Relationships Among Moral Reasoning, Empathy, and Distorted Cognitions in Men With Intellectual Disabilities and a History of Criminal Offending Peter E. Langdon University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom, and Hertfordshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, St Albans, United Kingdom Glynis H. Murphy University of Kent, United Kingdom, and Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust, Kent, United Kingdom Isabel C. H. Clare University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom, and Cambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom Tom Steverson University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom, and Cambridge and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, United Kingdom Emma J. Palmer University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom Abstract Eighty men, spread equally across 4 groups, were recruited, including men with and without intellectual disabilities. The men were either criminal offenders or nonoffenders. Participants completed measures of moral reasoning, empathy, and distorted cognitions. The results indicated that the moral reasoning abilities of offenders with intellectual disabilities were developmentally delayed but were still more mature than those of nonoffenders with intellectual disabilities. Offenders without intellectual disabilities had less mature moral reasoning abilities than nonoffenders without intellectual disabilities. The differences may be partially accounted for by intellectual ability. The results also indicated that the relationship between empathy and distorted cognitions was mediated by moral reasoning. The findings have implications for the use of psychological interventions with offenders with intellectual disabilities. DOI: 10.1352/1944-7558-116.6.438 Piaget (1932) is often credited as the first theorist to consider the moral development of children from a psychological perspective. Later, Kohlberg (1969, 1976) revised Piagetian theory and extended the theory beyond childhood and into adolescence and adulthood. However, Kohlberg’s theory has been criticized for being culturally biased (Simpson, 1974) and based on Western liberalism (Schweder, 1982; Sullivan, 1977). Others have noted that the theory appears based on masculine conceptualizations of morality (Gilligan, 1982), whereas others have commented that the VOLUME 116, NUMBER 6: 438–456 | NOVEMBER 2011 AJIDD 438 E American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities