從局部統合到整體統合的發展－以道德思考為例

From Local to Global Coherence: The Development of Moral Thinking

10.6251/BEP.20160128

林慧慈(Huitzu Lin)；林文瑛(Wenying Lin)；王震武(Jennwu Wang)

矛盾 ； 局部統合 ； 道德思考 ； 認知發展 ； 整體統合 ； cognitive development ； contradiction ； global coherence ； local coherence ； moral thinking

教育心理學報

48卷3期（2017 / 03 / 01）

329 - 349

繁體中文

Piaget 主張，解決認知衝突，達成內在認知與現實的均衡，是促進認知發展的主要機制，因此，其理論顯然蘊含著，認知發展是解決認知矛盾，朝向認知統合發展的基本假設。同樣的，Kohlberg的道德發展理論，從情境利我取向到普世正義原則的發展，也意味著從特定情境的局部統合到整體統合之發展趨勢。據此，本研究想要探討道德思考的統合（coherence）程度是否會隨著年齡而越來越整體統合（global coherence），以驗證Piaget 與Kohlberg 理論背後的基本假設。本研究以兩個研究測試此假設，方法是編製有關偷竊、作弊、欺騙、守信主題的四個道德情境故事，針對故事主角的行為，提供兩個彼此矛盾的道德評價，要求參與者分別評估對這兩個矛盾說法的贊成程度。研究一以小學二年級、三年級及六年級學生作為參與者，研究二則以小學六年級、高中生、大學生到大學以上的學生作為參與者。兩個研究分別發展出具有年齡合宜性的實驗材料。參與者對於兩個矛盾說法若呈正相關，代表思考越局部統合，會同時接受兩個矛盾的說法，若呈負相關，代表思考越整體統合，對矛盾說法會接受其一，拒絕其一。研究結果支持Piaget 與Kohlberg 的發展假設，在多數的情況底下，道德思考隨年齡增加而越趨整體統合，但是由於「守信行為」情境在兩個研究中均為唯一的例外，因此思考統合性的領域特定性顯然是必須更進一步加以釐清的因素。

The implicit assumption of Piaget's and Kohlberg's cognitive developmental theory is the development of cognitive coherence (equilibrium between internal cognitive structure and external environmental world) via resolution of cognitive conflict. The present study aims to investigate whether the global coherence of moral thinking develops by age. The researchers utilized four moral scenarios to evaluate the participants' responses to two contradicting arguments regarding behaviors of stealing, lying, cheating in an exam, and breaking a promise. The degree of coherence was evaluated by the correlation of the two responses. Since assessment materials should be developed differently for younger children and older subject, the researchers designed two separate studies for different age groups: Study 1 for elementary school children, and Study 2 for older subjects. Study 1 results showed that sixth graders' moral judgment was more coherent than third graders' except for the ＂Breading Promise＂ scenario. Study 2 showed that college students' moral judgment was more coherent than sixth graders' except for the ＂Breaking Promise＂ scenario, as well. Taking both Study 1 and Study 2 into account, coherence of moral thinking increases by age which supports Piaget and Kohlberg's theoretical hypothesis.

1. 王震武、林文瑛(2005)。迷信思考中的解釋效果。中華心理學刊，47，39-60。
   連結：
2. 王震武、林文瑛、張郁雯(2011)。科學教育有助於消除迷信嗎？從思考統整層面所做的觀察。教育心理學報，42(3)，467-490。
   連結：
3. Albrecht, J. E.,O'Brien, E. J.(1993).Updating a mental model: Maintaining both local and global coherence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,19(5),1061-1070.
4. Aronson, E.,Carlsmith, J. M.(1963).Effect of the severity of threat on the devaluation of forbidden behavior.The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,66(6),584-588.
5. Beilin, H.(Ed.),Pufall, P. B.(Ed.)(1992).Piaget's theory: Prospects and possibilities.Hillsdale, NJ:Lawerence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Chomsky, N.(1980).Rules and representation.New York, NY:Columbia University Press.
7. Evans, J. St. B. T.(1977).Linguistic factors in reasoning.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,29,297-306.
8. Festinger, L.,Carlsmith, J. M.(1959).Cognitive consequences of forced compliance.Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,58,203-210.
9. Fischer, K. W.(1980).A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills.Psychological Review,87(6),477-531.
10. Freedman, D. G.(1965).Hereditary control of early social behavior.Determinants of Infant Behavior,3,149-159.
11. Gagne, R. M.(1968).Contributions of learning to human development.Psychological Review,75(3),177-191.
12. Gelman, R.(1969).Conservation acquisition: A problem of learning to attend to relevant attributes.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,7(2),167-187.
13. Glenberg, A. M.,Langston, W. E.(1992).Comprehension of illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental models.Journal of Memory and Language,31,129-151.
14. Goslin, D. A.(Ed.)(1969).Handbook of socialize theory and research.Chicago, IL:Rand Mcnally.
15. Johnson, M. G.,Henley, T. B.(1992).Finding meaning in random analogies.Metaphor and Symbolic Activity,7,55-75.
16. Markovits, H.(1988).Conditional reasoning, representation, empirical evidence on a concrete task.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,40(3),483-495.
17. McKoon, G.,Ratcliff, R.(1989).Semantic associations and elaborative inference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,15(2),326-338.
18. McKoon, G.,Ratcliff, R.(1992).Spreading activation versus compound cue accounts of priming: Mediated priming revisited.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,18(6),1155-1172.
19. Myers, J. L.,O'Brien, E. J.,Albrecht, J. E.,Mason, R. A.(1994).Maintaining global coherence during reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,20,876-886.
20. O'Brien, E. J.,Myers, J. L.(1985).When comprehension difficulty improves memory for text.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,11(1),12-21.
21. Ortony, A.(1975).Why Metaphors Are Necessary and Not Just Nice.Educational Theory,25(1),45-53.
22. PascualLeone, J.(1987).Organismic processes for neoPiagetian theories: A dialectical causal account of cognitive development.International Journal of Psychology,22(5-6),531-570.
23. Perfetti, C. A.(1993).Why inferences might be restricted.Discourse Processes,16,181-192.
24. Piaget, J.,Brown, T.(Trans),Thampy, K. J.(Trans)(1985).The equilibration of cognitive structures: the central problem of intellectual development.Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
25. Piaget, J.,Cook, M.(Trans.)(1952).The origins of intelligence in children.New York, NY:International University Press.
26. Pinard, A.,Laurendeau, M.(1969).Stage in Piaget's cognitive-developmental theory: Exegesis of a concept.Studies in cognitive development: Essays in honor of Jean Piaget,New York, NY:
27. Reeves, A. G.(Ed.)(1985).Epilepsy and the corpus callosum.New York, NY:Plenum.
28. Rosskopf, M.(Ed.),Stette, L. P.(Ed.),Taback, S.(Ed.)(1971).Piagetian cognitive-developmental research and mathematical education.Washington, DC:National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
29. Singer, M.,Graesser, A. C.,Trabasso, T.(1994).Minimal or global inference during reading.Journal of Memory and Language,33(4),421-441.
30. Spelke, E. S.,Breinlinger, K.,Macomber, J.,Jacobson, K.(1992).Origins of knowledge.Psychological Review,99(4),605-632.
31. Sternberg, R. J.(1984).What should intelligence tests test? Implications of a triarchic theory of intelligence for intelligence testing.Educational Researcher,13(1),5-15.
32. Sternberg, R. J.(Ed.),Berg, C. A.(Ed.)(1992).Intellectual development.New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
33. Stevenson, R. B.(1993).Critically reflective inquiry and administrator preparation: Problems and possibilities.Educational Policy,7(1),96-113.
34. Tversky, A.,Kahneman, D.(1983).Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.Psychological Review,90,293-315.
35. Wertheimer, A.(1987).Coercion.Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
36. Wildman, T, M.,Fletcher, H. J.(1977).Developmental increases and decreases in solutions of conditional syllogism problems.Developmental Psychology,13,630-636.
37. Wright, R. E.,Rosenberg, S.(1993).Knowledge of text coherence and expository writing: A developmental study.Journal of Educational Psychology,85,152-158.
38. Yang, K. S.(1998).Chinese responses to modernization: A psychological analysis.Asian Journal of Social Psychology,1(1),75-97.
39. 王震武、林文瑛(1998)。刑罰與教化─中國人的素樸心理學分析。輔仁學誌，26，181-214。
40. 王震武、林文瑛(2006)。國科會研究計畫國科會研究計畫,國科會。
41. 王震武、林文瑛(1994)。自學方案的意識型態分析。應用心理學報，3，1-42。
42. 李玉貴(1998)。Taipei, Taiwan，台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所=National Education in University of Taipei。
43. 林文瑛(1997)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會。
44. 林文瑛(1992)。中國人的兒童教育觀初探─以體罰現象為基礎。輔仁學誌，21，81-120。
45. 林文瑛(1992)。體罰實態、理論及心理因素之探討。應用心理學報，1，53-77。
46. 林文瑛、王震武(1995)。中國父母的教養觀：嚴教觀或打罵觀？。本土心理學研究，3，2-92。
47. 林文瑛、王震武(1999)。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告,行政院國家科學委員會。
48. 邱耀初(1999)。矛盾性的中文諺語與權變思維關係之初探。應用心理研究，1，247-264。
49. 陳春燕(2002)。Chiayi, Taiwan，國立中正大學教育研究所=National Chung Cheng University。

1. 李琪明(2020)。多面向道德情意量表之發展與信效度考驗。教育心理學報，51(4)，561-583。