Page 1

BRIDGE Bullying and Teen Suicide Loss of Childhood Yes or No?

How Large Is the Role of Emotion in Judgments of Moral Dilemmas?


Letter from the editor. This issue of MIAD Bridge is focused on psychology, it features an two articles written by MIAD students and one article written by Zachary Horne and Dr. Derek Powell. I am excited to present these three articles in our psychology issue. The first article is about bullying and teen suicide focusing on young teenagers. This article is a heart wrenching discussion about the effects of bullying and the dangers of untreated mental health conditions. This article was illustrated by MIAD’s own Robert Foster. The second article is titled the loss of childhood, and offers a look into the history of childhood and how easy it is to loose ones innocence. The third article is a published work written by Zachary Horne and Dr. Derek Powell about the role of emotion in moral dilemmas. This article was previously published in a scientific Journal and MIAD Bridge was granted permission by the authors to republish it in the psychology issue. The objective of the psychology issue is to get you the reader to consider the potential for the use of some of these scientific practices to benefit your day to day life, whether its understanding your emotional state or contemplating a large moral decision, its important to understand how our brain works. Psychology is a complicated field and we only scratch the surface with our three articles, there is so much more and a lot of it is very technical so we

2

M

I

A

D

hope to translate it so the average human can understand it. These articles are all rooted in psychology and are all relevant to pretty much everyone. Everyone has experienced bullying one way or another. Everyone has at some point lost their childhood, even if you had the best childhood of all time at some point you have to grow up. Everyone faces dilemmas of some kind and maybe they aren’t as extreme as some of those referenced in “How Large Is the Role of Emotion in Judgments of Moral Dilemmas?” but they still are dilemmas. I hope that these three articles can open up the world of psychology to you the reader and that it will have some level of positive influence on your day to day life. Editing this issue of MIAD Bridge certainly has opened up my eyes to the advantages of analyzing my mental decisions and stresses. Please enjoy this issue of MIAD Bridge Psychology Edition.

B

R

I

D

G

E


Table of Contents. 4

Bullying and Teen suicide Department: DIY

10

18

9

Loss of Childhood Department: Health

16

Department: Interview

17

Yes or No?

P

S

Y

C

H

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

3


“A spike in bully-related suicides among teens and preteens has caused school administrators and legislators to rethink the current course of action when dealing with bullying in the school system. Currently, what often happens in response to bullying cases is something close to nothing” (Understanding and Preventing Bullying)

Imagine this: you’re 12 years old. You get up in the morning and get ready, eat breakfast and walk to the bus stop to go to school. When you get on the bus you walk until find a seat by yourself and clutch your backpack on your lap. The entire ride, classmates are kicking you, yelling at you, pulling your hair, and spitting at you. When you finally arrive at school, you get up to get off the bus and someone trips you and you fall flat on your face as someone steps on your back to get off the bus. The bus driver does nothing. Once you get into school people start throwing spitballs at you, knocking your books out of your hands and ripping your homework. The teacher punishes you for not being prepared for class and you are no longer allowed to go to recess for the entire day. During lunch, kids throw food at you, staining your clothes. When school is done you get back on the bus to be kicked and spit at until your bus stop. You go straight to your room and wait for the same thing to happen all over again the next day. You feel as though you cannot continue to live like this; obviously your life isn’t worth anything. So one day, after all the bullying at school, you get home and you are tired and lonely, and instead of waiting for everything to happen all over again tomorrow, you decide it just isn’t worth it anymore. You decide to hang yourself. No second thoughts. No talking to anyone about it because no one even notices you. That’s it, that’s what you’ll do so it won’t hurt anymore. You’ll just end all the pain, forever. Sadly, more and more children are committing suicide each year because their classmates bully them to the point of feeling their life is not worth anything:

4

M

I

Bullying is often viewed as a normal part of growing up but has escalated into “shocking acts of hatred, verbal harassment, and physical abuse” (Understanding and Preventing Bullying). A large portion of the bullying happens in public and private schools where the officials in charge ignore the problem and leave children to fend for themselves. However, today’s technology has extended the bullying from something that happens in the schools and on the bus to Facebook and other social networks that reach these children in their homes where they are supposed to feel safe. In fact, bullying has become so common in some areas the children committing the bullying acts do not even realize they are the bullies. Our society needs to define what constitutes bullying, examine the causes of bullying, develop organizations to help the victims deal with the effects of being bullied, and educate the public about dealing with bullying. Most bullying happens for things children have no control over; things they were born with such as disabilities, body type, or mental capacity. Other issues may be caused by the economy and social status where the loss of a parent’s job means a child cannot dress like others it the class or when the child is just different than others. The tabloids and people’s A

D

B

R

I

D

G

E

Written by Niki Feld Illustrations by Robert Foster


opinions polls lead children to believe they need to act a certain way or wear certain clothes in order to be accepted. “Bullying is repeated oppression, psychological, or physical, of a less powerful person by a more powerful one. The prevalence of bullying by and of school children is quite high; in some studies, about half of children were bullies, and over half were victims.” (Understanding and Preventing Bullying) A bully’s main goal is to make a person feel like they are less of a person than themselves which puts a child at a much greater risk to develop antisocial behavior and depression (Suicide Prevention, Awareness, and Support). From the time a child is 5 years old peers are targeting each other physically and verbally which happens once every three to six minutes. By the time a student is in fifth grade, there is a student being bullied once every two minutes, and by the time a child is in high school, someone is being bullied once every 30

P

S

Y

C

H

O

L

O

G

Y

seconds. Studies also show that girls who are being targeted in kindergarten are more likely to develop symptoms of depression and antisocial behavior (Suicide Prevention, Awareness, and Support). Behavioral problems that might exist would be two very different extremes: lashing out or shutting down completely which then leads to other problems. I completely understand that children are going to be children, but at some point I feel parents and school officials need to step in to resolve the issues. There are far too many cases of suicide in young children and I feel there needs to be something put in place that enables all children to feel safe in their school environment. I also think parents should talk to their child on a daily basis to understand what they are going through and help them deal with problems. It is a parent’s duty to stand up for and protect their children against the bullies of this world. A parent can determine if a situation out of the child’s control and consult with school officials to correct the situation or remove the child from the school. Too many cases of sui-

I

S

S

U

E

5


cide are caused by lack of communication from child to adult; which means the suicide may have been prevented if the child had been able to communicate with their parents. The most heart breaking result of the increased suicide rate is the idea that suicide is an acceptable thing to do. Since there are so many children committing suicide, more and more children think it’s becoming a normal and acceptable thing to do this without fully realizing the finality of this act. Young children are not equipped to deal with bullying whether they are gay, have a learning disability, a teen parent, a rape victim, or just not ‘cool’ enough. Children that are being bullied end up having very serious psychological problems, behavioral problems, and sometimes brain damage. Other problems that occur in children that are being bullied are psychological disorders with symptoms like social difficulties, internalizing symptoms, anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, and eating disorders (Bully Victims: Psychological and Somatic Aftermaths). Children as young as three years old are displaying suicidal symptoms because they are being put on strong medications at an age that is far too young. Adult medications affect the body and brain of young children if very different ways than how they affect adults. As a child reaches adolescence, the issues worsen as the child feels every aspect of their life changing. Many times it escalates to the point where the child wants to commit suicide more than ever before (Does Bullying Cause Emotional Problems? A Prospective Study on Young Teenagers). Children with these types of problems tend to develop feelings such as frequent worries, sadness, nervousness, and fearfulness, which causes them to feel like they are not wanted (Bully Victims: Psychological and Somatic Aftermaths). If it is known that a child is/was being bullied and they start to show some of these psychological symptoms, I strongly feel they should be taken to a therapist so they can talk to someone without feeling like they are going to be judged. Sometimes children do not feel like they can talk to their parents about issues like this and when given the opportunity to talk

6

M

I

to someone that is not related to you, it might make them feel more at ease. The rate of suicide in young children is at the highest level it has ever been and I think this has a lot to do with the lack of parental involvement in their child’s life. Today, people are so busy doing what they need to do that they feel their child needs to learn for themselves how to deal with these huge issues. The first time they realize that they should have done something is when it’s too late. Sometimes a child who feels they have nothing left to live for attempts to commit suicide but is unsuccessful. When this happens the result is often permanent brain damage which incapacitates them for the rest of their lives. In an incident where a young boy tried to hang himself, the paramedics were able to get his heart started again after 15 minutes of CPR, but the child was no longer able to do anything for himself. “He was not able to feed himself and had to be fed through a tube into his stomach, he cannot walk, he barely can move. He has constant muscle spasms, and sometimes his limbs flail uncontrolla-

A

D

B

R

I

D

G

E


bly. His mouth hangs open, and his eyes have a glazed, blank look to them” (Suicide Prevention, Awareness, and Support). This suicide attempt changed his life and his family’s life forever; their son will never be able to do anything for himself again. No matter how badly a family feels after the loss of a child to suicide, there is some good that can come from it. The mother of a one young suicide victim started an anti-bullying campaign in the school where her child was bullied. While speaking the children of the school she had some very inspiring words, “’The very second Jamey made that decision and followed through was the very second he found out it was a mistake, but there’s no going back,’ she said she told her son’s schoolmates. ‘I want to say I know my boy’s at peace with himself, but there are other ways’ to handle life’s problems” (Jamey Rodemeyer’s Suicide Leads to Bullying Spotlight, Caution). This mother’s words helped the children to begin understanding they need to stop thinking suicide is ‘cool’ and started making them realize that there really is no turn back, you will never come back to life if you choose to do this. I cannot imagine being a parent and coming home one day to my deceased child on the floor in their room. No talks, no hints, just gone. At that moment, you realize that as a parent, you have failed your child and there is nothing you can do to bring them back. Or like in some cases where they are able to bring them back, their child is so brain damaged you cannot even communicate with them. At what point did this child feel that they needed to end their life and where was everybody to pick them back up and support them. I truly feel that a lot of suicide cases have to do with the fact that children do not feel as if they are wanted by anybody including their parents. I know so many parents in this world that do pretty much everything without their kids and just get a babysitter because they want to be alone with their spouse. Even though that seems to be the normal thing these days, I think that really drives home to a child P

S

Y

C

H

that they are not their own parent’s number one choice, which then results in feelings of not being wanted and suicide. Bullying has been around for ages but there has never really been a preventative process put in place to help children get the help they need. An ariticle in The Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) about bullying states that , “Although violence among US youth is a current major concern, bullying is infrequently addressed and no national data on the prevalence of bullying are available.” After having such a spike in children’s suicides, they took it upon themselves to conduct a study of children that are being bullied. The results show that “A total of 29.9% of the sample reported moderate or frequent involvement in bullying, as a bully (13.0%), one who was bullied (10.6%), or both (6.3%). Males were more likely than females to be both perpetrators and targets of bullying. The frequency of bullying was higher among 6th- through 8th-grade students than among 9th- and 10th-grade students (Bullying Behaviors Among US Youth).” O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

7


If more people were aware of these facts and more research was done in different areas of the country, more young children could get help and there would be fewer children that are actually going through with committing suicide. Schools think they are doing a good job trying to prevent bullying by talking about it in classes, but what they don’t realize is that the only children that are listening are the ones already being bullied. The bullies that are hurting these children are just getting angrier and this is just adding fuel to the fire. What the schools don’t understand is they are not stopping these incidences in action when the student is getting hurt and putting an end to it. Parents also should be more involved in their children’s lives no matter how busy their own life it. They chose to have children, so they have to take the responsibility of taking care of that child. Too many parents blame everyone else when something happens to their child instead of realizing they are more than half of that problem themselves. Children learn behaviors from the people they are around the most, which in most cases are their parents. If their parents are never around they start to develop feelings that

8

M

I

their parents don’t care about them and they are not wanted. Adding that on top of being the ‘un cool’ kid at school, that child feels they no longer has anything to live for. Growing up, my parents were extremely involved in my life and they never missed a single activity I was involved in. They talked to me every single day when I got home from school how my day was and what I learned. They made sure I got my homework done and that I learned to do chores and clean up after myself instead of just letting me do it at my leisure. We went on a vacation every year together so that I learned things by seeing and doing as well as just reading about them. They praised me when I did something good but also taught me how to stand up for myself so that I knew that it was not ok to be bullied or picked on by other students. My parents did everything they could to help me be a confident, smart, loving child, and for that, I am extremely thankful.

A

D

B

R

I

D

G

E

Personal experience.

Having been a person

who survived middle school, I have seen and experienced my fair share of bullying. Bullying was a day to day occurrence that never got easier to experience. Bullying was always a destructive and painful. Schools never have a good system for dealing with bullying. Bullying usually goes unnoticed and unpunished. Bullies usually get away with being bullies, schools just aren’t prepared and don’t know how to deal with occurrences of bullying.


N

T

DIY: Self Evaluation.

Ways to assess and treat symptoms of depression and stress.

4

E M T A

R

Is there something you can do to improve your emotional status? Creating a starting point is extremely important. Small steps are fine, making progress can be difficult. Make sure to keep track of your progress and consider how easy or hard the process is for you. If you can’t do anything to improve your emotional state, then external help might be needed. You can’t always do everything by yourself. Therapy can be extremely helpful for some people who need something more than they themselves can provide. Theres nothing wrong with needing help from others.

P

3

Can you attribute the way you feel to something? Being able to understand why you feel a certain way can help you understand yourself and your emotions better. If you can make connections between your emotions and your surroundings you can take steps to improve your emotional wellbeing.

E

2

How do you feel? Feeling Exhausted can often be a sign of depression.

D

1

P

S

Y

C

H

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

9


10

M

I

A

D

B

R

I

D

G

E


By Hayley Eichenbaum

Childhood is becoming an endangered concept. Over the last century it can be seen that the behavior, language, attitudes, and desires—even the physical appearance—of adults and children are becoming increasingly indistinguishable. In order to demonstrate this, it’s imperative to clarify the journey that childhood has taken throughout the course of history. What defines the parameters of childhood, or rather, what does it mean to be an adult? When and where do these two worlds intersect? By answering these questions, the importance of preserving the realm of childhood becomes evident. Little is known about the attitudes toward children in antiquity. The Greeks gave us a foreshadowing of the idea of childhood. They were ambivalent, perhaps even confused about the concept. Despite this obscurity, they were unswervingly passionate about education. Romans borrowed the Greek notion of schooling and went on to develop an awareness of childhood that surpassed the Greek idea. The Roman rhetorician Quintilian played a substantial role in the defining of childhood. He emphasized that children are special beings that require protection, nurturing, schooling, and freedom from adult secrets (particularly sexual secrets) (Postman 9). During this era the concept of shame emerges; specifically it’s relationship to childhood. The idea of shame rests, in part, on secrets. Secrets encompass the mysteries, contradictions, violence, and tragedy of adulthood. Quintilian expressed that childhood cannot exist without an established understanding of shame. In this case, shame is comparable to civilized behavior; Children have a tendency to demon-

strate shameless behavior therefore adults must demonstrate controlled behavior. There is a pressure to privatize ‘adult’ impulses around younger parties. This leads to the realization that children require protection(Miller 63). The Romans grasped this point, although, apparently, not all of them and not enough of them. It wasn’t until three centuries after Quintilian in AD 374 that the first known law prohibiting infanticide was sanctioned. This indicates a sensitivity to the specific arena that is childhood. After the Romans, however, it appears that all delineations of childhood begin to deteriorate (Postman 11). This deterioration was due, in large part, to a noticeable decline in literacy levels. After the collapse of the Roman Empire followed by Europe’s descent into the Dark and Middle Ages, a disregard for education develops. The disappearance of literacy can be attributed to several phenomena. During this point in time the styles of writing and the letters of the alphabet multiplied, the shapes becoming complicated and obscured. As a consequence the readers’ capacities to interpret it disappeared, and a condition called craft literacy took over. Craft literacy describes a circumstance where the art of reading is restricted to a few who form a privileged class. Its counter-condition is social literacy—a state where most people can and do read. It can be stated that the Roman church was not unaware of the benefits of craft literacy as a means of keeping control over a large and diverse population. Thus, Europe returned to an instinctive condition of human communication, dominated by talk and reinforced by song (Aries 31).

He emphasized that children are special beings that require protection, nurturing, schooling, and freedom from adult secrets (particularly sexual secrets) (Postman 9). P

S

Y

C

H

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

11


This fateful transition directly leads to an evaporation of childhood. As essayist Neil Postman declares: “Reading makes it possible to enter a non-observed and abstract world of knowledge; it creates a split between those who cannot read and those who can. Reading is the scourge of childhood because, in a sense, it creates adulthood. Literature of all kinds—including maps, charts, contracts, and deeds—collects and keeps valuable secrets. Thus, in a literate world to be an adult implies having access to cultural secrets codified in unnatural symbols. In a literate world children must become adults.” The idea of shame hinges on secrets, as Quintilian knew. It was considered shameful to reveal these secrets too indiscriminately. In the modern world, as children move toward adulthood these secrets are revealed to them through education and experience. But such an idea is possible only in an atmosphere where there is a strong division between the adult and the child, and where there are institutions that articulate that distinction. The medieval world made no such distinction and had no such institutions. Where literacy is valued there are schools, and where there are schools the concept of childhood thrives. The invention of the printing press in the 15th century brought upon a shift in paradigms.

It created a new definition of adulthood based on reading competence and, as a result, a new ideation of childhood based on reading incompetence. The resurgence of learning and classical culture in the 13th century had triggered a craving for books. Additionally, the growth of commerce and of the age of exploration generated a need for printed materials. The printing press had generated a knowledge explosion, and craft literacy evolves into social literacy. To be a fully functioning adult required one to go beyond custom and memory into worlds not previously contemplated. The Literate Man had been established (Eisenstein 22). As childhood’s journey enters the 17th and 18th centuries a heightened sense of government responsibility for the welfare of children arises. New legislations were enacted to protect children and Europe developed a more compassionate regard of childhood: “The child became an object of respect—a special creature with a different nature and different needs, which required separation and protection from the adult world” (Postman 37). A major contributor to this shift was the English philosopher and physician John Locke. Locke saw the connections between book learning and childhood. He proposed a form of education that treated the child as a precious resource while still demanding attention to the child’s intellectual development and capacity for self-control.

Reading makes it possible to enter a non-observed and abstract world of knowledge; it creates a split between those who cannot read and those who can. Reading is the scourge of childhood because, in a sense, it creates adulthood. Literature of all kinds—including maps, charts, contracts, and deeds—collects and keeps valuable secrets. Thus, in a literate world to be an adult implies having access to cultural secrets codified in unnatural symbols. In a literate world children must become adults. 12

M

I

A

D

B

R

I

D

G

E


Locke also promoted the Tabula Rasa theory, which encompasses the notion that at birth the mind is a blank tablet—thus, a heavy responsibility falls to the parents, teachers, and government for what is ‘written’ on the mind (Postman32). This reintroduced the concepts of shame and guilt in association to adult and child obligations. Another influential figure in the development of childhood was the Genevan philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. He expressed that the psychology of a child was fundamentally different from that of adults. In a view that differed from Locke, Rousseau suggested that a child’s intellectual and emotional life can be deadened by self-control and shame; childhood is the stage of life when man most closely relates to the ‘state of nature.’ According to Rousseau the candor, understanding, curiosity, and spontaneity of a child can be suppressed by structure and education (Postman 60). Locke and Rousseau shaped childhood in the New World. The Protestant conception of childhood, also known as the Lockean belief, maintained that the child is an unformed person who through literacy, education, reason, self-control, and shame may be made into a civilized adult. For those who followed this concept, education was viewed as an addition to self-quality. On the other end of the spectrum was the Romantic perception

P

S

Y

C

H

of childhood, also known as the Rousseauian belief. This stance viewed education as a deduction of selfquality—a way to suffocate the creativity of childhood. A strong example of the Romantic conception of childhood is Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Despite the differences among the beliefs, both platforms led to the establishment of new associations aimed to benefit the wellbeing of children. For instance, the National Education Association was founded in 1857, followed by the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (1875), and the Society for the Study of Child Nature (1890). Research indicates that childhood— as a universal concept—experiences a real highpoint between 1850 and 1950. During this time, successful attempts were made to get children out of factories and into school, and into their own clothing, furniture, literature, games, and social world (Aries 54). This highpoint is fueled in part by infamous neurologist Sigmund Freud and philosopher John Dewey. Postman asserts: Freud and Dewey crystallized the basic paradigm of childhood that had been forming since the printing press: the child as schoolboy or schoolgirl whose self and individuality must be preserved by nurturing, whose capacity for self-control, deferred gratification, and logical thought must be extended, whose knowledge

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

13


of life must be under the control of adults. Yet at the same time, the child is understood as having its own rules for development, and a charm, curiosity, and exuberance that must not be strangled—indeed, is strangled—at the risk of losing mature adulthood. During the time in which Freud and Deweyoperated, 100 laws were passed that classified children as qualitatively different from adults and offered protection from the idiosyncrasies of adulthood (Aries 79). This was also the period in which the stereotype of the modern family was cast; a period in which adults developed the psychic mechanisms that allow for a full measure of empathy, tenderness, and responsibility toward children—this is a huge mental evolution. However, as war and media began to take over in the 20th century, a major disruption in the progression of childhood occurs. The News Industry took off, coupled with a wave of invention, and information was transformed from a personal possession to a commodity of worldwide value. The camera, telephone, film, radio, and television not only transformed the world of information but the world of children as well. These electronic and graphic revolutions represented a powerful assault on language and literacy. For example, television tends to make the rigors of literate education irrelevant; it requires no instruction to grasp its form; it does not make complex demands on the mind; it does not segregate its audience. In essence, electric

media cannot withhold any secrets, and, without secrets there is no childhood. Suddenly the mysteries of sexuality and violence are accessible to everyone, and as a result, the innocence of childhood dissolves. It is evident that the media has the ability to uproot childhood through its form and context. It can be seen in the merging of taste and style of children and adults. As electric media moves literacy to the periphery of culture, different attitude and character traits come to be valued and a new definition of adulthood emerges—or rather, a hybridization of the two realms occurs. In modern culture, QWQ there is a phenomena revolving around the ‘adultified child’ and the ‘childified adult’ (Postman 138). Children are increasingly anxious to grow up while adults are increasingly hesitant to grow up. This confusion threatens our culture, as the whimsies of childhood are wasted and the responsibilities of adulthood are neglected. Childhood, as a whole entity, has experienced many tribulations over the course of history. It has become clear that the survival of childhood depends on the survival of literacy, education, protective laws, and adult compassion and obligation. When any one of these components is taken out, the entire realm of childhood is threatened. It’s important to preserve this realm in order to ensure a healthy and secure future. In the eloquent words of Neil Postman, children are the living messages we send to a time we will not see.

In the eloquent words of Neil Postman, children are the living messages we send to a time we will not see.

14

M

I

A

D

B

R

I

D

G

E


P

S

Y

C

H

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

15


T N

Health: For Your Health. 1

M

E

Ways to reduce stress and maintain a healthy mind.

3 4

P

A

R

T

2

Eat a balanced diet. Your stomach has a profound effect on your mood and mental state. A healthy balanced diet will help keep you feeling good in mind and body. Socialize with family and friends. Socializing is very important for your mood being around people you like will make you feel good, and can turn around a rough day. Get plenty of Exercise. Exercise is important to maintain a healthy brain. Exercise reduces stress and helps the body feel better which in turn causes positive effects in the brain as well. Do what you enjoy. Doing what you want causes less stress on your brain and also helps with efficiency.

D

E

5

Get plenty of sleep. Sleep is extremely important for a healthy brain. Sleep aids in retention of information, and allows your brain to recover from the stress of the day.

16

M

I

A

D

B

R

I

D

G

E


T N

Interview: Dr. Derek Powell.

M T A

This is just one finding, so it would be premature to draw any big conclusions from it alone. However, more generally in my research I’ve argued that we should consider the cognitive (as contrasted with emotional) processes underlying moral judgment, and especially to examine how moral beliefs and attitudes produce moral judgments and might be changed by moral judgments or by learning.

R

What are the larger implications of this article?

Why study moral judgment? P

Q A

A lot of researchers think that moral judgments are driven by emotions. Some think this means people’s beliefs and judgments are irrational or even flat out wrong. We found that, although moral judgments evoke strong emotions (guilt, anger, etc.), those emotions don’t really predict their moral judgments--people weren’t more likely to say one thing or another based on how they felt.

Well one reason is that it’s important--morality is a central part of what makes us human and how we define ourselves. In terms of impact, moral beliefs and judgments affect all kinds of decisions that shape society. For me, I studied moral judgment because I am interested in philosophical and ethical questions of what is right, and also because I am interested in higher-order cognition. That is to say, I’m interested in how we reason about complex abstract ideas. That kind of thinking is exactly what’s going on when we

P

S

Y

C

H

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

E

Q A

What’s the takeaway from the article?

D

Q A

E

A short interview with the up-and-coming Dr. Derek Powell.

17


Yes or No?

How Large Is the Role of Emotion in Judgments of Moral Dilemmas? Authors: Zachary Horne Dr. Derek Powell

Participants Participants were recruited online from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk work distribution website. After recruitment, participants were redirected to a Qualtrics website where the experiment was administered. Before advancing to the experiment, participants indicated consent by clicking a checkbox and could only continue in the experiment if they consented. These experiments were approved by the UCLA Institutional Research Board, IRB 12–000063. Participants were paid $0.60 to participate in Experiments 1 and 3, and $0.75 to participate in Experiment 2. Attention checks were conducted and timings were recorded to ensure participants paid attention while

18

How do we decide whether an act is morally right or wrong? Though this question has a long history, the nature of the controversies surrounding moral decision-making has not fundamentally changed. Historically, there has been debate between philosophers who stressed the role of reason and deliberation in moral judgment and those who argued that moral judgments are driven by emotional processes. These contrasting emphases are also evident in the course of psychological research on moral judgment. Early investigations were chiefly concerned with how morality was shaped through cognitive development. More recently however, a great deal of research has focused on the role of emotion in moral decision-making. These and other recent insights into the psychological processes involved in moral judgment have reinvigorated normative ethical debates about our moral obligations to ourselves and others. Theories of moral judgment have tended to emphasize the influence of either reason or emotion to moral judgment. However, it is quite likely that both of these capacities play a role in everyday moral evaluation. The roles of both of reason and emotion are integrated in the dual-process theory of moral judgment [7,16]. According to the dual-process theory, cold reasoning processes are recruited when making utilitarian moral judgments, but these judgments can be preempted by hot affective processes that lead people to make deontological moral judgments. Contemplating the violation of a moral rule elicits a strong negative emotional reaction that tends to elicit disapproval toward

M

I

A

D

B

R

I

D

the violation. However, when violating the rule would bring about a better moral outcome, this prepotent response can be overridden by deliberative processes, leading to utilitarian approval for the action. The signatures of these two processes are thought to be evident in the so-called personal-impersonal distinction: researchers have found that people are less likely to approve of sacrificing one person to save others if a dilemma requires an “up-close-and-personal” action, such as physically pushing someone to their death, than if a dilemma requires an action that operates at greater distance, such as flipping a switch that leads to someone’s death. The dual-process theory has become very influential within the field of moral psychology over the last decade, and it is now widely accepted that people are less likely to approve of personal violations because they evoke strong emotional reactions compared to impersonal actions.

REEXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMOTION AND JUDGMENT IN MORAL DILEMMAS. The largest and most widely-cited body of evidence for the role of emotion in judgments of moral dilemmas, and for the dual-process theory, has come from research examining people’s judgments about a single battery of moral dilemmas (henceforth, the standard battery). Most prominently, several neuroimaging studies have examined people’s judgments about dilemmas taken from the standard battery. For instance, in two studies, Greene et al.found

G

E


increased activation in brain areas associated with emotion when participants made judgments about personal dilemmas, and increased activation in areas associated with reasoning processes when they considered impersonal dilemmas. In other studies, researchers demonstrated similar effects using psychophysiological measures of affect and when examining clinical populations with ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions (an area of the brain thought to be critically involved in emotion and emotion regulation). However, there are problems with the standard battery. Of particular concern is the fact that personal dilemmas in the standard battery more often involve physically harming a moral patient than do impersonal dilemmas. In fact, it appears that all of the personal dilemmas in the standard battery involve physical harm, whereas only half of the impersonal moral dilemmas do. This is potentially problematic, as the harmfulness of an action ought to be orthogonal to its up-close-and-personal nature. What’s more, it appears that personal dilemmas in the stanP

S

Y

C

dard battery tend to involve more graphic and grisly descriptions of harm than do impersonal dilemmas, even when focusing only on impersonal dilemmas involving harm. For example, personal dilemmas ask participants to consider cutting off a man’s head, smothering a baby, or subjecting children to painful medical experiments. In contrast, impersonal dilemmas ask participants to consider venting deadly fumes into a room or voting for a new environmental policy that will harm people. Researchers using the standard battery have often argued that the “closeness” of personal moral actions elicits a strong negative emotional reaction that in turn leads participants to make deontological moral judgments. Yet, one possibility is that researchers have observed stronger emotional reactions to personal dilemmas because the personal dilemmas in the standard battery more often involved grisly and harmful actions than did the impersonal dilemmas, and not because of the closeness of personal actions. If so, then prior studies may have only shown that graphic descriptions of H

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

19


harmful acts are emotionally salient. Thus, many studies taken to provide evidence for the dual-process theory may not provide a strong test of the central claim of the theory. That is, it is unclear whether emotional responses explain the difference in people’s judgments about personal and impersonal dilemmas or whether the observed differences are due to confounds in the stimuli. Setting aside concerns about the standard battery, there is little work on precisely which emotions are involved in judgments of moral dilemmas. Further, there is no work to our knowledge demonstrating the causal strength of these emotional reactions. There is compelling evidence that disgust and anger are elicited in judgments about norm violations such as committing incest or suicide, but the neuroimaging studies that provide evidence for the role of emotional processes in moral judgments have not directly measured which emotions are involved in judgments of moral dilemmas. In addition, very little work has examined the extent to which emotional processes are

20

M

I

A

D

B

R

I

D

causally related to the moral judgments of neurotypical individuals. Whereas a number of researchers have argued that incidental emotional states can affect judgments of simple norm violations, attempts to demonstrate these effects on judgments about moral dilemmas have produced inconsistent results. Meanwhile, reaction time data and experiments examining speed-pressure and cognitive load manipulations suggest that deliberative reasoning is crucial for utilitarian judgments—utilitarian judgments are sometimes slower, and seem to be impaired by speed-pressure and increased cognitive load—however, these findings cannot determine whether characteristically emotional processes produce deontological judgments. Rather, the current data only suggest that deontological judgments are produced by some sort of automatic or intuitive process. If the automatic processes involved in moral judgment are truly affective processes, then their operation ought to be accompanied by the qualitative experience of emotion, which is most easily measured by asking participants to report their emotional experiences. Altogether, the current state of the literature suggests that more research is necessary to establish the role of emotion in judgments of moral dilemmas. If confounds in the standard battery affect participants’ emotional reactions, then it needs to be determined whether prior findings—that is, those demonstrating a connection between emotions and judgments of moral dilemmas—were a result of these confounds or of genuine affective differences between personal and impersonal dilemmas. In addition, existing research does not tell us what types of emotional responses are involved in judgments of moral dilemmas, nor does it inform us as to the strength of the relationship between people’s emotional responses and their moral judgments. Thus, we aim to reassess the extent to which emotional responses explain the difference between personal and impersonal judgments when the confounds in the standard battery are eliminated, and importantly, what specific emotions explain this difference. We should point out that, as Greene et al. [36] have noted, the value of the dual-process

G

E


theory of moral judgment does not depend on its ability to explain the personal-impersonal distinction. Furthermore, there are a variety of dual-process models that make no particular claims about the role of emotion in deontological moral judgment, either because they do not associate specific processes with specific moral judgments, or because they dichotomize moral judgments along other lines. Nonetheless, one highly influential dual-process theory originally argued for by Greene et al. and still frequently discussed by many other researchers, predicts that people’s emotional reactions are causally related to deontological moral judgments and that the signatures of this effect is evident in the personal-impersonal distinction. This is the dual-process theory we aim to test.

THE PRESENT RESEARCH Our goal was to examine the role of emotions in judgments of moral dilemmas using a self-report emotion measure. Self-report measures afford two important benefits: they allow us to identify the specific emotions involved in judgments of moral dilemmas and to assess the strength of the connections between these emotions and moral judgments. There are, of course, limitations to using self-report measures as well. Chief among them is the fact that self-report measures are only suitable when the emotions of interest are available to conscious introspection. To begin to address this concern, in Experiment 1 we validated our self-report emotion measure by examining people’s emotional responses to the standard battery. Based on the findings of prior neuroimaging studies that have examined people’s judgments about the standard battery, we expected to find significant differences between the emotions elicited by personal and impersonal dilemmas in this battery. In Experiment 2, we conducted a norming study and confirmed that participants rated personal dilemmas from the standard battery as both more harmful and graphic than impersonal dilemmas. On the basis of these findings, we revised a battery of matched personal and impersonal dilemmas originally created by

P

S

Y

C

H

Moore et al.. We then experimentally confirmed that these dilemmas were matched for harm and graphicness (though they were actually more graphic and harmful on average than the standard battery). Finally, in Experiment 3 we reexamined the role of emotion in moral judgments of dilemmas in the revised battery.

GENERAL DISCUSSION The present experiments constitute a direct investigation of the role of emotion in people’s judgments of moral dilemmas. Our findings indicate that, as with simple norm violations, anger and disgust play a role in judgments of moral dilemmas. We found that moral dilemmas elicited strong emotional reactions, and that personal dilemmas elicited significantly stronger emotional responses than did impersonal dilemmas. In addition, we found that participants’ experience of anger and disgust were significantly correlated with their moral judgments. However, our findings also suggest that the relationship between emotional reactions and judgments of moral dilemmas is weaker than initially hypothesized. Although the relationship between anger and moral judgment was statistically significant, the correlations between participants’ emotional responses and their moral judgments are conventionally considered small, as was emotion’s mediating effect on participants’ moral judgments. Clearly, our findings are not the last word on the role of emotion in people’s judgments of moral dilemmas. As discussed, there have been several investigations that seem to demonstrate the role of emotion in moral judgments about simple norm violations. In addition, recent investigations claim to show a link between emotion and people’s judgments of moral dilemmas using new and more tightly controlled materials that may not suffer from the confounds present in the standard battery. Likewise, there is evidence that impairments in empathy can lead to abnormal moral judgments, suggesting that proper affective functioning is a necessary, but perhaps not a sufficient condition, for making moral judgments. However, our findings still offer important insights on the role of emotion

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

21


in moral judgment. First, extant research in moral psychology makes it difficult to interpret the strength of the relationship between specific emotional responses and judgments of moral dilemmas. Our findings are novel in this respect, demonstrating a link between emotions like disgust and hostility and moral disapproval in dilemmatic contexts. However, our findings also suggest that this relationship is weaker than anticipated by many researchers. Thus, our findings make room for the possibility that dual-process theories—in particular, those that attempt to explain differences in people’s judgments of personal and impersonal dilemmas by appealing to the emotions these dilemmas elicit—are incomplete.

LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS Self-report emotion measures afford two advantages for assessing the role of emotion in judgments of moral dilemmas. First, these measures allow us to identify the specific emotions experienced during judgments of moral dilemmas. Until now, it was unclear that anger and disgust, rather than guilt, for example, support people’s judgments of moral dilemmas. Second, self-report emotion measures allow us to assess the strength of the relationship between particular emotional responses and people’s moral judgments. These measures also have some clear limitations. Awareness and sensitivity of self-report measures. Self-report measures require participants to be consciously aware of their emotional state and be able to accurately report those states. This raises two potential concerns: First, this limitation prevents our experiments from addressing how unconscious emotional processing may have influenced moral judgments. It is clear that further investigation on the link between unconscious emotional responses and judgments of moral dilemmas is warranted, and not at all addressed by the present studies. Second, even if the relevant emotions are consciously experienced, one might worry whether the PANAS-X are sufficiently sensitive to detect the emotional states that drive moral

22

M

I

A

D

B

R

I

D

judgments. Along these lines, one might worry that we used wrong subscales to measure the connection between emotions and moral judgments. Several points speak against the second concern: For one, we not only tested differences between the emotions elicited by personal and impersonal dilemmas, but also tested for differences in participants’ emotions before and after reading a moral dilemma. We observed that reading a moral dilemma had a strong effect on participants’ emotional states. These main effects indicate that the emotions we measured are induced during moral decision-making and that the PANAS-X scales are sufficiently sensitive to detect these effects. Moreover, we provided further validation of our measure by replicating the original emotion differences found in prior research using the items from the standard battery. Disruption of normal operations of emotion and judgment. Another disadvantage to self-report emotion measures is that they explicitly direct participants’ attention toward their emotional responses, whereas in more naturalistic settings participants may experience and be influenced by emotions without explicitly attending to them. This potentially threatens to disrupt the normal connections between emotional responses and moral judgments. If participants are made aware of their emotions they may work to discount them in making their judgments, potentially weakening their connection. Alternatively, participants might feel a demand pressure to make judgments that align with their emotion ratings. Either situation is undesirable from the researcher’s perspective. We recognize that ruling out these concerns may require implicit emotion measures that do not direct participants’ attention toward their emotional reactions. Future directions. A number of future directions are suggested by the limitations of prior research, as well as the limitations of the present studies. First, we identified potentially serious confounds in the standard battery of dilemmas that have been used in moral judgment research. As our norming study demonstrates, the revised battery (originally developed by Moore et al.) avoids these confounds and so

G

E


may be better suited for examining the factors that influence people’s judgments of moral dilemmas. Future studies might also employ methods capable of measuring unconscious emotional experiences, such as facial expression coding or the measurement of facial muscle activity using electromyography . Like galvanic skin response measures (GSR), these methods allow researchers to examine unconscious emotional experiences, yet they also allow researchers to differentiate between different types of emotions. Coupled with carefully controlled and normed materials, these methods might reveal a greater role of unconscious emotions in judgments of moral dilemmas. In addition, these methods would allow researchers to measure emotional reactions without affecting participants’ attention during the decision-making process. Finally, our findings suggest that occurrent emotions (those experienced during the process of judgment) have only a relatively small role in judgments of moral dilemmas. Still, moral judgments might be more strongly influenced by people’s anticipated emotions, or how people imagine they would feel having taken one or another action. Anticipated emotions play an important role in many judgment and decision contexts, so we might expect that they also influence moral judgments. However, we also think that this idea departs from the claim that alarm bell emotions lead to deontological judgments in personal moral dilemmas (or high-conflict personal dilemmas). Nevertheless, the influence of anticipated emotions in the context of moral dilemmas warrants further examination.

CONCLUSION There has never really been any question as to whether emotions play some role in moral decision-making—even Kant recognized that “sympathies” and “sentiments” are integral to proper moral functioning. Rather, the more substantive concerns are the relative contribution of emotion to people’s moral judgments and whether or not emotion plays an important role in people’s judgments of moral dilemmas. Our findings suggest that emotions (especially anger and disgust) are involved in judgments of moral dilemmas, but that their role in producing these judgments may be weaker than we once thought.

Frontal lobe controls decision making. P

S

Y

C

H

O

L

O

G

Y

I

S

S

U

E

23


Miad powell cd4sim  
Advertisement
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you