• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

卡罗尔·吉利根关于青少年道德推理发展中性别差异的理论。

Carol Gilligan's theory of sex differences in the development of moral reasoning during adolescence.

作者信息

Muuss R E

机构信息

Goucher College, Towson, Maryland 21204.

出版信息

Adolescence. 1988 Spring;23(89):229-43.

PMID:3381683
Abstract

Gilligan's work, which focuses on sex differences in moral reasoning, the perception of violence, the resolution of sexual dilemmas and abortion decisions, poses a major challenge to Kohlberg's theory by introducing a feminist perspective of moral development. Kohlberg had shown that the average female attained a moral judgment rating of stage three (good boy-nice girl), while adolescent males score at level four (law and order) and are more likely to move on to postconventional levels. Gilligan suggests that these findings reveal a gender bias, not that females are less mature than boys. Men and women follow different voices. Men tend to organize social relationships in a hierarchical order and subscribe to a morality of rights. Females value interpersonal connectedness, care, sensitivity, and responsibility to people. Kohlberg's scoring criteria give the interpersonal care orientations of females lower ratings than the principled justice orientation. Hence, Gilligan identifies different developmental stages for females. However, she does not claim that one system is better; both are equally valid. Only by integrating these complementary male (justice) and female (care) orientations will we be able to realize our full human potential in moral development.

摘要

吉利根的研究专注于道德推理中的性别差异、对暴力的认知、性困境的解决以及堕胎决策,通过引入女性主义的道德发展视角,对科尔伯格的理论提出了重大挑战。科尔伯格曾表明,普通女性的道德判断等级达到第三阶段(好孩子—好女孩),而青少年男性的得分处于第四阶段(法律与秩序),并且更有可能进入后习俗水平。吉利根认为,这些发现揭示的是一种性别偏见,而非女性不如男孩成熟。男性和女性遵循不同的声音。男性倾向于以等级秩序来组织社会关系,并认同一种权利道德观。女性重视人际关系的联结、关怀、敏感以及对他人的责任。科尔伯格的评分标准给予女性的人际关怀取向的评分低于原则性正义取向。因此,吉利根确定了女性不同的发展阶段。然而,她并未声称一种体系比另一种更好;两者同样有效。只有将这些互补的男性(正义)和女性(关怀)取向整合起来,我们才能在道德发展中充分实现人类的全部潜能。

相似文献

1
Carol Gilligan's theory of sex differences in the development of moral reasoning during adolescence.卡罗尔·吉利根关于青少年道德推理发展中性别差异的理论。
Adolescence. 1988 Spring;23(89):229-43.
2
Sexual and moral development of Israeli female adolescents from city and kibbutz: perspectives of Kohlberg and Gilligan.以色列城市和基布兹地区女性青少年的性与道德发展:科尔伯格与吉利根的观点
Adolescence. 1991 Spring;26(101):59-71.
3
Protection as care: moral reasoning and moral orientation among ethnically and socioeconomically diverse older women.保护即关爱:不同种族和社会经济背景的老年女性的道德推理和道德取向。
J Aging Stud. 2014 Jan;28:44-56. doi: 10.1016/j.jaging.2013.12.001. Epub 2013 Dec 22.
4
Care: from theory to orientation and back.关怀:从理论到方向,再回归理论。
J Med Philos. 1998 Apr;23(2):190-209. doi: 10.1076/jmep.23.2.190.8922.
5
Tom, Huck, and Oliver Stone as advocates in Kohlberg's just community: theory-based strategies for moral education.汤姆、哈克以及奥利弗·斯通作为科尔伯格公正社区中的倡导者:基于理论的道德教育策略
Adolescence. 1991 Summer;26(102):319-29.
6
Gender differences in moral orientation: a meta-analysis.道德取向中的性别差异:一项元分析
Psychol Bull. 2000 Sep;126(5):703-26. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.126.5.703.
7
In search of an everyday morality: the development of a measure.寻找日常道德准则:一种测量方法的发展
Adolescence. 1990 Winter;25(100):923-43.
8
Theory derivation in moral development.
Nurs Health Care. 1990 Jun;11(6):302-6.
9
Kohlberg's theory of moral development: insights into rights reasoning.科尔伯格的道德发展理论:对权利推理的见解
Med Law. 2000;19(3):351-72.
10
A longitudinal study of moral reasoning.一项关于道德推理的纵向研究。
Child Dev. 1989 Feb;60(1):157-66. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1989.tb02705.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Towards a Psychologically Realist, Culturally Responsive Approach to Engineering Ethics in Global Contexts.迈向全球背景下工程伦理的心理现实主义、文化响应式方法。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2025 Apr 1;31(2):10. doi: 10.1007/s11948-025-00536-1.
2
Beyond Dehumanized Gender Identity: Critical Reflection on Neuroscience, Power Relationship and Law.超越非人性化的性别认同:对神经科学、权力关系和法律的批判性反思
Integr Psychol Behav Sci. 2024 Dec;58(4):1684-1703. doi: 10.1007/s12124-023-09814-8. Epub 2023 Dec 8.
3
Investigating the relationship of actively open-minded thinking in future time perspectives among Saudi undergraduate students.
调查沙特本科大学生未来时间视角下积极开放思维的关系。
Psychol Res. 2024 Feb;88(1):222-237. doi: 10.1007/s00426-023-01851-7. Epub 2023 Jul 10.