305 STUDIES IN PHYSICAL CULTURE AND TOURISM Vol. 18, No. 4, 2011 MILTIADIS PROIOS 1 , IOANNIS ATHANAILIDIS 2 , KAROLINA WILIŃSKA 3 , ARVANITIDOU VASILIA 2 , PIOTR UNIERZYSKI 3 1 Department of Physical Education and Sport Science Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece 2 Department of Physical Education and Sport Science Democritus University of Thrace, Greece 3 University School of Physical Education, Poznan, Poland MORAL DEVELOPMENT AND GENDER DIFFERENCES IN SPORT Key words: moral reasoning, gender, sport. ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to investigate differences in moral reasoning between the two genders. The research sought to examine the development of moral reasoning according to the age, education level, training experience, sport type and the form of participation in sport for men and women separately. The participants were 441 persons (n = 315 men and n = 126 women), aged 14 to 33 years (M = 21.52, SD = 4.74), who were asked to fill the Defining Issues Test [58]. The results indicated that the differences between the genders in moral reasoning were not significant. Moreover, the results supported the mediatory role of age in moral development of both men and women, as well as in the effect of athletic experiences and the women’s moral development. Deductively, the present study failed to support Gilligan’s points of view on moral development concerning gender. INTRODUCTION Moral development has been studied diachronically through various models. The current dominating model is Kohlberg’s structural- developmental model [68], according to which, theoretical attention is concentrated on age-related shifts in moral reasoning [43]. However, Kohlberg’s theory was criticized for not dealing with the way morality can be perceived by women [30]. Carol Gilligan [30] claims that Kohlbergian hypothetical dilemmas which frame moral problems in terms of competing rights force some people to resolve hypothetical dilemmas in ways foreign to their natural modes of thinking; secondly, she also thinks that Kohlberg’s method of coding these dilemmas does not sufficiently recognize the adequacy or maturity of these alternate modes; and third that women and girls are more likely than men and boys to utilize these alternate modes of thinking. Gilligan [30] in her interpretation of gender differences responsible for the development of a separate socio-cognitive model of development in women, borrowed evidence from Chodorow’s neo- Freudian theory. According to Chodorow [19], the main effect of identity development and adoption of respective roles between the genders should be sought in the kind of experience acquired by a person through his or her relationship with his or her mother and not by working out interpersonal conflicts, as the orthodox Freudian theory claims [6]. Gilligan [30] asserts that moral reasoning in women tends to reflect care orientation (e.g., orientation reflecting an ideal of attachment, loving and being loved, listening and being listened to, and Correspondence should be addressed to: Miltiadis Proios, Iatrou Zanna 17, 54643 Thessaloniki, Greece; e-mail: mproios@phed.auth.gr