[1][2] Empirical studies show that reasoning and emotion only moderately predicted moral action.
[6] Colby and Damon studied moral identity through the narratives of civil rights activist Virginia Foster Durr and Suzie Valadez, who provided services for the poor, whose behavior, actions, and life's works were considered to be morally exemplary by their communities and those with whom they came in contact.
In many of the moral exemplars interviewed, the triggering events and goal transformation did not take place until their 40s.
[9] Furthermore, exemplars possess the ability to be open to new ideas and experiences, also known as an "active receptiveness"[10] to things exterior to themselves.
The findings suggested that adolescent care exemplars formulated their self-concept differently from comparable peers in several notable ways.
Additionally, they were also more likely to emphasize academic goals and moral typical activities compared with their comparison adolescents.
In a semantic space analysis relating to self-concept, care exemplars were more likely to view their past, present, and future selves in a more continuous manner.
[11] David Wong proposes that we think of cultures in an analogy to a conversation, there are people with different beliefs, values, and norms that can voice their opinion loudly or quietly, but over the course of time these factors can change.
In essence the notion of Wong's theory is that in order to define our true morality it ultimately comes down to acceptance and being able to accommodate within and between cultures around the world.
[13] Darcia Narvaez describes the neurobiological and social elements of early experience and their effects on moral capacities.
[18][19] In fact, children as young as 5 years-old are able to consistently identify themselves as having certain moral behavioral preferences.