Development of the Distinction Among the "Desirable", Morality, and Personal Preference

Israeli children of grades 1, 4, and 7 were asked, with respect to nine types of behavior, whether such behavior is bad, whether a child should be brought up to behave otherwise (and why), whether a child should be required to behave otherwise, and whether such behavior should be punished. Analysis of their responses and the reasons they provided supports the hypothesized distinction between three categories of behaviors or reasons for action—morality, “the desirable” and personal preferences—in terms of two dimensions: desirability and obligatoriness. Specifically, moral norms were perceived as both desirable and strictly obligatory, and were justified in terms of inherent goodness/badness and the welfare of others. Behaviors in the category of “the desirable” were perceived as desirable but not obligatory, and were justified in terms of self-development and long-term utility. Behaviors in the category of personal preferences were perceived as non-obligatory and neither desirable nor undesirable, and were justified in terms of personal choice. This distinction was less sharp among first graders, who exhibited some tendency to view desirables and preferences, as well as moral behavior, as obligatory. In light of these findings, it is suggested that the young child's “intuitive morality” relates only to the dimension of desirability and not to that of obligatoriness, which seems to develop somewhat later.