No Morality without Autonomy by Brigitte Latzko

No Morality without Autonomy: The Role of Emotional Autonomy in Moral Development

by Brigitte Latzko 

In this study, Latzko discusses the role of emotional autonomy in moral development by trying to conceptualize the relationship between autonomy and authority.

With the use of theoretical frameworks like Kohlberg’s, Turiel’s and Piaget’s, she introduces us to the development of a theoretical definition of emotional autonomy by analyzing patterns that indicate a process of internalization in adolescents.

Latzko defines the development towards the period of autonomous moral judgment as a process where we restructure our relationships with our surrounding social systems (e.g. friends, family, society, etc.).

Her study suggests that emotional autonomy can be considered as a quality of emotions that reflects the general stage of autonomy development, experienced by adolescents. In order to describe this quality of emotion, she uses a two-component model where cognitive and affective elements are combined. 

Latzko’s study was examined at an empirical level in the form of interviews. These interviews tried to address whether adolescents could be classified as either “emotionally autonomous” or “less emotionally autonomous.” The study was conducted in Germany with 16 participants between the ages of 14 and 17 from working and middle class backgrounds.  

The data analysis of her study focused whether the empirical data collected conformed with the theoretical frameworks. In order to classify participants as “emotionally autonomous” or “less emotionally autonomous” she used the following indicators:

•  The way adolescents handled external authority
•  The patterns of arguments emphasizing their personal convictions
• The positive or negative emotions shown by participants

As a result of the study, Latzko found congruence between the cognitive and affective appraisals. Half of the participants were categorized as “emotionally autonomous” and the other half as “less emotionally autonomous.” The study showed no effect of sex or social class of the adolescents on the classification of their emotional autonomy. 

One interesting fact is that Latzko only used students in grammar schools and secondary modern schools. She did not include participants from any “Gesamtschule” (all inclusive German schools). 

In her findings, Latzko suggests that as emotional autonomy increases it can be assumed that cognition and emotion are progressively unified. Even though I agree with her assumption, I found the article lacks depth in explaining some of the study’s findings and arguments. Latzko has interesting points in her discussion section but does not necessarily address the results in a detailed manner. I would have liked for her to explain in greater depth the influence that emotional and moral autonomy have on each other.

The author also suggests that parent’s and teacher’s autonomy support contributes to moral development and vice versa. She also concludes that emotional autonomy should be given a central position within the formation of moral identity.

My question for this study would be, as educators, should we have a personal responsibility for this identity development and achievement? If so, how can we contribute to this realization?