Research Interests

Discussing what it means to be a good person doesn’t have to be left to moral philosophers and scholars. Fully elaborating on what it takes to make moral choices and how we come to understand this about ourselves and others has far-reaching applications. Moral development and all of its latent processes underscore numerous dynamics and contexts in our everyday lives. This ranges from business ethics (DeTienne et al., 2019), education (Nucci & Turiel, 2009), navigating interpersonal relationships (Sirota, 2019), understanding economic behavior and navigating social systems (Hajnal, Z. 2020), and technological innovation (Danaher & Saetra, 2022).

When hearing about moral development, a fellow student of psychology may remember learning about Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg in their undergraduate social development course. What’s exciting to say is that there have been monumental waves in moral development research in the late twentieth and early twenty-first century and exciting new research directions are on the rise. Ranging from new theories and re-visiting old concepts (e.g., Social Domain Theory, moral agency, moral identity, etc.) to the rise of notable moral developmentalists in the public eye (e.g., Carol Gilligan and Paul Bloom) and less public (but just as important, or even more so) developmentalists (e.g., Melanie Killen, Elliot Turiel, Cecilia Wainryb, and many more), moral development as a field of study has expanded its scope and impact.

However, the scientific study of moral development is still in its early phases. We are less than one hundred years since the Cognitive Revolution and the expansion of developmental studies in the mid-twentieth century (Dixon, 2001; Miller, 2003). This is a relatively short amount of time when compared to the entirety of human history. Yes, philosophers have been pontificating on the nature and origins of morality for centuries, but true, rigorous experimental and observational data collection on this topic is a modern phenomenon. This is an area ripe for growth while in need of adapting to the quick advances in quantitative methods and technology taking on the social sciences more broadly.

Exceptional care in methodology and analysis is what transforms a good idea into meaningful research. This is why methodological innovation is fundamental to the ontogenesis of knowledge within psychology. From the distant days of early 20th century psychoanalysis, the field of psychology has quickly evolved into multiple disciplines, largely due to the dialectical nature of methodological and theoretical innovation. The foundations of psychological inquiry were built on the clinical observations recorded by Freud and his school, but true growth in the field of psychology was spurred by interdisciplinary methodological learnings in the mid- and late-20th century. These include discoveries from biology, anthropology, physics, chemistry, and mathematics, all of which have informed psychologists in evaluating inferential statistics and mathematical theory, qualitative research, experimental methods, and theory development.

Centering quantitative methods, theory, and methodological development in my research will be critical in understanding the processes underlying moral development in all of their complexity (click here to learn more about studying complexity in psychology). Modern approaches in studying a variety of psychological topics, such as emotion regulation (Lewis et al., 1999), theory of mind (Lagattuta et al., 2016), cognitive and sensorimotor development (Thelen & Smith, 2007), and social-personality psychology (Jackson & Beck, 2021), could be applied in studying moral development processes. These processes can include exploring moral identity, reasoning, judgment, evaluation, and more.

Ultimately, I want to determine whether applying dynamical systems theory, both conceptually and analytically, to moral development is a worthwhile research endeavor. I believe that DST concepts can explain how conceptions of the self (e.g., identity) can change and re-organize over time, along with how conceptions of others shift over time and across context, specifically within the realm of moral development. This intersection of interests is not the first of its kind. Contemporary researchers such as Drs. Minkang Kim, Derek Sankey, Ulas Kaplan, and others have contributed to this topic.

Last, but not least, it is a great privilege to pursue a higher education degree wherein I can advance our knowledge of developmental psychology. Many great, contemporary scientists are ultimately pushed to leave academia, either due to financial, cultural, personal, or other professional considerations. The time I spend studying moral development, I plan to leave a mark and to learn all that I can with the time and privilege I have.