About the Moral Development of Adolescents

Adolescents are in a kind of limbo between childhood and adulthood. In 2005, Dr. Ruben Gur, professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote: "The evidence now is strong that the brain does not cease to mature until the early 20s." Adolescents are still in the process of gaining control over cognitive processes that shape any reasonable definition of morality, including "impulsivity, judgment, planning for the future [and] foresight of consequences." Adolescent moral development is not only a concern for parents and educators, but for the criminal justice system, scientists and therapists.

Definition

• While there are many interpretations of what "moral development" is, the influential theories put forth by psychologists Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg assume that morality goes beyond adherence to social norms and conventions. Professor Larry Nucci of the University of Illinois at Chicago defines morality as "one's concepts, reasoning, and actions which pertain to the welfare, rights and fair treatment of persons." People who choose not to steal or murder for fear of being caught and punished aren't making a moral choice. People who view such activities as "wrong" regardless of laws or social conventions are guided by morality.

Theories

• Piaget identified four stages of cognitive development, with the final stage, "Formal Operations," occurring in adolescence. Moving beyond the "Concrete" phase in which they develop the ability to reason and think abstractly about solid objects and observable reality, adolescents are able to think in purely abstract terms, taking various points of view into consideration.

  Kohlberg expanded on Piaget's work and theorized six stages of moral development, with adolescents falling somewhere within the third and fourth stages. In Stage 3, "Good Interpersonal Relationships," a sense of right and wrong is based on what's best for those young people actually know---family members, friends and members of their local communities. In Stage 4, they think more broadly in terms of society as a whole. Their morality is still tied to laws and social norms, but they have a more sophisticated understanding of why such laws and norms are important.

Biology

• While adolescents may have access to the level of morality Kohlberg and Piaget described, the discoveries of brain researchers call into question whether or not it's reasonable to expect teenagers to act consistently on their sense of morality. In 2004, the American Bar Association reported on collaborative brain research done by scientists at Harvard, UCLA and the National Institute of Mental Health. They found that the frontal lobe goes through more changes in the teenager years than at any other stage and is "not done being built yet," according to NIMH researcher Jay Giedd. In addition, the ABA notes that hormonal changes cause emotional upheavals that can override moral reasoning and lead to risky behaviors.

Social Factors

• Dartmouth College psychology professor Abigail A. Baird wrote in 2006 that adolescents' moral development hinges on their ability to process and assimilate information from their interactions with peers. While some theorists argue that peers are more of an influence in adolescents' moral development than parents, Baird suggests that the parental role changes, but does not diminish. Peers are added to the complex process of the teenager's evolving moral view, but parents continue to help shape it.

Education

• Dr. Baird notes that one-sided lectures on morality have little influence on adolescents. Kohlberg advocated a Socratic method of fostering moral development, in which educators pose moral dilemmas and ask students to solve them. When the student provides an answer based on her level of moral reasoning, the teacher provides more information that complicates the issue and creates a conflict for the student that can only be resolved by a higher level of moral reasoning.