Aging as Ripening: Character and Consistency of Moral Judgment in Young, Mature, and Older Adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hypothesis that with maturity moral judgments would become more organized and consistent was studied over the adult life span. 10 men and 10 women in each of three age groups (18–24, 30–50, and 60–75) were interviewed. Both stage levels and philosophical orientations of moral thinking were assessed. Three different tasks were used: Kohlberg’s Moral Judgment Interview, Rest’s Defining Issues Test, and a Story Pair task developed for this study, focused on usage of ‘fairness’ or ‘utilitarian’ philosophical orientation. Results showed few differences in average stage level or orientation among the three age groups. However, consistency between moral stages produced and those preferred by the subject increased markedly with age. So did the consistency of moral orientation usage. These results support a hypothesis of increasing philosophical reflectiveness with maturity.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it