128 Chapter 4
someone’s moral development. Rather, it
is the reasoning that is used to arrive at an
answer.
This dilemma was used by Lawrence
Kohlberg (1981) in his creation of a six-stage
theory of moral development (see Table 4.1).
Kohlberg evaluated people’s stages of moral
development by presenting them with a se-
ries of hypothetical moral dilemmas and
coding their responses. The first two stages
of moral development are calledpreconven-
tionaland emphasize the physical conse-
quences of behavior. In other words, people
decide for or against a behavior out of a fear
of punishment or a desire to be rewarded.
The third and fourth stages are called the
conventionalstages and emphasize the im-
portance of rules and laws; the third stage
emphasizes conformity to rules and others’
expectations, whereas the fourth stage em-
phasizes the importance of maintaining law
and order. The fifth and sixth stages are re-
ferred to aspostconventionaland involve
developing one’s own internal standards,
separate from those of society.
Kohlberg (1981) based his theory on a
longitudinal study of boys, following them
from elementary school through adult-
hood. Because Kohlberg’s study excluded
females, people began to question whether
his theory applied to girls. Carol Gilligan
was one such person. In 1982, she criticized
Kohlberg’s work, arguing that his stages
did not fairly represent women’s views of
moral reasoning. Gilligan said that women
often ended up being classified as having a
lower stage of moral development than men
when using the Kohlberg scheme. Girls of-
ten were classified at the third stage of de-
velopment, which emphasizes how others
feel about the situation, pleasing others, and
gaining approval from others. Boys, by con-
trast, were more likely to be classified at the
■ A meta-analysis on helping behavior showed that men
help more than women, contrary to expectations. How-
ever, this sex difference is limited to situations of dan-
ger. In the context of relationships, women help more
than men.
■ Men are more likely than women to be the perpetrators
and victims of aggression.
■ Sex differences in aggression (male more than female)
are smaller under conditions of provocation and very
low or very high arousal.
■ Compared to women, men have more permissive at-
titudes toward sex, engage in more casual sex, have
more sexual partners, and engage in more masturba-
tion. Women have more favorable attitudes toward
homosexuality than men.
■ There are sex differences in some personality traits. Sex
differences seem to be larger in more egalitarian cul-
tures where behavior is more strongly linked to traits.
■ For all the domains of social behavior, measurement is
an important moderator. Self-report measures are influ-
enced by demand characteristics as men and women
try to behave in ways that fit their gender roles (e.g.,
empathy). Consistent with this idea, sex differences
for some behaviors are larger under public than private
conditions (e.g., helping).
Sex Comparisons in Moral Development
Imagine the following dilemma: Heinz has a
wife who is dying, and he is unable to get a
drug that would save her life. The only phar-
macist who sells the drug is asking an exor-
bitant amount of money for it, and Heinz
is poor.
This is the famous “Heinz dilemma.”
The question we are faced with is this: Should
Heinz steal the drug? It is not the answer to
the question that determines the extent of
