Moral development in adolescence is a recent area of interest in psychological research that achieved maturity. An indicator of that is the numerous published literatures itemizing moral development in adolescence. The interest may push us to want to investigate the reason for which moral development has become a popular topic of interest amongst researchers. The reasons for the attention paid may lie in political and theoretical aims (Hart & Carlo, 2005). Political research is motivated by public belief and funded mostly by federal funding of research, while theory research is offered by genuine theoretical opportunities in the study of adolescents’ moral capacities. The general attitudes towards adolescents have been negative: only 15% of American adults in a national poll to describe adolescent have characterized teenagers positively, and the majority have suggested moral shortcomings such “impolite” and “irresponsible” (Duffett et al., 1999). In the same survey, when asked to classify the most crucial problem facing adolescents and young adults, American adults responded that it was the deficiency of moral values. Given the overrall perception of adolescents as morally deficient, it is self-evident that policy makers, and researchers alike, would be politically motivated to fund research on the topic.
The Foundations of Morality in Adolescence
While for a big part literature has been misled by the misconception that most adolescents are immoral, it has, however, capitalized on the theme that adolescence is the bridging foundation of moral capacities in adulthood. Researchers suggested that moral models, such as Gandhi, can be comprehended through the study of the development of moral devoirs of adolescents and young adults. The supposition that adult moral character is shaped during adolescence is implicit. By the motive of understanding and ultimately mastering the influences that act on the adolescent, the moral development of adults are apt to be guided to become better persons. In their article, Lawford et al. (2009) put forward the same idea by suggesting that the generativity, the motivation to be concerned about the future and to contribute to the future generations, takes root during adolescence. The result of their research indicates that there is a correlation between present young adults with a caring personality towards others and their positive relationships with parents and peer during adolescence. Likewise, Smetana and Killen (2015) have suggested that community involvement, reflecting the obligation of adult’s morals, is essentially intertwined with peers, family and church or religious community.
A secondary important theme across the research on moral developments in adolescent has been that adolescence is distinguished by unique qualities that render it developmentally and distinctively different from childhood such as sexual maturation, increased decision-making, heightened pressures from peers and family, and the search for self-identity. As a result, moral character can go through an important transformation between the stages of childhood and adulthood. Surely, in Western societies, a distinguishing quality of adolescents in comparison to children is that they devote more time with their peers, while spending less time with their parents. Consequently, adolescents are likelier to be influenced by the influences of peers than children are. Children are also more dependent on their parents than adolescents are. Inferring those variables, Coie and colleagues (1998) centralized on the influence of adolescents’ peers on the inclining and maintaining of delinquent behavior. Adolescence is characterized by distinctive contexts such as transition into schools, work, romantic interests, burgeoning of sexuality, and the prominence of peers, along with all the relationships and challenges that comes with those transitions. The findings of the research painted a complex image of delinquent behavior being influenced by peers, but also influences in the realm of family and schools. Adolescents are likelier to engage in delinquent behavior if they form friendships with delinquent peers or spend a lot of time in unstructured socializing with their friends (Haynie & Osgood, 2005). Therefore, we can reasonably assume that shaping of moral character during adolescence is more influenced by peers than parents as well as the parenting style.
Another important aspect of moral development during adolescence was purposed by the article of Eisenberg and al. (1998) pointing out the substantial research showing varieties of skills and expertise relating to moral development and character developed during adolescence more-so than in childhood. For instance, in adolescence, the abilities of adopt the view of others, understanding one’s self and solving interpersonal problems are majorly developed than they are in childhood. However, the advancement of those abilities is founded upon the achievements and disappointments of childhood, thereupon, adolescence is not a unique set apart psychological stage. Instead, it is a stage of deterministic refinements of the tools that make a person able to commit to their moral lives more effectively than it is normally realizable for a child.
Socialization and Morality in Adolescents
Altogether, special distinguishing situations, relationships, pressures, expectations, and search for self, make adolescence a special period of interest to observe moral development. Adolescence is also the leading stage into adulthood, and just as childhood constitutes a foundational base for the skills of moral character to be refined and developed; adolescence is the base of morals in young adulthood. Thus, to be concise, the psychological processes of moral development during adolescence can be quantified through the lens of peers, parents, practices within the culture, and social institutions. In childhood, most of the contacts with the outside world are mediated and structured by the parents and adults. Parents organize playdates, most times watch the children or babysit them, keep track of their contacts with social institutions, and guide their involvement in religious and practices within the culture, hence the influent power of parents on moral socialization in childhood. However, for adolescents, there tends eto less control and regulation as they are expected to become more responsible by adjusting to newer obligations. Adolescents and adults alike are in an affluent milieu of peers, family, establishments, and cultural as well as religious practices. Although, adolescents change way faster than adults do as by the age of thirty personality as well as moral character tends to plateau (James, 1890).
Therefore, due to the importance of peers and family, the bulk of research on moral development and socialization has focused on the influence of socialization agents, however, although the focus on social factors, the study of moral development of adolescence reminds us of other important factors, often neglected, such as the role of genes and epigenetics. Scholars have noted evidence on the genetic basis for moral tendencies like aggression, altruism, as well as temperament (Eisenberg & Fabes, 1998). Puberty marks the start of adolescence and is significant to the re-emergence of the processes with a biological basis that could potentially influence moral development in adolescence. The maturations of puberty, which are biologically based, enhance and influence emotions, social behaviors, and emotional receptivity. Additionally, hormonal changes in puberty have been linked to aggressivity and irritability, adolescent crisis, which are believed to mollify altruistic and aggressive behavior (Fabes, Carlo, Kupanoff, & Laible, 1998). It is suggested that certain hormones and neurotransmitters are responsible, in part, for aggressiveness and pro-social behavior (Carlo & Bevins, 2002). Other studies have focused on brain activation while taking moral decisions (De Quervain, Fischbacher, Treyer, Schellhammer, Schnyder, Buck, & Fehr, 2004).
Peers are important because they give the chance of “role-taking opportunities” and reveal novel moral behaviors to adolescents (Hart, Atkins, Markey, & Youniss, 2004). During adolescence, moral dilemmas become fully fledged in their moral consequences to the self and to others. For instance, adolescents often develop romantic interests and through that experience: they must act as moral agent and make personally significant decision with extensive implications. Adolescence offers the contingency of becoming agentic in various responsibilities, duties, and social roles. For instance, adolescents have access to work (part-time job), community service, extracurriculars, and the increase of participation in socially regulated behaviors like driving etc. which places them in situations of moral decision-making. Additionally, adolescents have access to different media and social networks, which provide them with unique socializing experiences. Movies, novels, and series directed at a teen and adult audience provide novel moral information and situation where adolescents are able to reflect on their own moral beliefs and the impact of their actions on their surroundings and other. Without doubt, socializing experiences have an important impact, as they are intertwined with the influence of authority figures.
Finally, it is important to note the influence of culture. Cultural expectations and traditions are important in defining the moral systems of children (Whiting & Edwards, 1988). Morality is embedded in culture, as it the dynamic play of norms, perceptions, and understanding. Although, there are multiple levels of morality at multiple levels of the individual and contexts, such as familial, academic, or professional. Adolescents navigate through those levels and contexts, and the influence either genetic, social, or psychological brings us closer to understand the complexity of moral development.
Bibliography
Carlo, G., & Bevins, R. A. (2002). The need for proximal mechanisms to understand individual differences in altruism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences (Commentary), 25, 255–256.
Coie, J. D., & Dodge, K. A. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Volume Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 779–862). New York: John Wiley.
De Quervain, D. J. -F., Fischbacher, U., Treyer, V., Schellhammer, M., Schnyder, U., Buck, A., & Fehr, E (2004). The neural basis of altruistic punishment. Science, 305, 1254–1258.
Duffett, A., Johnson, J., & Farkas, S. Kids these days 99: What Americans really think about the next generation. Retrieved December 31, 2003 from www.publicagenda.org Eisenberg, N., & Fabes, R. A. (1998). Prosocial development. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) N. Eisenberg (Volume Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3: Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 701–778). New York: John Wiley.
Fabes, R. A., Carlo, G., Kupanoff, K., & Laible, D. J. (1999). Early adolescence and prosocial/ moral behavior I: The role of individual processes. Journal of Early Adolescence, 19, 5–16.
Hart, D., & Carlo, G. (2005). Moral Development in Adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence (Wiley-Blackwell), 15(3), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2005.00094.x
Hart, D., Atkins, R., Markey, P., & Youniss, J. (2004). Youth bulges in communities: The effects of age structure on adolescent civic knowledge and civic participation. Psychological Science, 15, 591–597.
Haynie, D., & Osgood, D. (2005). Reconsidering Peers and Delinquency: How do Peers Matter? Social Forces, 84(2), 1109-1130. Retrieved December 18, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3598492
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Holt.
Lawford, H., Pratt, M. W. & Arnold, M. L. (2009). Growing toward care: A narrative approach to prosocial moral identity and generativity of personality in emerging adulthood. In D. Narvaez & D. K. Lapsley (Eds.), Personality, identity, and character: Explorations in moral psychology (p. 295–315). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627125.014
Schepers, D. (2017). Moral Development in Adolescence: A Test of Change and Influences in Context of Sat with German Panel Data. Contemporary Readings in Law & Social Justice, 9(1), 70–97. https://doi.org/10.22381/CRLSJ9120175
Smetana, J. G. & Killen, M. (2015). Origins and development of morality. In M. E. Lamb & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science: Socioemotional processes (p. 701–749). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy317
Whiting, B. B., & Edwards, C. P. (1988). Children of different worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press