Development of Moral Foundations in Children's Language

Author: PNAS Nexus
Published: 2024/08/20
Publication Details: Peer-Reviewed, Informative
Topic: Youth and Disability - Publications List

Page Content: Synopsis - Introduction - Main

Synopsis: Quantifying the emergence of moral foundational lexicon in child language development. Moral Foundations theory posits that morality is largely intuitive and underlaid by modular foundations.

Defining Moral Foundations Theory

Moral Foundations Theory

Moral Foundations Theory (MFT) is a social psychological framework developed to explain the origins and variations in human moral reasoning. It was first proposed by psychologists Jonathan Haidt, Craig Joseph, and Jesse Graham, building on the work of cultural anthropologist Richard Shweder. The theory posits that human morality is based on several innate, modular foundations that are shaped by evolutionary processes and cultural influences.

Initially, MFT identified five core moral foundations, which were later expanded to six with the addition of Liberty/Oppression:

Care/Harm: This foundation is related to our evolutionary history as mammals with attachment systems, emphasizing kindness and compassion.
Fairness/Cheating: Linked to reciprocal altruism, this foundation underlies justice and rights.
Loyalty/Betrayal: Stemming from our tribal past, it involves group allegiance and patriotism.
Authority/Subversion: Reflects hierarchical social interactions, emphasizing respect and tradition.
Sanctity/Degradation: Associated with the psychology of disgust, it relates to purity and spirituality.
Liberty/Oppression: Concerns the feelings of autonomy and resistance to domination.

MFT has faced critiques for its biological plausibility and redundancy among the moral foundations. Critics argue that some foundations may be reducible to concerns about harm or threat-reduction versus empathy. Alternative theories have been proposed, including the model of moral motives and the theory of dyadic morality. Despite these critiques, MFT remains influential in moral psychology and political discourse.

Introduction

A study of children's conversations with their caretakers sheds light on the timeline of the emergence of moral foundation words in the first six years of life in English-speaking children.

Focus

Moral Foundations theory posits that morality is largely intuitive and underlaid by modular foundations. The original set of five foundations proposed by researchers includes:

Care/Harm
Fairness/Cheating
Authority/Subversion
Loyalty/Betrayal
Purity/Degradation

Aida Ramezani and colleagues systematically identified words related to these moral foundations in 44 text corpora from the CHILDES dataset, a large database of transcripts of children's speech used by researchers, seeking to establish a timeline for the emergence of these ideas in children's lexicons.

Words that appear in contexts relevant to moral foundations are extracted from dyadic conversations between children and caretakers.

The authors find that children use words related to Care/Harm at much higher rates than all the other foundations.

Care/Harm and Fairness/Cheating, which focus on benefits to the individual and are thus known as "individualizing foundations," emerge earlier than Authority/Subversion, Loyalty/Betrayal, and Purity/Degradation, which focus on benefits to a wider group and are thus known as "binding foundations."

The Care/Harm foundation is present in the speech of one-year-olds, in utterances such as "help Carrie wash dish."

Caretakers speak more often about Purity/Degradation than children do.

According to the authors, caretakers tend to talk about fairness, while children tend to talk about cheating, in utterances such as the childhood classic: "That's not fair!"

Attribution/Source(s): This peer reviewed publication was selected for publishing by the editors of Disabled World (DW) due to its relevance to the disability community. Originally authored by PNAS Nexus and published on 2024/08/20, this content may have been edited for style, clarity, or brevity. For further details or clarifications, PNAS Nexus can be contacted at academic.oup.com/pnasnexus NOTE: Disabled World does not provide any warranties or endorsements related to this article.