The Interplay of Metacognition and Post-Conventional Moral Reasoning: A Synthesis of Theory and Research

1. Introduction

1.1. The Significance of Moral Development

Understanding the development of moral reasoning stands as a cornerstone in the study of human psychology and social functioning. Morality, broadly conceived, involves the capacity to distinguish right from wrong, guiding ethical behavior and underpinning social cooperation.1 Moral development encompasses the gradual evolution of an individual's concepts of right and wrong, including their conscious values, social attitudes, and behavioral patterns.2 It is a process through which individuals learn moral values via active thinking and reasoning, progressing through identifiable stages as they mature.3 The study of how individuals arrive at moral judgments and justify their actions in complex ethical situations provides critical insights into human nature, social order, and the foundations of ethical conduct.

1.2. Kohlberg's Foundational Framework

Among the most influential frameworks for understanding this developmental trajectory is Lawrence Kohlberg's stage theory of moral development.4 Building upon Jean Piaget's earlier work on moral judgment in children 4, Kohlberg proposed that moral reasoning progresses through a sequence of six stages, grouped into three distinct levels: Pre-conventional, Conventional, and Post-conventional.2 Kohlberg's theory is fundamentally cognitive in nature, focusing explicitly on the thinking process or justification individuals use when confronting moral dilemmas, rather than evaluating the moral quality of the chosen action itself or the emotional responses involved.4 Each successive stage represents a more complex and adequate way of reasoning about moral issues, characterized by increasingly sophisticated perspective-taking abilities.8 Kohlberg posited that this developed moral reasoning is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition for ethical behavior, implying a correlation between how someone reasons and how they act.8 His methodology often involved presenting individuals with hypothetical moral dilemmas, such as the famous Heinz dilemma, to probe the underlying structure of their moral logic.8

1.3. Introducing Metacognition: The Capacity for Reflective Consciousness

Parallel to the study of moral reasoning, the field of cognitive psychology has extensively investigated metacognition. Often defined simply as "thinking about thinking" 15 or "knowing about knowing," metacognition refers more formally to the awareness individuals have of their own cognitive processes and their ability to monitor and regulate these processes.15 It is recognized as a critical higher-order thinking skill essential for effective learning, complex problem-solving, critical thinking, and self-regulated behavior.16 Metacognition is typically conceptualized as comprising two main components: knowledge of cognition (what one knows about their own thinking, tasks, and strategies) and regulation of cognition (how one manages and controls their thinking, including planning, monitoring, and evaluation).16

1.4. Statement of Purpose and Report Structure

While both moral development and metacognition involve sophisticated cognitive operations, the specific relationship between them, particularly at the highest levels of moral reasoning, warrants detailed examination. The purpose of this report is to conduct an in-depth exploration of the theoretical and empirical connections between developed metacognitive capabilities and the attainment and operation of post-conventional moral reasoning, specifically Kohlberg's Stages 5 and 6. Both Kohlberg's framework and the concept of metacognition share a fundamental focus on internal cognitive architecture—the processes of reasoning and thinking.5 This shared emphasis provides a strong rationale for investigating their potential interdependence. If the advanced moral reasoning characteristic of post-conventional stages requires qualitatively more complex thought processes, it follows logically that the capacity to reflect upon, monitor, and regulate those processes (i.e., metacognition) might be not just relevant, but potentially essential. This report will proceed by first defining post-conventional moral reasoning (Section 2) and the key components of metacognition (Section 3). It will then explore the theoretical mechanisms through which specific metacognitive functions might enable post-conventional thought (Section 4). Subsequently, it will review empirical research investigating this link, including studies using relevant assessment tools like the Defining Issues Test (DIT) and the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI), as well as related cognitive measures (Section 5). The interplay with associated cognitive capacities such as perspective-taking, critical thinking, and reflective judgment will be analyzed (Section 6). Developmental considerations regarding the timing and potential prerequisite nature of metacognition for post-conventional reasoning will be discussed (Section 7). Finally, the report will synthesize the findings to characterize the nature and strength of the relationship, concluding with implications for fostering advanced moral development (Section 8).

2. Understanding Post-Conventional Moral Reasoning (Kohlberg's Stages 5 & 6)

2.1. Moving Beyond Convention

The post-conventional level, also termed the principled level, represents the third and highest tier in Kohlberg's hierarchy of moral development.5 This level marks a significant cognitive and ethical shift, characterized by a growing realization that individuals are entities separate from society, and that their own autonomously derived perspective and principles may take precedence over prevailing social norms, laws, or the expectations of authority figures.8 Morality at this level is no longer defined primarily by external controls (pre-conventional) or societal conformity (conventional), but by abstract principles and values that are seen as having universal applicability across diverse situations and societies.5 Individuals operating at this level view rules and laws not as absolute, immutable dictates that must be obeyed without question, but as useful, potentially fallible, and changeable social mechanisms.5 Ideally, these rules should maintain social order and protect fundamental human rights, but when they fail to do so or conflict with deeper ethical principles, they can be critically evaluated and potentially disobeyed.8 This capacity for critical evaluation and principled dissent requires the ability to engage in abstract thinking, moving beyond concrete instances and societal dictates to consider underlying ethical concepts.3

2.2. Stage 5: The Social Contract and Individual Rights Orientation

Stage 5, the first stage within the post-conventional level, is characterized by a "social contract" orientation.5 Individuals reasoning at this stage understand society as functioning through social contracts – agreements among people to uphold certain laws and norms for the sake of mutual benefit, order, and the protection of individual rights.3 Laws are viewed as important for maintaining a functional society, but they are recognized as human constructions, flexible tools that can and should be evaluated based on rational considerations such as fairness, justice, equality, and human dignity.3 The emphasis shifts towards individual rights and the idea that laws derive their legitimacy from their capacity to serve human purposes and protect the interests and welfare of the majority.5 Consequently, Stage 5 reasoners believe that laws can be changed through democratic processes and consensus if they prove unjust or fail to serve the common good.5 They recognize that situations can arise where strict adherence to a law might conflict with fundamental human rights (e.g., the right to life superseding property rights in the Heinz dilemma), justifying exceptions or challenges to the law.3 This stage involves sophisticated perspective-taking, including the ability to understand the societal perspective and the rationale behind laws, as well as imagining oneself in another's position to negotiate and reach fair agreements.5

2.3. Stage 6: The Universal Ethical Principles Orientation

Stage 6 represents the apex of Kohlberg's model, a level of moral reasoning grounded in universal ethical principles.5 Kohlberg considered this stage to be the highest form of moral functioning, although he acknowledged that it is rarely achieved in practice.3 At this stage, moral judgments are determined not by social contracts or laws, but by abstract, self-chosen ethical principles of conscience that are believed to be universal, comprehensive, and consistently applicable.5 These principles typically include fundamental concepts such as justice, the equality of human rights, respect for the dignity of individuals, and the sanctity of human life.3 Reasoning at Stage 6 involves taking the perspective of every person or group potentially affected by a decision, seeking solutions that uphold these universal principles for all.5 Individuals guided by Stage 6 reasoning are prepared to act in defense of these principles, even if doing so means violating established laws or social conventions and facing significant personal consequences, such as social disapproval or legal punishment.24 Their commitment is to an internal moral compass aligned with universal justice, rather than external rules or authority.

2.4. Hallmarks of Post-Conventional Reasoning

Synthesizing the characteristics of Stages 5 and 6 reveals several key hallmarks of post-conventional moral thought:

• Abstract Reasoning: A fundamental shift from concrete rules and consequences to reasoning based on abstract concepts, values, and ethical principles.3

• Principled Judgment: Moral decisions are guided by internalized, self-chosen ethical standards perceived as having universal validity, rather than relying on external authority, peer approval, or existing social norms.5

• Critical Evaluation of Norms: Societal laws, rules, and conventions are not accepted unquestioningly but are subjected to critical scrutiny based on whether they align with fundamental rights and principles. They are viewed as potentially flawed and open to change or even principled disobedience.3

• Advanced Perspective-Taking: The capacity to understand and coordinate multiple complex perspectives is essential. This progresses from considering the perspective of society as a whole and the rationale behind social contracts (Stage 5) to adopting a universal perspective that considers the rights and dignity of all individuals potentially affected by a decision (Stage 6).5

• Moral Autonomy: A strong sense of the individual as a separate moral agent, whose conscience and commitment to ethical principles can override external dictates or societal pressures.5

2.5. Measuring Post-Conventional Reasoning

Empirically assessing levels of moral reasoning, particularly the preference for post-conventional thinking, has largely relied on instruments derived from Kohlberg's framework. The most prominent of these is the Defining Issues Test (DIT), developed by James Rest, and its updated version, the DIT-2.6 The DIT presents respondents with several moral dilemmas (often adapted from Kohlberg's originals) and asks them to rate and rank a series of statements representing different stages of moral reasoning in terms of their importance for resolving the dilemma.32 It does not directly assign individuals to a specific stage but rather measures the extent to which they prefer and utilize different moral schemas: Personal Interests (pre-conventional), Maintaining Norms (conventional), and Postconventional.31 The most commonly used score, the P-score (or the N2 score in DIT-2), quantifies the relative importance a respondent gives to post-conventional (Stage 5 and 6) considerations, providing a continuous measure of principled moral thinking.6 The DIT is considered a "Neo-Kohlbergian" measure, emphasizing cognitive development and post-conventional thinking.31

A critical tension arises within the post-conventional framework itself. The emphasis in Stage 6 on adhering to universal ethical principles, even when they conflict with established laws, means that the highest stage of moral development, according to Kohlberg, can lead to actions considered illegal or socially disruptive from a conventional (Stage 4, law-and-order) perspective.8 This potential for principled civil disobedience underscores the radical shift from valuing social order above all (Stage 4) to prioritizing universal justice (Stage 6). It highlights the inherent conflict between upholding existing societal structures and adhering to potentially transcendent ethical demands, a conflict that post-conventional reasoning directly confronts.

Furthermore, the empirical observation that post-conventional reasoning, especially Stage 6, is relatively rare in most populations, achieved by perhaps only 10-15% of adults 3, poses a challenge to the theory's claims of universality. While Kohlberg proposed the stages as a universal sequence 2, the low prevalence of the highest stages suggests either widespread developmental arrest or that these stages might reflect culturally specific values (e.g., abstract individualism prominent in Western, educated societies) rather than a universal endpoint.8 This rarity implies that reaching these advanced stages likely requires more than just typical cognitive maturation; specific cognitive skills, such as highly developed metacognition, or particular kinds of challenging life experiences and educational environments may be necessary catalysts.

3. Metacognition: Components and Functions

3.1. Defining Metacognition

Metacognition, fundamentally, is the human capacity for reflective consciousness regarding one's own cognitive activities.15 It encompasses both the awareness and understanding an individual has of their own thinking processes ("thinking about thinking") and the ability to actively monitor and regulate those processes to achieve specific goals.15 This involves stepping back from the primary cognitive task (e.g., reading, solving a problem) to observe and manage the mental operations involved.15 Metacognition is widely recognized as a crucial higher-order thinking skill that underpins successful learning, effective problem-solving, critical thinking, decision-making, and the broader capacity for self-regulated learning and behavior.16 It allows individuals to become more strategic and intentional in their cognitive endeavors.

3.2. Component 1: Metacognitive Knowledge

The first major component, Metacognitive Knowledge, refers to the knowledge or beliefs individuals hold about cognition in general and their own cognitive processes in particular.16 It is often subdivided into three categories:

• Declarative Knowledge: This is knowledge about oneself as a learner and about the factors that influence one's performance.15 It includes awareness of one's own cognitive strengths and weaknesses (e.g., "I am good at remembering facts but struggle with abstract concepts"), understanding task characteristics (e.g., "This type of problem requires careful analysis"), and knowing about different types of cognitive strategies (e.g., "I know that rehearsal helps memory").15

• Procedural Knowledge: This refers to knowledge about how to perform cognitive tasks and implement specific strategies.15 It involves knowing the steps required to execute a plan, use a learning technique effectively, or solve a particular type of problem (e.g., "I know the steps for outlining an essay," "I know how to apply this mathematical formula"). This knowledge often becomes more automatic with practice.17

• Conditional Knowledge: This involves knowing when and why to apply specific cognitive strategies.15 It requires understanding the specific conditions under which a particular strategy is likely to be effective and recognizing the rationale for its use (e.g., "I know that summarizing is useful after reading a complex section," "I know to use brainstorming for generating ideas but outlining for structuring them"). This includes adapting strategies based on task demands and context.18

3.3. Component 2: Metacognitive Regulation

The second major component, Metacognitive Regulation, involves the active control and management of one's cognitive processes during learning or problem-solving.16 It encompasses several key sub-processes:

• Planning: This involves activities undertaken before starting a task, such as setting clear goals, selecting appropriate strategies based on metacognitive knowledge, sequencing steps, and allocating resources like time and effort.15 Effective planning directs subsequent cognitive activity.

• Monitoring: This refers to the ongoing assessment of one's understanding, progress, and performance during task execution.15 It includes checking comprehension (e.g., "Do I understand this concept?"), tracking progress towards goals (e.g., "Am I meeting my objectives?"), and evaluating the effectiveness of the strategies currently being employed.15

• Control/Debugging: Based on the feedback from monitoring, this involves making adjustments and taking corrective actions when problems or discrepancies are detected.20 This might include changing strategies, reallocating attention, adjusting pace, seeking help, or re-evaluating understanding.15 It involves intentionally looking for disconfirming evidence to avoid biases.39

• Evaluation: This occurs after task completion and involves assessing both the outcome (e.g., "How well did I achieve my goals?") and the process (e.g., "Were my strategies effective?").15 Evaluation contributes to refining metacognitive knowledge and improving future planning.

3.4. Assessing Metacognition

Measuring metacognition presents challenges due to its internal nature.16 However, several methods have been developed. Among the most widely used is the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI), a self-report questionnaire typically consisting of 52 items rated on a Likert scale.15 The MAI is designed to assess both major components – Knowledge of Cognition and Regulation of Cognition – across their various sub-components (e.g., declarative knowledge, planning, monitoring).16 It has been used extensively in educational research to explore the relationship between metacognitive awareness and outcomes such as academic achievement, problem-solving ability, and self-directed learning readiness.16 While self-report measures like the MAI offer convenience and are suitable for large samples, they are subject to potential biases and limitations regarding respondents' accuracy in self-assessment.23 Other methods used to assess metacognition include think-aloud protocols (where individuals verbalize their thoughts during a task), interviews, observations of behavior, and performance-based measures.16

While often discussed as distinct components, metacognitive knowledge and regulation are deeply interdependent and function synergistically. Effective regulation relies heavily on a foundation of relevant knowledge. For instance, one cannot effectively plan strategy use (regulation) without knowing which strategies exist and when they are appropriate (knowledge).15 Similarly, monitoring comprehension (regulation) requires awareness of one's own understanding (knowledge).15 Conversely, actively engaging in regulatory activities like monitoring and evaluation helps individuals refine their understanding of their own cognitive processes and strategy effectiveness, thereby building their metacognitive knowledge base.20 Studies using instruments like the MAI often find strong positive correlations between scores on knowledge and regulation factors, empirically supporting this functional interdependence.16 This reciprocal relationship suggests that both aspects of metacognition likely play a coordinated role in complex cognitive tasks, including advanced moral reasoning.

Another important consideration is the extent to which metacognition operates as a domain-general skill versus a domain-specific one. While the core regulatory processes (planning, monitoring, control, evaluation) might be considered general cognitive tools 22, their effective application often depends on specific knowledge relevant to the domain in question.40 For example, metacognitive strategies for reading comprehension differ from those for solving mathematical problems.40 The existence of domain-specific assessment tools, such as the Metacognitive Awareness of Reading Strategies Inventory (MARSI) 40, further supports this distinction. This implies that applying metacognition to the domain of moral reasoning likely involves not only general regulatory skills but also specific metacognitive knowledge pertinent to ethics, social cognition, perspective-taking, and the nature of moral dilemmas themselves. Understanding how one thinks about morality specifically may be as important as general thinking skills.

4. Bridging Metacognition and Post-Conventional Morality: Theoretical Mechanisms

The cognitive architecture required for post-conventional moral reasoning—characterized by abstract thought, principled justification, critical evaluation of norms, and advanced perspective-taking—strongly suggests a dependence on well-developed metacognitive capabilities. Specific metacognitive functions can be theoretically linked to the requirements of Kohlberg's Stages 5 and 6.

4.1. How Metacognitive Knowledge Facilitates Principled Reasoning

Metacognitive knowledge provides the necessary awareness and understanding to navigate complex moral terrain beyond conventional boundaries:

• Awareness of Cognitive Biases: Knowledge about common cognitive pitfalls, such as confirmation bias (seeking information that confirms pre-existing beliefs), egocentric bias (overemphasizing one's own perspective), or biases stemming from group affiliation, is crucial.15 Recognizing these potential distortions allows individuals to consciously monitor for and counteract their influence when evaluating moral situations. This self-awareness enables a move beyond intuitive, potentially biased judgments towards more objective, principle-based assessments, a hallmark of post-conventional thought.19

• Understanding Epistemic Limitations (Epistemic Cognition): A sophisticated understanding of the nature of knowledge itself (epistemic beliefs) is fundamental. Post-conventional reasoning often deals with ill-structured moral problems where answers are not clear-cut.42 Recognizing that knowledge, particularly moral knowledge, can be uncertain, context-dependent, and requires reasoned justification rather than being simply received from authority, is essential for moving beyond the absolutism of pre-reflective stages or the uncritical relativism of quasi-reflective stages.42 This mature epistemic stance, a form of metacognitive knowledge, underpins the ability to construct and defend moral positions based on evaluated principles and evidence.

• Knowledge of Moral Frameworks/Strategies: Awareness of diverse ethical theories and perspectives (e.g., utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, care ethics) equips individuals with a broader conceptual toolkit.49 This knowledge allows them to analyze moral dilemmas from multiple angles, compare different lines of reasoning, and understand the principles underlying various moral positions, facilitating the nuanced and comprehensive evaluation characteristic of Stages 5 and 6.

• Evaluating Societal Norms: Metacognitive knowledge includes understanding how social norms, laws, and conventions are constructed, transmitted, and internalized within a society.5 This awareness enables individuals to critically assess the legitimacy and ethical grounding of these norms against higher-order principles, rather than accepting them unquestioningly simply because they exist or are widely endorsed, which is typical of conventional reasoning.5

4.2. The Role of Metacognitive Monitoring in Refining Moral Judgments

Ongoing monitoring of the reasoning process itself is vital for ensuring the integrity and quality of post-conventional moral judgments:

• Checking for Consistency: Post-conventional reasoning strives for coherence between abstract principles and specific judgments in concrete situations. Metacognitive monitoring allows individuals to continuously check if their reasoning process and conclusions align consistently with their stated ethical principles.15

• Evaluating Justifications: Simply stating a principle is insufficient; post-conventional reasoning requires robust justification. Monitoring involves actively assessing the quality, relevance, and sufficiency of the evidence and arguments used to support a moral stance.42 This ensures that judgments are genuinely grounded in chosen principles rather than being rationalizations of self-interest, emotional reactions, or conformity pressures.

• Identifying Flaws and Gaps: Effective monitoring helps detect logical fallacies, unexamined assumptions, potential biases, overlooked perspectives, or unintended negative consequences within one's own line of moral reasoning.15 Identifying these weaknesses prompts further reflection, revision, and refinement of the moral judgment.

4.3. How Metacognitive Regulation Enables Complex Moral Deliberation

Metacognitive regulation provides the executive control necessary to manage the demanding cognitive processes involved in post-conventional thought:

• Inhibiting Impulsive/Biased Responses: Moral dilemmas often evoke strong immediate emotional reactions or trigger ingrained conventional responses (System 1 thinking).49 Metacognitive regulation, specifically inhibitory control, allows individuals to pause, suppress these initial impulses, and engage in more effortful, deliberate, and systematic reasoning (System 2 thinking) required to apply abstract principles.49

• Flexible Perspective-Taking: Moving between different viewpoints—self, specific others, societal expectations, and ultimately a universal perspective—is cognitively demanding.5 Metacognitive regulation enables the intentional and flexible shifting of attention and cognitive resources required to genuinely consider these multiple perspectives, weigh their claims, and integrate them into a principled judgment.10

• Systematic Evaluation of Alternatives: Post-conventional reasoning involves considering various possible actions and their ethical implications. Metacognitive regulation, through planning and control, facilitates a methodical approach to exploring different lines of reasoning, evaluating competing principles, and weighing potential outcomes before committing to a moral conclusion.15

• Goal Maintenance: When grappling with complex moral issues, it is easy to get sidetracked by peripheral details or social pressures. Metacognitive regulation helps maintain focus on the core ethical principles and the overarching goal of reaching a just and principled resolution, ensuring the reasoning process stays on track.15

Kohlberg's description of moral development as a process of "decentering"—moving from an egocentric focus to encompass progressively wider social perspectives—finds a potential mechanistic explanation in metacognition.10 The ability to decenter requires, first, an awareness of one's current, limited perspective (metacognitive knowledge and monitoring) and, second, the ability to actively regulate one's thinking to inhibit that perspective and deliberately adopt and consider broader ones (metacognitive regulation and control).15 Metacognitive functions thus appear to provide the essential cognitive engine driving the expansion of moral scope necessary to transition from conventional to post-conventional levels of reasoning.

Furthermore, the concept of 'metaethical cognition'—beliefs about the nature of moral knowledge and the processes of moral judgment formation—represents a specific application of metacognitive and epistemic awareness within the moral domain.43 Research indicates that the development of sophisticated metaethical stances (e.g., moving beyond intuitionism or pure subjectivism towards understanding morality as involving reasoned, justifiable principles – a 'transsubjectivist' view) parallels general epistemic development and is correlated with more advanced moral reasoning.43 This suggests that thinking about how one thinks about morality itself, and developing a mature understanding of moral justification, is a critical metacognitive achievement that facilitates the capacity for post-conventional reasoning.

The following table summarizes the proposed theoretical links between specific metacognitive functions and the cognitive requirements inherent in post-conventional moral reasoning:

Table 1: Mapping Metacognitive Functions to Post-Conventional Reasoning Requirements

Metacognitive Function	Sub-component / Description	Relevance to Post-Conventional Reasoning (Stage 5/6 Characteristic)	Supporting Snippets
Knowledge of Cognition
Declarative Knowledge	Awareness of own cognitive biases (e.g., egocentrism)	Enables recognition and mitigation of biases, facilitating objective evaluation beyond self-interest or group norms.	15
Declarative Knowledge	Awareness of strengths/weaknesses in moral reasoning	Allows for strategic compensation and focus on areas needing more careful deliberation.	15
Declarative/Conditional Knowl.	Knowledge of different ethical frameworks/perspectives	Provides tools for analyzing dilemmas from multiple angles, comparing principled arguments.	49
Declarative/Conditional Knowl.	Understanding the nature of moral knowledge (Epistemic Beliefs)	Recognizes moral problems as often ill-structured, requiring reasoned justification beyond authority or simple rules; enables critical evaluation of norms.	42
Regulation of Cognition
Planning	Setting goal to reach a principled/just decision	Orients the reasoning process towards post-conventional ideals rather than conventional compliance or self-interest.	15
Planning	Selecting strategies for perspective-taking & evaluation	Ensures deliberate consideration of multiple viewpoints and systematic analysis of arguments.	10
Monitoring	Checking consistency between judgment and principles	Ensures coherence and integrity of principled reasoning; avoids contradictions.	15
Monitoring	Evaluating the quality/sufficiency of moral justifications	Moves beyond assertion to reasoned defense of moral stance based on principles and evidence.	15
Monitoring	Identifying flaws, biases, or gaps in own reasoning	Prompts self-correction and deeper reflection, refining the moral judgment.	15
Control / Debugging	Inhibiting impulsive emotional or conventional responses	Allows deliberate, rational (System 2) processing needed for applying abstract principles over intuitive (System 1) reactions.	49
Control / Debugging	Flexibly shifting between multiple perspectives	Enables the complex coordination of viewpoints required for social contract (Stage 5) and universal (Stage 6) reasoning.	10
Control / Debugging	Adjusting reasoning strategies if initial approach is inadequate	Facilitates overcoming obstacles in complex moral deliberation and finding more adequate principled solutions.	21
Evaluation	Reflecting on the moral reasoning process after completion	Refines metacognitive knowledge about effective moral deliberation and improves future moral problem-solving.	15

5. Empirical Investigations of the Link

While the theoretical connections between metacognition and post-conventional moral reasoning are compelling, empirical validation requires examining research that attempts to measure both constructs and their relationship.

5.1. Research Using Standardized Measures

A direct examination of studies correlating scores from the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) with scores from the Defining Issues Test (DIT) reveals a scarcity of such specific investigations within the reviewed literature.41 This lack of direct correlational data between these two widely used instruments represents a notable gap in the empirical landscape. However, substantial indirect evidence emerges from studies linking moral reasoning scores (often DIT P-scores) to constructs closely related to metacognition:

• Epistemic Beliefs: Research consistently demonstrates a relationship between individuals' beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing (a key facet of metacognitive knowledge) and their level of moral reasoning. Studies have found that specific epistemic dimensions, such as beliefs about the certainty of knowledge and the role of authority in knowledge (omniscient authority), significantly predict moral reasoning scores, explaining unique variance even after accounting for factors like age, education, and general reasoning skills.36 For instance, individuals who view knowledge as less certain and are less reliant on authority tend to exhibit higher levels of principled moral reasoning.36 This suggests that how individuals think about knowledge fundamentally shapes how they approach moral justification.

• Reflective Judgment: The Reflective Judgment Model (RJM), which assesses how individuals justify their beliefs when faced with ill-structured problems, shows strong parallels with moral reasoning development.29 Research using the Reflective Judgment Interview (RJI) or related measures demonstrates a developmental progression in reflective judgment capabilities that correlates with age and educational level, mirroring findings in moral reasoning research.42 Studies have linked higher stages of reflective judgment (characterized by evaluating evidence, considering context, and acknowledging uncertainty) to more sophisticated patterns in written argumentation and reasoning about complex issues 61, capabilities closely aligned with the demands of post-conventional moral deliberation. One study explicitly attempted to synthesize Kohlberg's theory and the RJM, finding empirical support for a relationship but also domain-specific variations in reflective moral judgment.62

• Cognitive Reflection: Measures like the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) assess an individual's tendency to override initial, intuitive responses with more deliberate, reflective thought – a process central to metacognitive regulation.49 Studies have found that higher performance on the CRT correlates with a greater tendency towards utilitarian judgments in sacrificial moral dilemmas.49 While utilitarianism is not synonymous with post-conventional reasoning, this link suggests that the disposition towards cognitive reflection, a key aspect of metacognitive control, is associated with the kind of deliberate cost-benefit analysis often involved in moving beyond simple deontological rules, which can be characteristic of higher-stage reasoning.

5.2. Neurocognitive Evidence

Neuroimaging studies provide another layer of evidence, suggesting distinct neural correlates associated with different levels of moral reasoning. Research has found that individuals classified as post-conventional reasoners (based on DIT scores) exhibit increased resting-state cerebral blood flow and greater task-induced activation in brain regions associated with reward processing and subjective value, specifically the ventral striatum and ventromedial prefrontal cortex, compared to individuals at pre-conventional or conventional levels.6 These differences were observed both during rest and during unrelated decision-making tasks, suggesting a stable difference in frontostriatal system activity.6 While correlational, these findings hint that engaging in principled moral thought might be associated with different patterns of neural valuation or motivation for those at higher developmental levels. Additionally, research involving clinical populations, such as individuals with schizophrenia, highlights the importance of metacognition (defined as thinking about one's own thoughts, related to Theory of Mind) for accurate moral judgment, suggesting that deficits in metacognitive function can impair the ability to make appropriate moral inferences.63

5.3. Synthesis of Empirical Findings

Although direct evidence correlating broad metacognitive awareness (via MAI) with post-conventional reasoning (via DIT) is limited in the reviewed sources, the collective empirical findings provide strong indirect support for a significant relationship. Converging lines of research consistently link crucial components or close correlates of metacognition—including sophisticated epistemic beliefs, advanced reflective judgment capabilities, and the tendency towards cognitive reflection—with higher levels of moral reasoning. The observed correlations between epistemic beliefs and DIT scores 36, the developmental parallels and conceptual links between reflective judgment and post-conventional thought 42, and the association between cognitive reflection and utilitarian-leaning judgments 49 all point towards the integral role of metacognitive functions in advanced moral development. Neurocognitive studies further bolster this connection by identifying distinct brain activity patterns associated with post-conventional reasoning, potentially related to valuation and motivation.6

The relative absence of direct MAI-DIT correlation studies within the provided materials presents an interesting observation. It might reflect methodological choices by researchers who prefer to investigate more specific cognitive links, such as the relationship between epistemic beliefs (a subset of metacognitive knowledge) and moral reasoning, rather than using a broader measure of general metacognitive awareness. It could also point to the inherent difficulties in measuring these complex, internal constructs and establishing clear causal links. Researchers might prioritize examining the epistemic foundations of moral justification or the capacity for reflective judgment as being more theoretically proximal to the processes described by Kohlberg than general metacognitive awareness. Nonetheless, the consistent findings across related constructs strongly suggest that metacognitive abilities are deeply implicated in the capacity for post-conventional moral thought.

The neurocognitive findings linking post-conventional reasoning to heightened activity in brain reward circuits 6 offer a particularly intriguing perspective. This correlation suggests that for individuals who attain these higher stages, the very act of engaging in abstract, principled moral deliberation might be intrinsically rewarding or carry greater subjective value at a neural level. This could provide a motivational underpinning, helping to explain why individuals persist in the effortful cognitive work required for post-conventional reasoning, potentially reinforcing this mode of thought beyond purely rational considerations. It hints that achieving principled morality might involve not just cognitive restructuring but also a shift in what the brain finds valuable and motivating.

6. Interplay with Related Cognitive Capacities

The development and exercise of post-conventional moral reasoning do not occur in cognitive isolation. They are intricately interwoven with other advanced cognitive capacities, including reflective judgment, epistemic cognition, perspective-taking, and critical thinking. Metacognition appears to play a central role in orchestrating the interplay among these abilities.

6.1. Reflective Judgment (King & Kitchener)

The Reflective Judgment Model (RJM), developed by Patricia King and Karen Strohm Kitchener, describes a seven-stage progression in how individuals understand the nature of knowledge and justify their beliefs, particularly when dealing with complex, ill-structured problems (problems without clear-cut solutions).42 Development moves from pre-reflective stages (1-3), where knowledge is seen as certain and obtained from authorities; through quasi-reflective stages (4-5), where uncertainty is acknowledged but justification remains difficult or idiosyncratic; to reflective stages (6-7), where knowledge is understood as constructed, contextual, and justified through critical inquiry, evaluation of evidence, and comparison of different perspectives.42

The parallels between reflective judgment and post-conventional moral reasoning are striking. Both involve moving beyond simplistic, absolutist thinking (akin to pre-reflective judgment and pre-conventional/conventional morality) towards reasoning that acknowledges complexity, evaluates competing claims, and constructs justifications based on evidence and principles rather than deference to authority or rules.29 Making reasoned judgments about controversial moral dilemmas (a type of ill-structured problem) requires the epistemic footing provided by reflective thinking stages.42 Empirical studies confirm that reflective judgment develops with age and education, similar to Kohlberg's moral stages, and that higher RJI scores are associated with more complex reasoning patterns.42 Reflective judgment can be seen as providing the epistemological framework necessary to support the justification processes inherent in Stages 5 and 6 moral reasoning.

6.2. Epistemic Cognition

Closely related to reflective judgment, epistemic cognition refers specifically to individuals' beliefs about the nature of knowledge (e.g., its certainty, simplicity) and the nature of knowing (e.g., its source, justification).41 As discussed previously, sophisticated epistemic beliefs are crucial facilitators of post-conventional morality. Individuals who view knowledge as complex, tentative, constructed through reasoning, and justified by evidence are better equipped to engage in the critical evaluation of norms and the construction of principled arguments required at Stages 5 and 6.43 Conversely, naïve epistemic beliefs—seeing knowledge as simple, certain, and handed down by authorities—align more closely with the cognitive styles of pre-conventional and conventional moral reasoning, where rules are often accepted without critical examination.29 Research explicitly links epistemic beliefs to moral reasoning scores 36 and explores 'metaethical cognition' as the specific application of epistemic reasoning to the moral domain, suggesting its development is analogous to epistemic development concerning factual knowledge.43

6.3. Advanced Perspective-Taking

Kohlberg himself emphasized the centrality of perspective-taking in moral development, with each level representing an expansion of the social perspectives considered.5 Pre-conventional reasoning is largely egocentric, while conventional reasoning incorporates interpersonal and societal perspectives.10 Post-conventional reasoning demands even more advanced perspective-taking abilities. Stage 5 requires understanding the concept of a social contract from a societal viewpoint, recognizing the need for laws that coordinate diverse individual interests for the common good.5 Stage 6 necessitates adopting a "universal" perspective, attempting to consider the standpoint and rights of every individual potentially affected by a moral decision, guided by abstract principles of justice and equality.5 This capacity to transcend one's own position and even societal norms to consider abstract, universal implications is a defining feature. Research supports the correlation between perspective-taking abilities and moral stage development, as well as links to related capacities like empathy and prosocial behavior.10

6.4. Critical Thinking

Critical thinking involves a set of cognitive skills and dispositions, including analyzing arguments, identifying assumptions, evaluating evidence, drawing warranted conclusions, explaining reasoning, and engaging in self-regulation and correction.13 There is significant conceptual overlap between critical thinking, metacognition (especially regulation and evaluation), and the reasoning processes required for post-conventional morality. The ability to critically analyze societal norms, evaluate the justification for different moral claims, weigh competing principles, identify logical inconsistencies, and construct well-reasoned ethical arguments are all facets of critical thinking that are indispensable for Stages 5 and 6 reasoning.13 Educational approaches aimed at fostering moral reasoning often explicitly incorporate critical thinking skills development.50

6.5. Synergies and Convergence

These cognitive capacities—reflective judgment, epistemic cognition, perspective-taking, and critical thinking—are not independent faculties but rather interact dynamically, mutually supporting and enabling each other, with metacognition often serving as an overarching regulatory function. For example, making reflective judgments about a complex moral issue requires sophisticated epistemic assumptions about knowledge, the ability to take multiple perspectives on the issue, and critical thinking skills to evaluate evidence and arguments, all while metacognitively monitoring and regulating the judgment process itself. Post-conventional moral reasoning, therefore, likely emerges not from the maturation of a single capacity, but from the synergistic development and integration of this suite of advanced cognitive abilities. Metacognition provides the self-awareness and control needed to deploy these other capacities effectively in the challenging domain of moral deliberation.

The Reflective Judgment Model appears particularly significant in this constellation, acting as a conceptual bridge connecting broader cognitive and epistemic development with the specific demands of post-conventional moral reasoning.42 By focusing explicitly on how individuals justify their beliefs when faced with uncertainty and conflicting information—the very nature of many complex moral dilemmas—the RJM details the cognitive journey from reliance on external authority or subjective opinion towards reasoned, evidence-based, principled conclusions.29 This progression directly maps onto the cognitive shifts required to move beyond conventional rule-following towards the autonomous, justified, principle-based reasoning of Stages 5 and 6.

Furthermore, the role of epistemic cognition can be understood as acting as a kind of 'gatekeeper' for entry into post-conventional thought. If an individual holds naïve epistemic beliefs—that knowledge is simple, certain, and derived unquestioningly from authority—they lack the fundamental conceptual framework needed to even entertain the possibility that societal rules might be flawed or that personally constructed ethical principles are necessary.29 The acceptance of complexity, uncertainty, and the need for reasoned justification in the realm of knowledge (including moral knowledge) seems to be a crucial prerequisite for questioning conventional morality and embarking on the construction of a post-conventional ethical framework. Without this epistemic shift, individuals are likely to remain anchored in conventional modes of thought.

7. Developmental Considerations

Understanding the relationship between metacognition and post-conventional morality also requires considering their developmental trajectories and potential interdependence over time.

7.1. The Maturation Timeline

General cognitive development provides the foundation. Both advanced metacognition and post-conventional moral reasoning require the capacity for abstract, hypothetical thought, which typically emerges during adolescence with the onset of Piaget's formal operational stage.3 Metacognitive skills themselves show a developmental progression, generally improving throughout childhood and adolescence, with some evidence suggesting a plateau in early adulthood followed by potential decline later in life.39 Post-conventional moral reasoning, if it develops at all, typically emerges later, often during late adolescence or adulthood.3 Its development is frequently associated with experiences that challenge existing worldviews, such as higher education, exposure to diverse perspectives, and grappling with complex societal issues.29

7.2. The Prerequisite Hypothesis

Given the cognitive demands of post-conventional reasoning, a key question is whether certain levels of metacognitive development function as necessary prerequisites. Kohlberg himself linked the attainment of formal operational thought to the possibility of post-conventional reasoning 29, suggesting a cognitive prerequisite. Extending this logic, it seems plausible that developed metacognitive capabilities – including sophisticated epistemic beliefs, reflective judgment skills, and effective regulatory functions – must be in place before an individual can successfully construct and utilize Stage 5 or Stage 6 moral frameworks.8 The ability to think abstractly about principles, critically evaluate societal norms, coordinate complex perspectives, and consciously monitor and justify one's own moral reasoning process appears fundamentally dependent on these underlying metacognitive skills.19 From this perspective, metacognition provides the necessary cognitive tools and reflective capacity required for the challenging work of post-conventional moral construction.

However, a strict prerequisite model might be too simplistic. An alternative or complementary view suggests co-development, where metacognitive skills and moral reasoning advance in tandem, mutually influencing each other.2 Engaging with complex moral dilemmas and participating in discussions that require justification and perspective-taking could actively stimulate the development and refinement of metacognitive skills.2 Moral development might serve as a particularly potent context for honing abilities like monitoring one's biases, evaluating justifications, and regulating thought processes.

7.3. Co-occurrence and Interaction

The most likely scenario involves a dynamic interplay between metacognitive development and moral reasoning growth. Exposure to experiences that create cognitive disequilibrium regarding moral issues—such as encountering diverse viewpoints in higher education or grappling with real-world ethical conflicts—can trigger advancements in both domains.2 Educational interventions designed to foster moral reasoning often rely on methods like dilemma discussions, role-playing, and reflective writing, which implicitly or explicitly engage and potentially enhance students' metacognitive skills (e.g., monitoring their reasoning, evaluating arguments, considering alternatives).35 Thus, progress in one area likely facilitates progress in the other through a reciprocal process.

The consistent finding that higher education is associated with gains in both moral reasoning (towards post-conventional levels) and related cognitive capacities like reflective judgment and epistemic sophistication lends strong support to this interactive view.35 College environments often present students with ill-structured problems, diverse perspectives, and demands for reasoned justification—conditions known to stimulate cognitive development along multiple fronts.42 This suggests that such environments act as powerful catalysts, simultaneously fostering the advanced moral reasoning and the complex metacognitive/reflective infrastructure needed to support it. The challenging intellectual climate may push students to develop both the what (more principled moral content) and the how (more reflective and regulated thinking processes) of advanced reasoning.

Despite the apparent necessity of advanced cognitive and metacognitive capacities for post-conventional reasoning 8, these abilities are clearly not sufficient on their own. As noted earlier, post-conventional reasoning remains relatively uncommon even among adults who possess formal operational thought and presumably functional metacognitive skills.3 This crucial observation implies that possessing the requisite cognitive toolkit is merely a starting point. Other factors must also be present to translate this cognitive potential into the actual practice of post-conventional moral reasoning. These might include specific types of life experiences that foster empathy and social concern, personality traits like openness to experience and intellectual humility, strong motivational factors driving a commitment to justice, or immersion in specific social and educational environments that actively cultivate principled thought and critical reflection. Moral development is thus a complex phenomenon shaped by more than just cognitive maturation.

8. Conclusion: Synthesizing the Relationship

8.1. Characterizing the Nature and Strength of the Link

The relationship between developed metacognitive capabilities and the attainment of post-conventional moral reasoning appears to be strong, intricate, and fundamentally synergistic. Theoretical analysis strongly suggests that the complex cognitive operations inherent in Kohlberg's Stages 5 and 6—abstract reasoning, critical evaluation of norms, advanced perspective-taking, and principled justification—are heavily reliant on metacognitive functions. Metacognitive knowledge (including sophisticated epistemic beliefs and awareness of biases) provides the conceptual foundation, while metacognitive regulation (planning, monitoring, control, evaluation) provides the executive management necessary to navigate complex moral deliberation effectively.

Empirical evidence, while lacking direct correlations between the most common measures (MAI and DIT) in the reviewed literature, provides robust indirect support. Consistent correlations between moral reasoning scores and related constructs such as epistemic beliefs, reflective judgment, and cognitive reflection strongly indicate that individuals who think more reflectively and hold more sophisticated views about knowledge are more likely to engage in post-conventional moral reasoning. Neurocognitive findings further suggest distinct brain activity patterns associated with higher moral reasoning stages, potentially linked to valuation and motivation. Taken together, the evidence points towards developed metacognition being a crucial enabler, and likely a necessary prerequisite, for post-conventional moral thought, although clearly not a sufficient condition on its own. Future research directly correlating comprehensive measures of metacognitive awareness with principled moral reasoning scores across diverse populations would be valuable to further solidify and nuance this understanding.

8.2. The Metacognitively Adept Moral Reasoner

An individual operating at the post-conventional level can be envisioned not merely as someone committed to abstract ethical principles, but as a metacognitively adept moral reasoner. Their moral compass is guided by principles like justice, rights, and universal dignity, but its effective navigation relies on a high degree of self-awareness regarding their own thinking processes.19 Such individuals likely monitor their reasoning for internal consistency and potential biases, critically evaluate the justifications for their own and others' moral stances, flexibly shift perspectives to achieve a comprehensive understanding, and consciously regulate their thought processes to ensure alignment with their core ethical commitments. They engage in reflective practice, consciously analyzing their decision-making to learn and improve.59 Their moral autonomy is grounded not just in conviction, but also in a reflective understanding of how they arrive at their moral judgments.

8.3. Implications for Fostering Advanced Moral Development

The strong link between metacognition and advanced moral reasoning has significant implications for education and developmental interventions. Efforts aimed at promoting post-conventional morality may be more effective if they explicitly incorporate strategies designed to enhance metacognitive awareness and skills alongside moral content. Potential approaches include:

• Explicit Metacognitive Instruction: Teaching students specific strategies for planning their approach to moral dilemmas, monitoring their reasoning processes for biases and consistency, evaluating the quality of justifications, and reflecting on their decision-making outcomes.

• Fostering Epistemic Reflection: Engaging students in discussions about the nature of moral knowledge, the challenges of moral justification, the role of different ethical perspectives, and the limits of certainty in moral matters.43

• Encouraging Reflective Practice: Incorporating activities that require students to consciously reflect on and analyze their own moral reasoning processes, such as journaling, structured debriefing after dilemma discussions, or analyzing case studies with a focus on the decision-making pathway.59

• Utilizing Cognitive Conflict: Employing pedagogical techniques like moral dilemma discussions that expose students to reasoning slightly above their own current level, creating cognitive dissonance that stimulates both moral growth and the metacognitive effort needed to resolve the conflict.13

• Creating Challenging Environments: Designing learning experiences that present students with complex, ill-structured problems requiring critical thinking, perspective-taking, and reasoned justification, thereby fostering the cognitive capacities underpinning both metacognition and post-conventional morality.42

8.4. Future Directions

While this report synthesizes current understanding based on the available evidence, several avenues for future research remain pertinent. Longitudinal studies that track the development of both metacognitive skills (using measures like the MAI) and moral reasoning (using measures like the DIT) concurrently from adolescence through adulthood would provide valuable data on the precise developmental sequencing and interplay. Further investigation is needed to directly correlate broad metacognitive awareness with post-conventional reasoning scores, potentially exploring which specific facets of metacognition (e.g., monitoring vs. conditional knowledge) are most predictive. Exploring these relationships within diverse cultural contexts is also crucial to assess the universality of the findings and the potential influence of cultural variations in both metacognitive development and moral values. Finally, examining the role of metacognition in relation to alternative moral frameworks, such as Carol Gilligan's ethics of care, could offer a more comprehensive picture of how reflective capacities contribute to different forms of mature moral functioning. Continued exploration of the intricate dance between how we think and how we think about thinking is essential for a deeper understanding of the development of a principled moral compass.

Works cited

1. What Is Moral Development? Exploring Kohlberg's 6 Stages - Positive Psychology, accessed April 29, 2025, https://positivepsychology.com/moral-development/

2. PowerPoint Presentation - Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.nwosu.edu/uploads/academics/social-sciences/bjcc/cbrp-training/moral-dev-1.pdf

3. Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development | Lifespan Development - Lumen Learning, accessed April 29, 2025, https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-lifespandevelopment/chapter/kohlbergs-stages-of-moral-development/

4. Kohlberg's Moral Development Stages | Level 1 - Structural Learning, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.structural-learning.com/post/kohlbergs-moral-development-stages

5. Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development | Definition ..., accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/science/Lawrence-Kohlbergs-stages-of-moral-development

6. Post-conventional moral reasoning is associated with increased ventral striatal activity at rest and during task - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed April 29, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5541100/

7. (PDF) Post-Conventional Moral Reasoning is Associated With Increased Ventral Striatal Activity at Rest and During Task - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318862486_Post-Conventional_Moral_Reasoning_is_Associated_With_Increased_Ventral_Striatal_Activity_at_Rest_and_During_Task

8. Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development - Wikipedia, accessed April 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Kohlberg%27s_stages_of_moral_development

9. Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development - Verywell Mind, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.verywellmind.com/kohlbergs-theory-of-moral-development-2795071

10. Reasoning about Ethics and Morality in the School Classroom: A Grounded Theory Case Study with a modified Kohlbergian Theoretica - PhilArchive, accessed April 29, 2025, https://philarchive.org/archive/NEWRAE

11. The Investigation and Criticism Moral Development Ideas of Kohlberg, Piaget and Gilligan, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366473635_The_Investigation_and_Criticism_Moral_Development_Ideas_of_Kohlberg_Piaget_and_Gilligan

12. To kill or not to kill: A systematic literature review of high-stakes moral decision-making measures and their psychometric properties, accessed April 29, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9869153/

13. Lawrence Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development and Theory - Early Years TV, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.earlyyears.tv/lawrence-kohlbergs-stages-of-moral-development-and-theory/

14. Lawrence Kohlberg- moral development | PPT - SlideShare, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/kohlberg-43206927/43206927

15. Metacognitive Awareness Inventory, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.rcsj.edu/Tutoring-site/Gloucester-site/Documents/Metacognitive%20Awareness%20Inventory.pdf

16. Validation of the Shortened Version of the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory in Spanish University Students - Psicothema, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.psicothema.com/pdf/4766.pdf

17. The Correlation Between Metacognitive Awareness Level and Self-Directed Learning Readiness of Undergraduate Nursingand Midwifery - ERIC, accessed April 29, 2025, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1208411.pdf

18. Applying Multiple, Triangulated, and Mixed-Methods Approaches for an Encompassing Measure of Metacognitive Awareness - ERIC, accessed April 29, 2025, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1224158.pdf

19. (PDF) A 'Chance' Study in Moral Reasoning and Moral Development - A Case for Self-Awareness - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228237741_A_'Chance'_Study_in_Moral_Reasoning_and_Moral_Development_-_A_Case_for_Self-Awareness

20. Metacognitive Awareness and Its Relation to Students' Academic Achievement - Education in Medicine Journal, accessed April 29, 2025, https://eduimed.usm.my/EIMJ20231504/EIMJ20231504_04.pdf

21. VALIDITY OF METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS INVENTORY AS A MEASURING TOOL FOR METACOGNITIVE ABILITY IN MATHEMATICS PROBLEM SOLVING - Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, accessed April 29, 2025, https://ojs.journalsdg.org/jlss/article/download/2246/1431/11882

22. Reliability and Validity of a State Metacognitive Inventory: Potential for Alternative Assessment - CRESST, accessed April 29, 2025, https://cresst.org/wp-content/uploads/TECH469.pdf

23. Evaluating the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory using empirical factor-structure evidence, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318669525_Evaluating_the_Metacognitive_Awareness_Inventory_using_empirical_factor-structure_evidence

24. Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development - Simply Psychology, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.simplypsychology.org/kohlberg.html

25. m6 ch 13 Flashcards - Quizlet, accessed April 29, 2025, https://quizlet.com/587343970/m6-ch-13-flash-cards/

26. Kohlberg's 6 Stages of Moral Development - Sprouts - Learning Videos - Social Sciences, accessed April 29, 2025, https://sproutsschools.com/kohlbergs-6-stages-of-moral-development/

27. Understanding Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development | SWTP - Social Work Test Prep, accessed April 29, 2025, https://socialworktestprep.com/blog/2023/august/03/understanding-kohlberg-s-stages-of-moral-development/

28. (PDF) What levels of moral reasoning and values explain adherence to information security rules? An empirical study - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/31986600_What_levels_of_moral_reasoning_and_values_explain_adherence_to_information_security_rules_An_empirical_study

29. Developmental Perspectives On Writing and Intellectual Growth in College, accessed April 29, 2025, https://quod.lib.umich.edu/t/tia/17063888.0003.021/--developmental-perspectives-on-writing-and-intellectual?rgn=main;view=fulltext

30. Moral development textbook Flashcards | Quizlet, accessed April 29, 2025, https://quizlet.com/ca/88125875/moral-development-textbook-flash-cards/

31. Defining Issues Test - Wikipedia, accessed April 29, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defining_Issues_Test

32. Do Moral Judgment and Reasoning Capability of LLMs Change with Language? A Study using the Multilingual Defining Issues Test - ACL Anthology, accessed April 29, 2025, https://aclanthology.org/2024.eacl-long.176.pdf

33. Measuring Moral Judgments from a Neo- Kohlbergian Perspective. Steve Thoma School of Education University of Birmingham Edgbasto, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.jubileecentre.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/thoma-steve.pdf

34. Moral judgement among university students in Ica: A view from the perspective of Lawrence Kohlberg - PMC, accessed April 29, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10186059/

35. Assessment of Moral Development Among Undergraduate Pharmacy Students and Alumni, accessed April 29, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10159402/

36. A CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EPISTEMOLOGICAL BELIEFS AND MORAL JUDGMENT AS A PSYCHOLOGICAL FOUNDATION FOR - GETD, accessed April 29, 2025, https://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/jeong_changwoo_200305_phd.pdf

37. Religion: Helping or Hindering Moral Development - Scholars Journal Publishing House, accessed April 29, 2025, https://scholarsjournal.net/index.php/ijier/article/download/1126/803

38. Stage, Sequence, and Sequels: Changing Conceptions of Morality, Post-Kohlberg, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226754982_Stage_Sequence_and_Sequels_Changing_Conceptions_of_Morality_Post-Kohlberg

39. Metacognitive awareness and the link with undergraduate examination performance and clinical reasoning. - MedEdPublish, accessed April 29, 2025, https://mededpublish.org/articles/7-100

40. Measuring metacognition in children and adolescents – rapid review - Department for Education | South Australia, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.education.sa.gov.au/docs/system-performance/fraser-mustard-centre/measuring-metacognition-in-children-and-adolescents-rapid-review.pdf

41. Successful Learning with Hypermedia: The Role of Epistemological Beliefs and Metacognitive Awareness - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250144834_Successful_Learning_with_Hypermedia_The_Role_of_Epistemological_Beliefs_and_Metacognitive_Awareness

42. Reflective Judgment: Theory and Research on the Development of Epistemic Assumptions Through Adulthood - University of Iowa Pressbooks, accessed April 29, 2025, https://pressbooks.uiowa.edu/app/uploads/sites/215/2021/06/KingKitchener-Reflective-Judgement.pdf

43. Metaethical cognition and epistemic reasoning development in adolescence, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247779823_Metaethical_cognition_and_epistemic_reasoning_development_in_adolescence

44. Epistemic Beliefs and Moral Reasoning - Taylor & Francis Online, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00223989809599158

45. Understanding relationships between epistemic cognition and executive functioning: Implications for measurement and practice - QUT ePrints, accessed April 29, 2025, https://eprints.qut.edu.au/228549/1/Epistemic_cognition_AJEC_accepted.pdf

46. Metaethical cognition and epistemic reasoning development in adolescence, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01650250444000180

47. Promoting social inclusion in the early years of elementary school: A focus on children's epistemic beliefs for moral reasoning | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306375065_Promoting_social_inclusion_in_the_early_years_of_elementary_school_A_focus_on_children's_epistemic_beliefs_for_moral_reasoning

48. Moral Development | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed April 29, 2025, https://iep.utm.edu/moraldev/

49. Reflection and Reasoning in Moral Judgment - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51767356_Reflection_and_Reasoning_in_Moral_Judgment

50. A Systematic Review between Kohlberg's and Gilligan's Theories of Moral Development - journal. Innovations, accessed April 29, 2025, https://journal-innovations.com/assets/uploads/doc/a07f2-738-743.11199.pdf

51. Cognitive Reflection and Moral Reasoning, accessed April 29, 2025, https://ac-psych.org/en/download-pdf/volume/18/issue/2/id/361

52. Navigating Right and Wrong: The Path of Moral Development in Children, accessed April 29, 2025, https://teachers.institute/childhood-growing-up/moral-development-children/

53. Means, standard deviations, maximum and minimum scores of pre and post sub- dimensions of metacognitive awareness inventory - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Means-standard-deviations-maximum-and-minimum-scores-of-pre-and-post-sub-dimensions-of_tbl2_288801955

54. t-test pearson correlation: Topics by Science.gov, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.science.gov/topicpages/t/t-test+pearson+correlation

55. making students aware: Topics by Science.gov, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.science.gov/topicpages/m/making+students+aware

56. ERIC - Search Results - Department of Education, accessed April 29, 2025, https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Cognition&ff1=subUndergraduate+Students

57. ERIC - Search Results - Department of Education, accessed April 29, 2025, https://eric.ed.gov/?q=source%3A%22European+Journal+of+Educational+Research%22&ff1=souEuropean+Journal+of+Educational+Research&ff2=subCorrelation

58. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, accessed April 29, 2025, https://iojes.net/sayi/c670fae7-a62f-4e0a-b375-5189caf28e6e.pdf

59. REFLECTIVE PRACTICE IN LEGAL EDUCATION: THE STAGES OF REFLECTION - NYU Law, accessed April 29, 2025, http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/Timothy%20Casey%20-%20Stages%20of%20Reflection.pdf

60. Reflective Judgment: Theory and Research on the Development of Epistemic Assumptions Through Adulthood - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247522681_Reflective_Judgment_Theory_and_Research_on_the_Development_of_Epistemic_Assumptions_Through_Adulthood

61. PERSUASIVE DEVELOPMENTS: REFLECTIVE JUDGMENT AND COLLEGE STUDENTS' WRITTEN ARGUMENTATION - NC State Repository, accessed April 29, 2025, https://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/bitstreams/1d5bc76b-ff3c-49f4-bcd9-9a29e346971b/download

62. Kohlberg and Freud: A Reconstruction of Emergent Moralities - ResearchGate, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247743485_Kohlberg_and_Freud_A_Reconstruction_of_Emergent_Moralities

63. Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine, accessed April 29, 2025, https://advances.umw.edu.pl/en/article/2024/33/12/1357/

64. Toward Epistemological Development Across the Curriculum: The Effect of Embedded Epistemic Instruction - Project MUSE, accessed April 29, 2025, https://muse.jhu.edu/article/919351

65. Research Bank Children's epistemic reasoning about social inclusion of aggressive peers in a culturally diverse school Scholes,, accessed April 29, 2025, https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/download/b95761e0c2e14645fd8ba10931d4b5d3b0e0f415fb0b8d8ba57e965d3c38b636/355745/AM_Scholes_2022_Childrens_epistemic_reasoning_about_social_inclusion.pdf

66. The effect of argumentation-based activities on the development of moral reasoning, accessed April 29, 2025, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00220671.2025.2492271?src=exp-la