Hypothetical versus real-life moral reasoning among psychopathic and delinquent youth

Abstract

Abstract Differences in moral reasoning concerning hypothetical versus real-life conflicts were examined with a sample of 44 youths (aged 15–18 years) who were classified as psychopathic, delinquent, or normal. All subjects were individually interviewed and assessed on (a) Hare's Psychopathy Checklist, (b) two of Kohlberg's hypothetical moral dilemmas, and (c) a subject-generated real-life moral dilemma. The results revealed that the normal youths attained a higher level of moral reasoning than either the delinquents or psychopaths. All groups scored lower on the real-life than the hypothetical dilemmas, indicating that hypothetical dilemmas may best elicit a person's level of moral reasoning competence, whereas real-life dilemmas may entail factors that lower the level of reasoning used in a situation of moral conflict. These two dilemma types also were found to elicit differing moral orientations. Finally, psychopaths were found to orient more to egoistic concerns than did delinquents when discussing real-life dilemmas.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 101 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.