Cross National Differences in Prosocial Moral Reasoning
Introduction
There have been many studies in the field of prosocial moral reasoning and on prosocial behaviours over the decade. Researchers have constantly tried to evaluate reasons behind these, mainly in children and adolescents. Prosocial behaviour can be defined as helping that is not motivated by professional obligations and is not based on organizations, other than for charities (Hewstone, Stroebe, & Jonas, 2007). Prosocial moral reasoning is, reasoning about moral dilemmas in which one person 's needs or desires conflict with those of needy others (Eisenberg, 1986). As children and adolescents are often faced with situations where their own interests conflict with those in need, researchers have been found to investigate the decisions they might make in such situations where proper external course of actions are not present or unclear. To date, there is simply little research on cross-national differences in prosocial moral reasoning that has been conducted over the years. However, cross-national studies on prosocial moral reasoning of children and adolescents in industrialized countries and age related changes in prosocial moral judgment have been identified. For instance, studies by Carlo, Eisenberg, Silvia, Da Silva, and Frohlich (1996), Boehnke, Silbereisen, Eisenberg, Reykowski, and Polomari (1989), Eisenberg, Zhou, and Koller (2001), and Trommsdorff, Friedlmeier, and Mayer (2007), to name a few, have contributed to the understanding of cross-national differences in prosocial moral reasoning.
Research methods
Prosocial Reasoning Objective Measure
The prosocial reasoning objective measure (PROM) has been used as the main instrument in examining prosocial moral reasoning in adolescents in studies conducted by Carlo et al. (1996) and Eisenberg et al. (2001, 2002, 1995). The majority of research in the past have been carried out by the use of interview measures of moral reasoning. However, Carlo et al. (1992) introduced a paper and pencil measure
There have been many studies in the field of prosocial moral reasoning and on prosocial behaviours over the decade. Researchers have constantly tried to evaluate reasons behind these, mainly in children and adolescents. Prosocial behaviour can be defined as helping that is not motivated by professional obligations and is not based on organizations, other than for charities (Hewstone, Stroebe, & Jonas, 2007). Prosocial moral reasoning is, reasoning about moral dilemmas in which one person 's needs or desires conflict with those of needy others (Eisenberg, 1986). As children and adolescents are often faced with situations where their own interests conflict with those in need, researchers have been found to investigate the decisions they might make in such situations where proper external course of actions are not present or unclear. To date, there is simply little research on cross-national differences in prosocial moral reasoning that has been conducted over the years. However, cross-national studies on prosocial moral reasoning of children and adolescents in industrialized countries and age related changes in prosocial moral judgment have been identified. For instance, studies by Carlo, Eisenberg, Silvia, Da Silva, and Frohlich (1996), Boehnke, Silbereisen, Eisenberg, Reykowski, and Polomari (1989), Eisenberg, Zhou, and Koller (2001), and Trommsdorff, Friedlmeier, and Mayer (2007), to name a few, have contributed to the understanding of cross-national differences in prosocial moral reasoning.
Research methods
Prosocial Reasoning Objective Measure
The prosocial reasoning objective measure (PROM) has been used as the main instrument in examining prosocial moral reasoning in adolescents in studies conducted by Carlo et al. (1996) and Eisenberg et al. (2001, 2002, 1995). The majority of research in the past have been carried out by the use of interview measures of moral reasoning. However, Carlo et al. (1992) introduced a paper and pencil measure
References: Boehnke, K., Silbereisen, R. K., Eisenberg, N., Reykowski, J., & Polomari, A. (1989). Developmental pattern of prosocial motivation: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 20, 219-243. Carlo, G., Eisenberg, N., & Knight, G. P. (1992). An objective measure of adolescents ' prosocial moral reasoning. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2, 331-349. Carlo, G., Eisenberg, N., Koller, S. H., Da Silva, M. S., & Frohlich, C. B. (1996). A cross-national study on the relations among prosocial moral reasoning, gender role orientations, and prosocial behaviours. Development Psychology, 32 (2), 231-240. Carlo, G., Fabes, R. A., Laible, D., & Kupanoff, K. (1999). Early adolescence and prosocial/moral behaviour II: The role of social and contextual influences. Journal of Early Adolescence, 19 (2), 133-147. Chanda, N., & Misra, G. (2004). Patterns of prosocial reasoning in indian children. Psychology Developing Societies, 16 (2), 159. Eisenberg, N. (1986). Altruistic emotion, cognition and behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Eisenberg, N., Guthrie, I. K., Cumberland, A., Murphy, B. C., Shepard, S. A., Zhou, Q., et al. (2002). Prosocial development in early adulthood: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82 (6), 993-1006. Eisenberg, N., Jeffrey, L., & Pidada, S. U. (2004). The longitudinal relations of regulation and emotionality to quality of indonesian children 's socioemotional functioning. Developmental Psychology, 40 (5), 790-804. Eisenberg, N., Miller, P. A. (1987). The relation of empathy to prosocial and related behaviours. Psychology bulletin, 101, 91-119. Eisenberg, N., Miller, P. A., Shell, R., McNalley, S., & Shea, C. (1991). Prosocial development in adolescence: A longitudinal study. Develpoment Psychology, 27 (5), 849-857. Eisenberg, N., Zhou, Q., & Koller, S. (2001). Brazilian adolescents ' prosocial moral judgement and behaviour: Relations to sympathy, perspective taking, gender-role orientation, and demographic characteristics. Child Development, 72 (2), 518-534. Hewstone, M., Stroebe, W., & Jonas, K. (2007). Introduction to social psychology: A European perspective (4th ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. Pakaslahti, L., Karjalainen, A., & K-J, L. (2002). Relationships between adolescent prosocial problem-solving strategies, prosocial behaviour, and social acceptance. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 26, 137. Staub, E. (1971). Helping a person in distress: The influence of implicit and explicit "rules" of conduct on children and adults. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17 (2), 137-144. Trommsdorff, G., Friedlmeier, W., & Mayer, B. (2007). Sympathy, distress, and prosocial behavior of preschool children in four cultures. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31 (3), 284-293.