|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Cite error: A
<ref> tag is missing the closing
</ref> (see the help page).
- Richardson, Henry. [<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2009/entries/reasoning-moral/>. ""Moral Reasoning""] Check
value (help). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2009 Edition). Retrieved 11 July 2011.
- Moral Reasoning Defined- Psychology Glossary. AlleyDog.com. Text " 20Reasoning" ignored (help); Missing or empty
- Bucciarelli, Khemlani, and Johnson-Laird, Monica, Sangeet, and P. N. "The psychology of moral reasoning" (PDF). Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 3, No. 2, February 2008, pp. 121–139. University of Turin and Department of Psychology. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
- Cherry, Kendra. "Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development". About.com Psychology. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
This page has clearly been significantly improved. The only problem I see is all the talk on Kolhberg and Piaget, condiering they have their own page. In both of their pages moral reasoning is heavily discussed. Spelling and grammar seem fine. I don't think there is much else that you could include in this page without overlapping other pages. (Ng179320 (talk) 00:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC))
I agree with Ng179320, you obviously added a lot of information, but it might be a little much on Piaget and Kolhberg. Your references will need to be cleaned up too. You used multiple footnotes for a single reference. I would use ref name="" in the tag to create a group. Then you just need to call ref name="" to call the same source again. Look here Help:Wiki_markup#References_and_citing_sources and check out the complete ref tag and referencing it again. --KJamison7 (talk) 01:35, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
It is obvious that this article has been substantially expanded. Overall this page is presented in a very clear and organized manner, however I would suggest making a separate heading for the four characteristics of moral reasoning. The only other thing that I would maybe consider looking into is the concept of the ghost in the machine, which could be a possible extension to your philosophy section in the article. I think it could give an interesting view on how we control our behavior as this philosophy takes a look at mind-body dualism. Overall though you seem to have done a lot of good work! well done! --Rushdwb (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay, so you added a ton of info. I do agree with the above statements though. You could improve it by adding some stuff outside of kohlberg and Piaget. I had some technical problems with my page too so I can understand the references error. I'm not too tech savvy anyway. I think you write well too and the information is good and well used. It's hard, especially for moral reasoning, to not overlap some information from other pages. Good job man. Well done!--Rgearin09 (talk) 23:08, 29 July 2011 (UTC)