Traditionally, it has been the cognitive-developmental approach that has dominated moral judgment research. Specifically, it has been Kohlberg’s theory of moral development (1969, 1986) that has provided the theoretical framework for much of the research in the field. According to the Kohlbergian perspective, individuals are rational agents who engage in conscious deliberation in order to reach a moral judgment or decision. In contrast to this, the social intuitionist model of moral judgment (Haidt, 2001; Haidt & Bjorklund, 2007) proposes that it is the individual’s immediate affective reactions to events are the overriding cause of moral judgment. In addition to this, the model proposes that the social context is an equally important determinant of moral judgment. Emergent group norms are said to directly shape the moral judgments of the individual, with the moral judgments of friends, allies and acquaintances having a direct bearing on the moral judgments one makes, even those made and held privately. In the current thesis, the impact of social persuasion - group norms, audience, and social identity - on moral judgment was investigated, using the methods and meta-theoretical framework of the social identity approach. In Studies 1 (N = 98) and 2 (N = 60) the influence of group norms and level of identification with the reference group on participants’ moral evaluations was assessed. The results of these studies revealed that participants’ evaluation of the target issue (the sex selection of children) was not influenced by the group norms to which they were exposed. In both studies, the interaction between norm and identification was also found to be non-significant. Under investigation in Studies 3, 4, and 5 was the impact of normative influence on participants’ moral evaluations. In Study 3 (N = 186) the impact of group norms, level of identification, and audience expectation on participants’ moral evaluations of morally-tinged scenarios and issues were assessed. Those exposed to a norm portraying the reference group as judgmental tended to be harsher in their evaluations than those exposed to a non-judgmental norm, but the effect was weak and inconsistent. Contrary to expectation, identification and audience were not found to interact with the norm manipulation. Study 4 (N = 93) focused exclusively on the impact of audience expectation on participants’ moral evaluation. Participants evaluated a number of morally-tinged scenarios either alone, under the expectation that their responses would be visible to an audience (with either the opportunity to justify their evaluations, or not), or under the pretext of being connected to a lie-detector. Contrary to expectation, no significant difference in participants’ moral evaluations was found across the four audience conditions. To discount the possibility that the lack of normative influence on moral evaluation obtained in Study 4 was due to methodological limitation (i.e., the audience category was too broad), the selection of participants and the choice of audience were modified for Study 5 (N = 54). In Study 5, Christian students were required to make their moral evaluations under the expectation that their responses would be made visible to either a Christian or student audience. Contrary to expectation, only a subtle effect of audience was found in relation to both the morally tinged issues and the morally tinged scenarios. Participants in the Christian audience condition were found to evaluate only a small number of the issues (3 of 10), and only one of the four scenarios more negatively than those in the student audience condition. In Studies 6 and 7 the impact of social identity factors on participants’ moral evaluations was investigated. In Study 6 (N = 45), the extent to which participants’ moral evaluation were influenced by their social identity was assessed. In this study, participants had either their Christian identity or their student identity made salient when making their evaluations. No difference in participants’ moral evaluations was found between the Christian identity and student identity salience conditions. In Study 7 (N = 68), the extent to which participants’ political identity influenced their moral evaluation of government policy was assessed. Participants (who were either Australian Labor Party supporters or Australian Liberal Party supporters) were led to believe that the policies had been proposed by either the Australian Labor Party or the Australian Liberal Party. It was found that participants’ political affiliation contributed to their moral evaluation of the presented policies. Overall, the current program of studies provides a first step toward understanding the impact that group norms, audience, and social identity factors have on the evaluation component of moral judgment. It suggests that morality is complex, and that moral judgments may be amenable to social influence, albeit weakly. Theoretical and practical implications for this research are discussed with reference to social identity theory and the broader literature on moral psychology.

Traditionally, it has been the cognitive-developmental approach that has dominated moral judgment research. Specifically, it has been Kohlberg’s theory of moral development (1969, 1986) that has provided the theoretical framework for much of the research in the field. According to the Kohlbergian perspective, individuals are rational agents who engage in conscious deliberation in order to reach a moral judgment or decision. In contrast to this, the social intuitionist model of moral judgment (Haidt, 2001; Haidt & Bjorklund, 2007) proposes that it is the individual’s immediate affective reactions to events are the overriding cause of moral judgment. In addition to this, the model proposes that the social context is an equally important determinant of moral judgment. Emergent group norms are said to directly shape the moral judgments of the individual, with the moral judgments of friends, allies and acquaintances having a direct bearing on the moral judgments one makes, even those made and held privately. In the current thesis, the impact of social persuasion - group norms, audience, and social identity - on moral judgment was investigated, using the methods and meta-theoretical framework of the social identity approach. In Studies 1 (N = 98) and 2 (N = 60) the influence of group norms and level of identification with the reference group on participants’ moral evaluations was assessed. The results of these studies revealed that participants’ evaluation of the target issue (the sex selection of children) was not influenced by the group norms to which they were exposed. In both studies, the interaction between norm and identification was also found to be non-significant. Under investigation in Studies 3, 4, and 5 was the impact of normative influence on participants’ moral evaluations. In Study 3 (N = 186) the impact of group norms, level of identification, and audience expectation on participants’ moral evaluations of morally-tinged scenarios and issues were assessed. Those exposed to a norm portraying the reference group as judgmental tended to be harsher in their evaluations than those exposed to a non-judgmental norm, but the effect was weak and inconsistent. Contrary to expectation, identification and audience were not found to interact with the norm manipulation. Study 4 (N = 93) focused exclusively on the impact of audience expectation on participants’ moral evaluation. Participants evaluated a number of morally-tinged scenarios either alone, under the expectation that their responses would be visible to an audience (with either the opportunity to justify their evaluations, or not), or under the pretext of being connected to a lie-detector. Contrary to expectation, no significant difference in participants’ moral evaluations was found across the four audience conditions. To discount the possibility that the lack of normative influence on moral evaluation obtained in Study 4 was due to methodological limitation (i.e., the audience category was too broad), the selection of participants and the choice of audience were modified for Study 5 (N = 54). In Study 5, Christian students were required to make their moral evaluations under the expectation that their responses would be made visible to either a Christian or student audience. Contrary to expectation, only a subtle effect of audience was found in relation to both the morally tinged issues and the morally tinged scenarios. Participants in the Christian audience condition were found to evaluate only a small number of the issues (3 of 10), and only one of the four scenarios more negatively than those in the student audience condition. In Studies 6 and 7 the impact of social identity factors on participants’ moral evaluations was investigated. In Study 6 (N = 45), the extent to which participants’ moral evaluation were influenced by their social identity was assessed. In this study, participants had either their Christian identity or their student identity made salient when making their evaluations. No difference in participants’ moral evaluations was found between the Christian identity and student identity salience conditions. In Study 7 (N = 68), the extent to which participants’ political identity influenced their moral evaluation of government policy was assessed. Participants (who were either Australian Labor Party supporters or Australian Liberal Party supporters) were led to believe that the policies had been proposed by either the Australian Labor Party or the Australian Liberal Party. It was found that participants’ political affiliation contributed to their moral evaluation of the presented policies. Overall, the current program of studies provides a first step toward understanding the impact that group norms, audience, and social identity factors have on the evaluation component of moral judgment. It suggests that morality is complex, and that moral judgments may be amenable to social influence, albeit weakly. Theoretical and practical implications for this research are discussed with reference to social identity theory and the broader literature on moral psychology.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Bowling Green State University, 2007. / Document formatted into pages; contains ix, 106 p. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Wyoming, 2008. / Title from PDF title page (viewed on June 24, 2009). Includes bibliographical references (p. 52-58).

Written for the Institute of Comparative Law. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2010/04/20). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Oregon, 2005. / Typescript. Includes vita and abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 107-116). Also available for download via the World Wide Web; free to University of Oregon users.

Thesis (M.A.)--Georgia State University, 2005. / Title from title screen. LeeAnne Richardson, committee chair; Marilynn Richtarik, Margaret Mills Harper, committee members. Electronic text (56 p.) : digital, PDF file. Description based on contents viewed May 2, 2007. Includes bibliographical references (p. 55-56).

Syftet med denna essä är att undersöka frågor kopplade till samlingens roll på förskolan och det dilemma som pedagoger ställs inför då barn inte vill delta. Det undersökningsmaterial som essän utgår från är en självupplevd samlingssituation, skriven som en berättelse. Denna situation är komplex och väcker många frågor. Essäns huvudfråga är: Hur kan man som pedagog förhålla sig till när barn inte vill delta i samlingen? I denna text kan man läsa om samlingens roll i förskolan, både ur ett historiskt och ett pedagogiskt perspektiv. Hur kommer det sig att samlingen har blivit ett sådant självklart inslag i förskolans verksamhet? Ett tema i texten är makt samt hur maktrelationen ser ut mellan pedagog och barn. Essän utforskar även vilka möjligheter barnen ges till inflytande i samlingen, samt hur man som pedagog kan arbeta mer inkluderande. Essän behandlar även frågor kring normer och etik. Michel Foucault, Jesper Juul, Jan-Olav Henriksen och Arne Johan Vetlesen är några av de personer som essän inspirerats av i de teoretiska utgångspunkterna.

La violence au Moyen Âge ne serait-elle qu’une question de perspective ? Cette question marque le point de départ de cette étude consacrée aux récits de la violence dans les sources hagiographiques. L’analyse du discours, reposant sur une déconstruction systématique des récits, a fait apparaître un canevas narratif commun sur lequel chaque auteur est venu broder son propre récit. Mais sous une simplicité apparente se dissimule un discours bien plus complexe en lien avec les problématiques sociales de leur époque. L’approche lexicale a permis de montrer que la dénonciation d’une action comme « violence » devient un moyen d’en exprimer l’illégitimité du point de vue de l’auteur et de sa communauté. Elle entre ainsi dans des stratégies plus larges d’autolégitimation mises en place par l’Église, dans lesquelles le discours de la violence est instrumentalisé dans le but de « normer » la communauté des fidèles, mais aussi de défendre son patrimoine ou de légitimer certaines réformes. Évidemment, le récit hagiographique de la violence n’offre qu’une vision unilatérale dans laquelle les motivations de la partie adverse sont déformées ou tout simplement ignorées. Enfin, l’intérêt porté au discours et à son élaboration, mais aussi à ses formes et aux thématiques abordées a permis de mener une réflexion plus générale sur les enjeux de l’écriture hagiographique. L’hagiographie s’adresse à un public très large en divers lieux et à différents moments, empruntant alors des voies communicationnelles variées. La lecture mais aussi l’écoute le plus souvent dans un cadre liturgique permettent une large diffusion du message hagiographique et lui confère toute son efficacité. De par ce caractère quasi universel, l’hagiographie devient aussi multifonctionnelle et joue un rôle socialimportant. / Would the violence in the Middle Ages be only a question of perspective? This question is the basis for this study on hagiographical stories of violence. The analysis of discursive strategies showed a common narrative structure on what each author came to embroider his own story. But this visible simplicity hides a more complex discourse linked to social issues of their times. The lexical study has showed that the denunciation of an action as "violence" becomes a means to express illegitimacy from the point of view of the author and his community. It belongs to strategies of autolegitimization set up by the Church, in which violence is instrumentalized with the intention not only to influence behaviours of the community of faithful, but also to defend its property or to justify some reforms ongoing. Of course, the hagiographical story of violence gives us only an unilateral vision in which the motivations of the opposite camp are simply distorted or hidden. Finally, the interest on discursive strategies and on the various forms of violence reported lead us to consider writing motives of thehagiographers. Hagiography touch a very large public in various places and at various times, using several ways of communication. Reading but also listening often in a liturgical context make the hagiographical message efficient. All over this quasi universal character, hagiography becomes multifunctional as well and plays an important social role. In this way, we can say that hagiography can be seen as a weapon in hands of religious men. It allows the glorification of a past through the holyness of the community foundator or members. But it’s also a support of the instrumentalisation of conflictsbetween the lay aristocracy and religious communities. / Könnte die Gewalt im Mittelalter nur eine Frage der Perspektive sein? Diese Frage ist der Anfangspunkt dieser Studie über Erzählungen der hagiographischen Gewalt. Die Diskursanalyse, auf einer systematischen Infragestellung der Berichte beruhend, hat ein gemeinsames narratives Schema gezeigt, dem jeder Autor seine eigene Geschichte hinzufügt. Dennoch verbirgt das scheinbar Einfache einen viel komplexeren Diskurs, der mit der sozialen Problematik der Epoche zusammenhängt. Die lexikalische Analyse hat nachgewiesen, daß die Stigmatisierung einer Tat als „Gewalt“ dem Autor unddessen Gemeinde als Mittel dient, die Ungesetzlichkeit der Tat hervorzuheben. So wird diese Darstellung zu einem der von der Kirche etablierten Selbstlegitimationsverfahren. In diesen Verfahren, wird die Gewaltthematik nicht nur dazu genutzt, um die Gläubigen zu beeinflussen, sondern auch um ihr Erbe zu schützen und diverse Reformen zu rechtfertigen. Selbstverständlich gibt die hagiographische Erzählung der Gewalt nur eine einseitige Sicht wieder, in der die Beweggründe der Gegner verdreht, bzw. verheimlicht werden. Schlussendlich hat die Analyse des Diskurses und seines Aufbaus eine allgemeinere Betrachtung der Ziele der hagiographischen Schriften ermöglicht. Die Hagiographie richtet sich an ein sehr breites Publikum, an verschiedenen Orten und zu unterschiedlichen Zeiten. Dazu werden verschiedene Kommunikationswege genutzt. Das Lesen sowie das Hören, in einem oft liturgischem Umfeld, verbreiten auf eine schnelle und wirksame Weise die hagiographische Botschaften. Dadurch wird die Hagiographie übergreifendund spielt eine wichtige Rolle in der Gesellschaft.

Syftet med den här essän är att undersöka vilka normer och diskurser som råder på min förskola och vidare hur de bidrar till att skapa olika konstruktioner av barn utifrån ett diskursperspektiv. Sedermera vill jag undersöka orsaker till mina egna och mina kollegors handlingsmönster samt vilka handlingsmöjligheter som finns i de uppkomna situationerna utifrån ett pliktetiskt och ett dygdetiskt perspektiv. Essän handlar om svårigheten att se till hela barngruppens bästa och att samtidigt ta hänsyn till varje barns unika behov. Idén till den här essän väcktes när jag på min avdelning uppmärksammade att både barn och vuxna la skulden för allting som gick fel på vår avdelning på ett av barnen. Essän börjar med beskrivningen av några situationer där mina kollegor, genom både språkliga och kroppsliga handlingar, ger uttryck för hur svårt det är att bemöta barn vars beteenden oroar, förbryllar eller utmanar dem medan jag förblir tyst. När jag äntligen tar mod till mig och börjar prata riskerar mitt handlande att förstöra deras chanser att få en resurspedagog till det här barnet. Mina kollegor fokuserar på barnets brister och korrigerar hans beteende. Mitt fokus ligger på förändring och anpassning av vår verksamhet så att den passar barnets unika behov. Jag reflekterar över orsaker till mina och mina kollegors handlingar samt våra handlingsmöjligheter utifrån två etiska perspektiv, pliktetik och dygdetik, vilka utgör ett ”inifrånperspektiv”. Med hjälp av inifrånperspektivet kan jag låta mina personliga tankar och funderingar komma till uttryck. Ett ”utifrånperspektiv” utgörs av ett diskursperspektiv med vars hjälp jag kan få syn på de diskurser och normer som bidrar till de konstruktioner av barn som skapas på min förskola. Dessa diskurser och normer kan så småningom förändras med hjälp av en pedagogisk reflektion tillsammans med mina kollegor. Jag reflekterar även över min egen praktiska kunskap som har hjälpt mig att lära av min egen och andras erfarenheter så att jag hela tiden kan utveckla mina förmågor och agera klokt i olika situationer. / The purpose of this essay is to investigate what norms and discourses exist at my preschool and how they contribute to create different constructions of children from a discourse perspective. Furthermore, I want to investigate the causes of my and my colleagues' patterns of action as well as the possibilities for action that exist in the emerging situations from two ethical perspectives, duty ethics and virtues. The essay is about the difficulty to cater to the best of the whole group and to take care of each child’s unique needs at the same time. The idea behind this essay was raised when I noted in my department that one child was blamed for all that went wrong. The essay begins with the description of some situations where my colleagues, through both their verbal and physical actions, express how difficult it is to meet children that behave in a way that makes them worried and puzzled. I do not raise my own concerns about the boy’s behavior or how the teachers react to his needs. When I finally dare to speak up during a meeting with the special pedagogue I risk destroying their chances to get an extra teacher for this child. My colleagues focus on his shortcomings and express a desire to correct his behaviour. My focus is on changing and adapting the environment, activities, routines and our approach to meeting the individual child’s specific needs. I reflect on the causes of my and my colleagues' actions as well as our possibilities of action using two ethical perspectives, duty ethics and virtues. These perspectives open up for an in-depth understanding of the dilemma through an insider perspective. Using this perspective, I can express my personal thoughts and speculations. An outsider's perspective comprises of a discourse perspective that helps me to see the discourses and the norms that contribute to the constructions of the children that are being created at my preschool. I even reflect over my own practical knowledge that has helpt me to learn from my own and other peoples experience, so I can develop my abilities and act wisely in different situations.