This research examined adolescents' and young adults' practical moral judgments, specifically their unique moral thinking in two interpersonal moral dilemmas. The basic philosophical frameworks (deontological and consequentialist principles) were employed as tools for psychological analysis. In Study 1, 42 preliminary groups of adolescents and young adults (14-16 years and 18-21 years) provided moral dilemmas that they had experienced during a past year. Among 42 dilemmas, two dilemmas (the homework and the video dilemmas), including different types of conflicting moral issues, were selected as materials for Study 2. In Study 2, 234 participants (76 aged 14-16, 90 aged 18-19, and 68 aged 20-21) resolved the two moral dilemmas on the paper-based questionnaire, in which questions were framed into two ways. Thus, the participants provided 1) their spontaneous decisions and its reasoning from perspectives of imagined moral agents and 2) their choices from nine fixed reasoning alternatives. The different types of moral dilemmas and the differently framed questions elicited age- and/or gender-related trends of young people's moral judgments. Selected interesting results include: 1) The female participants showed a unique decision style: \"restructuring\" the moral dilemmas/situations, and 2) The participants showed their relativistic thinking only when they were asked to select from nine reasoning alternatives, and relativistic thinking was evidenced more in younger (aged 18-19) female college students. Age- and gender-related developmental implications were further proposed.
","abstract_html":"<p>This research examined adolescents' and young adults' practical moral judgments, specifically their unique moral thinking in two interpersonal moral dilemmas. The basic philosophical frameworks (deontological and consequentialist principles) were employed as tools for psychological analysis. In Study 1, 42 preliminary groups of adolescents and young adults (14-16 years and 18-21 years) provided moral dilemmas that they had experienced during a past year. Among 42 dilemmas, two dilemmas (the homework and the video dilemmas), including different types of conflicting moral issues, were selected as materials for Study 2. In Study 2, 234 participants (76 aged 14-16, 90 aged 18-19, and 68 aged 20-21) resolved the two moral dilemmas on the paper-based questionnaire, in which questions were framed into two ways. Thus, the participants provided 1) their spontaneous decisions and its reasoning from perspectives of imagined moral agents and 2) their choices from nine fixed reasoning alternatives. The different types of moral dilemmas and the differently framed questions elicited age- and/or gender-related trends of young people's moral judgments. Selected interesting results include: 1) The female participants showed a unique decision style: "restructuring" the moral dilemmas/situations, and 2) The participants showed their relativistic thinking only when they were asked to select from nine reasoning alternatives, and relativistic thinking was evidenced more in younger (aged 18-19) female college students. Age- and gender-related developmental implications were further proposed. </p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Takagi, Yoko"],"institution":"The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York","degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy","degree_level":"Doctoral","degree_discipline":"Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Dr. Herbert Saltzstein"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2014,"date_issued":"2014-02-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2014-02-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:58:39Z","subjects":["Psychology","Developmental Psychology","Moral Development"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/116","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Dr. Herbert Saltzstein"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Takagi, Yoko"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Psychology","Developmental Psychology","Moral Development"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/116"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This research examined adolescents' and young adults' practical moral judgments, specifically their unique moral thinking in two interpersonal moral dilemmas. The basic philosophical frameworks (deontological and consequentialist principles) were employed as tools for psychological analysis. In Study 1, 42 preliminary groups of adolescents and young adults (14-16 years and 18-21 years) provided moral dilemmas that they had experienced during a past year. Among 42 dilemmas, two dilemmas (the homework and the video dilemmas), including different types of conflicting moral issues, were selected as materials for Study 2. In Study 2, 234 participants (76 aged 14-16, 90 aged 18-19, and 68 aged 20-21) resolved the two moral dilemmas on the paper-based questionnaire, in which questions were framed into two ways. Thus, the participants provided 1) their spontaneous decisions and its reasoning from perspectives of imagined moral agents and 2) their choices from nine fixed reasoning alternatives. The different types of moral dilemmas and the differently framed questions elicited age- and/or gender-related trends of young people's moral judgments. Selected interesting results include: 1) The female participants showed a unique decision style: \"restructuring\" the moral dilemmas/situations, and 2) The participants showed their relativistic thinking only when they were asked to select from nine reasoning alternatives, and relativistic thinking was evidenced more in younger (aged 18-19) female college students. Age- and gender-related developmental implications were further proposed.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Adolescents' and young adults' moral thinking in typical everyday-life moral dilemmas"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Dr. Herbert Saltzstein"],"dc:creator":["Takagi, Yoko"],"dc:date.available":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["This research examined adolescents' and young adults' practical moral judgments, specifically their unique moral thinking in two interpersonal moral dilemmas. The basic philosophical frameworks (deontological and consequentialist principles) were employed as tools for psychological analysis. In Study 1, 42 preliminary groups of adolescents and young adults (14-16 years and 18-21 years) provided moral dilemmas that they had experienced during a past year. Among 42 dilemmas, two dilemmas (the homework and the video dilemmas), including different types of conflicting moral issues, were selected as materials for Study 2. In Study 2, 234 participants (76 aged 14-16, 90 aged 18-19, and 68 aged 20-21) resolved the two moral dilemmas on the paper-based questionnaire, in which questions were framed into two ways. Thus, the participants provided 1) their spontaneous decisions and its reasoning from perspectives of imagined moral agents and 2) their choices from nine fixed reasoning alternatives. The different types of moral dilemmas and the differently framed questions elicited age- and/or gender-related trends of young people's moral judgments. Selected interesting results include: 1) The female participants showed a unique decision style: \"restructuring\" the moral dilemmas/situations, and 2) The participants showed their relativistic thinking only when they were asked to select from nine reasoning alternatives, and relativistic thinking was evidenced more in younger (aged 18-19) female college students. Age- and gender-related developmental implications were further proposed.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/116"],"dc:subject":["Psychology","Developmental Psychology","Moral Development"],"dc:title":["Adolescents' and young adults' moral thinking in typical everyday-life moral dilemmas"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy"],"thesis:institution_name":["The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:58:39Z"}