care scores, as well as each individual dilemma, supported Carol Gilligan's ( In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982) theory that two distinct ways of thinking about moral problems exist — justice and care — and are differentially related to gender. Girls emphasized the morality of care significantly more than justice. Contrary to Gilligan (1982) and Lyons (1983), however, boys in both age groups emphasized the morality of justice and care equally. Data from the interpersonal dilemmas using Lyons's (1983) coding scheme are consistent with J. Piaget ( The Moral Judgement of the Child, New York: Free Press, 1966) and Lawrence Kohlberg [“The Cognitive-Developmental Approach,” in D. A. Goslin (Ed.), Handbook of Socialization Theory and Research, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1969]: older subjects became more justice oriented and younger subjects emphasized the morality of care. Sex differences on Kohlberg's stage theory were not significant and the protagonist's gender in the Heinz dilemma had no effect on moral reasoning.en_US
dc.format.extent1015083 bytes
dc.format.extent3115 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherKluwer Academic Publishers-Plenum Publishers; Plenum Publishing Corporation ; Springer Science+Business Mediaen_US
dc.subject.otherPsychologyen_US
dc.subject.otherAnthropology/Archaeometryen_US
dc.subject.otherInterdisciplinary Studiesen_US
dc.subject.otherSociologyen_US
dc.subject.otherDevelopmental Psychologyen_US
dc.subject.otherSocial Psychologyen_US
dc.titleGender differences in moral developmenten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelWomen's and Gender Studiesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHumanitiesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michigan, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michigan, USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampusAnn Arboren_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45582/1/11199_2004_Article_BF00288055.pdfen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00288055en_US
dc.identifier.sourceSex Rolesen_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.