Since the time of the Ancient Greeks, western philosophers like Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle -- among countless others -- have wrestled with moral questions in order to establish a more complete picture of ethical theory. Two different disciplines have focused on questions about the moral characteristics, traits, and virtues of people: philosophy and psychology (Doris & Stich, 2006). For all its merits, philosophy does not focus on the scientific method to determine the context of an ethical theory, but the blossoming field of moral psychology utilizes an empirical approach in order to determine how morality fits into a framework built on the foundation of ethical theory. As the 21st century has begun, moral psychology and philosophy have converged and attempted to answer similar questions, each discipline necessarily filling the gaps of knowledge (Doris & Stich, 2006). Thus, one of moral psychology's goals is to answer philosophic questions using the scientific method.
Since the 1970s, moral psychology has been a growing field of scientific inquiry. The field has become more and more dedicated to determining which educational and policy changes need to be implemented in order to elicit good conduct and eliminate poor conduct (Doris & Stich, 2006). Many researchers in the field have always thought that the basic tenets of moral psychology are derived from an intuitive sense of right and wrong. However, the explanation for good and bad behaviors does not stop there (Cushman, Young & Greene, n.d.). Many researchers have discovered, based on brain imaging and reaction times, that much of our conduct with regards to moral decision-making implicates deliberation and reasoning as key processes (Cushman, et al.).
Furthermore, researchers have begun to recognize that moral psychology is implicated in a person's level of happiness. Namely, people who practice kindness are happier people, according to (Otake, Shimai, Tanaka-Matsumi, Otsui & Fredrickson, 2007). Otake et al. conducted experiments to determine how kindness affects overall happiness wherein questionnaires comparing subjects' perceived kindness and overall happiness were conducted. Other researchers have conducted similar experiments that correlate, if not show causality, between happiness and acts of kindness. Hardy (2006) has shown that identity plays a definitive role in moral behavior, reasoning and emotion. Prosocial identity and empathy are high predictors of moral, i.e. prosocial behavior. However, this study also found that moral reasoning plays no role in moral behavior. This study used 91 University students as subjects, positing that, as individuals mature, moral reasoning becomes a more significant factor in predicting moral behavior. Steinberg (2012) even suggested that practicing kindness has a physiological effect, keeping the immune system strong and staving off illnesses. Steinberg contended that moral behavior promotes resiliency and strong community ties, as well as lessening tensions caused by interpersonal conflict. Steinberg added that thinking and talking about kindness can even increase feelings of kindness, as well as promoting acts of kindness.
Our experiment will attempt to measure the relationship between moral experience and the performance of acts of kindness. The independent variable is a measurement of whether people are affected by morality while the dependent variable is a measurement of the number of people performing acts of kindness. Using methods such as surveys and direct observation, it is hypothesized that those subjects who are affected by morality to a greater degree are more likely to perform observable acts of kindness. Based on the literature review, the age of our subjects is an important determinant in why acts of kindness are performed. As our subjects are younger, college-aged students, they will display kindness as an effect of feelings of empathy and prosocial identity.
References
Cushman, F., Young, L. & Greene, J.D., (n.d.). Our multi-system moral psychology: towards a consensus view, 1-20. Retrieved from http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~jgreene/GreeneWJH/Cushman-et-al-MultiSystemMrlPsy- HandbookMrlPsy.pdf
Doris, J. & Stich, S., (2014). Moral psychology: empirical approaches. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from <http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/moral-psych-emp/>
Hardy, S.H., (2006). Identity, reasoning, and emotion: an empirical comparison of three sources of moral motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 30,207-215. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11031-006-9034-9#page-2
Otake, K., Shimai, S., Tanaka-Matsumi, J., Otsui, K. & Fredrickson, B.L., (2006). Happy people become happier through kindness: a counting kindnesses intervention. Journal of Happiness Studies, 7:3, 361-375. doi: 10.1007/s10902-005-3650-z
Steinberg, T., (2012). Practicing acts of kindness. Psychology Today. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-the-face-adversity/201211/practicing-acts- kindness
