A recount of my academic (and personal) history exploring a key Piagetian theme-growth beyond the superficial in moral and other aspects or contexts of human development-is presented in this chapter. As the child's ongoing thought becomes more multidimensional (Siegler, 1996), integrative or comprehensive, balanced, and discerning judgments gain in prevalence. This growth is evident across social (or moral) and non-social (such as conservation) contexts. In the social context, we generally gain depth or maturity in how we know the right (Piaget, Kohlberg) and feel the good (Hoffman)-in how we understand moral wrong such as deception and feel empathic distress with others' suffering-as we grow beyond early childhood and across the lifespan. Growth beyond the superficial in the moral domain distinguishes this approach from the more emotion-based-and hence more morally relativistic-themes evident in socialization, identification, or enculturation approaches such as Haidt's "social intuitions" theory. A brief articulation of my two-phase, lifespan view of moral development as growth beyond the superficial concludes the chapter.

The focus of this chapter is on the origin and adaptations of a program we have developed for remedying moral judgment developmental delay (and other problematic tendencies) common among high-risk, aggressive adolescents. I review the history of my and colleagues' work on EQUIP, a small-group intervention program for high-risk, aggressive adolescents. At the core of EQUIP's motivating-equipping theme and curriculum is the use of staff-led peer group meetings as the vehicle for change. The program curriculum encompasses "three Ds": (1) remedial moral development (to equip highrisk youth with mature moral judgment, thereby treating moral developmental delay); (2) anger management (especially, to equip the youth with accurate social perception, thereby correcting self-serving cognitive distortions); and (3) social skills training (to treat destructive social interaction deficiencies by equipping the youth with habits of balanced and constructive interpersonal behavior). In remedying the three Ds, group members learn to take the perspectives of others and to restructure problematic habits of thought. Since its origin in 1983, the EQUIP program has been implemented in various settings including community agencies, detention centers, and childcare homes that currently play a larger role in juvenile placement. Involving the youth's family can enhance the effectiveness of EQUIP as the program finds application in community settings.

Given the importance of moral identity for moral behavior, studying individual differences in moral identity has been a prominent research endeavor in moral psychology. In this chapter, we review the origin, construction, and research applications of a measure used to assess moral identity. Our Moral Self-Relevance Measure (MSR) is a self-report measure that originated in Arnold's (1993) contribution of an instrument for assessing the degree of centrality or relevance of moral qualities in the self-concepts of adolescents. Barriga and colleagues (2001) adapted Arnold's instrument to provide a group-administrable paper-and-pencil measure of moral identity. We made certain refinements in constructing the MSR, which evidences good internal consistency and construct validity. Research applications of the MSR (and related measures) have contributed to moral psychology, especially in relation to parenting and adolescent social behavior. Authoritative parenting is related to higher moral identity and prosocial behavior. In particular, inductive discipline (including parental expression of disappointed expectations) is positively associated with adolescents' sense of morality as highly relevant to the self. High moral identity (and moral judgment maturity) relates to less peer aggression, for example, not "joining in" with a bully in bullying situations. Indeed, adolescents high in moral identity are more likely to defend a bullying victim and engage in other prosocial behaviors. Overall, moral identity contributes importantly to progress toward a more comprehensive moral psychology.

This study examined whether and how moral judgment components (moral reasoning and moral value evaluation) combined with self-serving cognitive distortions are related to peer bullying (including associated participant roles) among adolescents. A total of 522 adolescents (49% males) from grades 1 to 4 of three public secondary schools in Spain (M-age = 14.6 years, range 12-18 years) completed questionnaires on moral judgment, self-serving cognitive distortions, and bullying. Bullies and bully-victims showed the lowest levels of moral judgment and the highest levels of self-serving cognitive distortions. In contrast, moral judgment was highest and self-serving cognitive distortions lowest for defenders and bystanders. Self-serving cognitive distortions mediated completely the relationship between moral reasoning and bullying, and partially between moral evaluation and bullying. Multigroup analyses indicated that the strength of the relationships between the moral judgment components and self-serving cognitive distortions varied across adolescents' role. Anti-bullying intervention programs should include the facilitation of moral reasoning and valuing as well as the reduction of self-serving cognitive distortions.

Abstract: The Sociomoral Reflection Measure – Short Form Objective (SRM-SFO) aims to assess the reasoning and valuing components of moral judgment. A new index for measuring moral reasoning is introduced. The first study assessed construct validity by examining the structure and invariance of moral reasoning and moral value evaluation in community adolescents and adults from The Netherlands ( N = 1,583). Factor analyses supported the unidimensionality of both components. Measurement invariance was found across age groups, gender, and educational levels. Convergent validity was supported by positive relationships between moral reasoning and age in males and between moral reasoning and higher educational levels. Divergent validity was supported by the weak relationship of both components with social desirability and their negative relationship with self-centered orientation and self-reported antisocial/delinquent behavior. The second study included incarcerated juvenile delinquents ( N = 246). Measurement invariance was found for both components across delinquency groups. Furthermore, community participants reporting no antisocial/delinquent behavior showed higher levels on both components than community participants reporting antisocial/delinquent behavior and juvenile delinquents. The SRM-SFO provides acceptable to good psychometric properties for assessing the reasoning and valuing components of moral judgment. Its practical benefits support its use in large-scale research from young adolescence onward.

Are moral judgement maturity and self-serving cognitive distortions or moral disengagement merely opposites, as recently claimed? Self-serving cognitive distortions and moral disengagement constitute (more or less interchangeable) neutralization techniques; they stem from the same theoretical background and refer to the same cognitive processes. In contrast, a distinct theoretical background provides the context for moral judgement. To examine the empirical relationships between the constructs, a systematic search was conducted, encompassing 17 studies from 8 countries. Moral judgement and self-serving cognitive distortions or moral disengagement related inversely only moderately in studies of offenders (externalizing behavioural disorders) and non-offenders. Moreover, self-serving cognitive distortions and moral disengagement correlated much more strongly with externalizing behavioural disorders than did moral judgement. Also differing were relationships with demographic and other variables such as empathy. We conclude that both moral judgement and self-serving cognitive distortions or moral disengagement should be assessed and utilized in studies and intervention programmes addressing externalizing behaviour.

Males and females differ—but only moderately—in moral judgment and morally relevant social behavior such as caring for others and aggression. Females more frequently use care-related concerns in their moral judgment. Research has to some extent supported traditional stereotypes of males as more assertive or independent (agency) and females as more relational or affiliative (communion). Males are on average more aggressive than females even after relational aggression is taken into account. In the expression of empathy and prosocial behavior, situational context plays a larger role for males than females. Males’ gender tendencies have been characterized as instrumental (“report talk,” object oriented, etc.) and females’ as socially and emotionally expressive (“rapport talk,” people oriented, etc.). In social relationships, adolescent girls generally engage in more intimate self-disclosure and active listening, provide more emotional support to one another, and emphasize affiliation and collaboration. Both biological and social experiential or cultural factors are involved in the formation of these morally relevant gender differences. Although average gender-linked differences in emphasis remain evident, a blend of instrumental and expressive characteristics may contribute to optimal morality for both genders. Sandra Bem termed the mixture of expressive (traditionally feminine) and instrumental (traditionally masculine) attributes in gender style “androgyny.” Highly androgynous adolescents and adults of both genders evidence more mature moral judgment and more adequate mental health.

Moral Development and Reality explores the nature of morality, moral development, social behavior, and human connection. By comparing, contrasting, and going beyond the prominent theories mainly of Lawrence Kohlberg, Martin Hoffman, and Jonathan Haidt, the author addresses fundamental questions: What is morality, and how broad is the moral domain? Can we speak of moral development (Kohlberg, Hoffman), or is morality entirely relative to diverse cultures (Haidt)? What are the sources of moral motivation? What factors account for prosocial behavior? What are the typical social perspective-taking limitations of antisocial youths, and how can those limitations be remedied? Does moral development, including moments of moral inspiration, reflect a deeper reality? Exploring these questions elucidates the full range of moral development, from superficial perception to a deeper understanding and feeling. Included are foundations of morality and moral motivation; biology, social intuitions, and culture; social perspective-taking and development; the stage construct and developmental delay; moral exemplars and moral identity; cognitive distortions, social skills deficiencies, and cognitive behavioral interventions or moral education; and, finally, near-death experiences and the underpinnings of the social and moral world.

In bullying situations, adolescent bystanders may help bullied others, just stand by, or join in the antisocial behavior. Current studies have yet to fully examine the moral and social factors motivating these varied responses to bullying encounters. Extending from pertinent developmental theories, the present study investigated the relative contributions of moral identity (i.e., viewing moral qualities as central to the self), moral judgment, and social self-efficacy to adolescents’ bystander behaviors vis-à-vis bullies. Also investigated were the interactions among these variables. Three hundred and thirty-seven adolescents (M age = 13 years, 56.1% female) who self-identified as Caucasian (90.2%), Hispanic-American (2.1%), Asian–American (0.9%), African–American (3.9%), or Other/Unknown (2.9%) participated in the study. Students completed questionnaires assessing moral identity, moral judgment, social self-efficacy, and how they would respond if they observed a peer being bullied. Moral identity predicted more prosocial action, particularly for adolescents high in social self-efficacy. Moral identity related positively to moral judgment, and both predicted less antisocial (joining in) behavior. Interestingly, moral judgment maturity primarily diminished antisocial behavior when moral identity was relatively low. Social self-efficacy predicted less passive bystanding. Overall, moral identity strongly relates to defending behavior, and—as does moral judgment maturity—predicts less antisocial behavior among bystanders.

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the contribution of the maturity of moral judgment on cannabis use among college students. Participants were 1572 college students who completed self-report questionnaires measuring cannabis use, maturity of moral judgment, and emotional and personality variables. Thirty five percent of men and 30% of women reported having used cannabis at least once during the last 6 months. Logistic regression analysis found that the maturity of moral judgment was a significant predictor of cannabis use versus non-use. This study suggests the importance of evaluating moral judgment in studies of risk factors of cannabis use and to develop effective and nonmoralizing interventions targeting permissive beliefs and other socio-cognitive variables determining cannabis use and misuse.

Prior research suggests that moral identity influences individuals' willingness to engage in prosocial behavior. Little attention, however, has been given to the roles of and relations between moral identity and other factors, such as moral judgment, in accounting for types of prosocial behavior in adolescence. The current study examined the extent to which moral identity, moral judgment, and social self-efficacy contribute to prosocial behaviors in adolescence. Approximately 338 adolescents (M-age=13.4 years) completed measures of moral identity, moral judgment, social self-efficacy, and prosocial behavior. Teachers rated adolescents' prosocial behaviors, which largely corroborated the adolescents' self-reports. Moral identity was found to predict most types of prosocial behavior. Moral judgment and moral identity were related and jointly predicted altruistic prosocial behaviors, but did not predict helping in front of others. Further, moral identity mediated the relationships between moral judgment and some forms of prosocial behavior (e.g., emotional, volunteering). Self-efficacy beliefs were found to predict some types of prosocial behavior (e.g., public), perhaps providing adolescents with confidence to engage in prosocial action. Overall, moral identity was especially effective in directly accounting for prosocial behavior, and may act as a mediator to bridge the moral judgment-moral action gap among adolescents.