Contemporary psychological science has become increasingly attentive to the limitations of Western, Educated, Industrial, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD)-centric knowledge and the urgent need for emic, culturally-grounded perspectives that can enrich global psychology. Across four studies, our work in human development and moral psychology describes the interplay of culture, development, and social class in shaping moral reasoning from childhood to adolescence and adulthood in India. Demonstrating the promise of the cultural-developmental approach for capturing plural moral ontologies, these studies highlight how indigenous concepts such as dharma, relational responsibility, self-refinement, and divinity are foundational to the Indian moral world, thereby challenging ‘universalistic’, Euro-Western assumptions that have largely dominated moral psychology. By placing Indian worldviews at the heart of the analysis and employing diverse qualitative methods, our research contributes to a broader disciplinary shift toward cultural inclusivity, methodological plurality, and epistemic decolonization.
In Pandya, Jensen, and Bhangaokar (2023), we investigated moral reasoning among children of high and low socio-economic status (SES) using a mixed-methods design anchored in the cultural-developmental approach. Findings revealed striking differences in the use of the three ethics of morality– Autonomy, Community, and Divinity– across social class. High-SES children used Autonomy more frequently, conceptualizing the self in psychological terms, reflecting their exposure to Westernized schooling and globalized urban environments. Low-SES children, by contrast, invoked Autonomy through concrete experiences involving fear of physical punishment, while simultaneously expressing strong duty orientations rooted in familial and community expectations. Across both groups, Divinity reasoning appeared early and spontaneously, contradicting developmental assumptions derived from Western samples. Indigenous moral concepts—humility, compassion, and karmic reasoning—surfaced prominently, illuminating moral worlds that braid together spiritual, interpersonal, and social concerns. This study demonstrates that moral ontologies are not only culturally variable but also shaped by intra-cultural factors such as social class. By amplifying the experiences of children from marginalized communities, this work contributes to a more equitable developmental science and underscores the need to examine moral reasoning within lived realities.
In Pandya and Bhangaokar (2024), we presented a longitudinal examination of moral reasoning in India, studying children from middle childhood to late adolescence. Using the cultural-developmental approach, we tested hypotheses about the three ethics of morality—Autonomy, Community, and Divinity—and explored the use of indigenous moral concepts over approximately 4.5 years. Findings revealed that Autonomy increased across adolescence, and importantly, Community remained highly salient throughout development. Indigenous duty concepts focused on interpersonal responsibility such as kartavya, zimmedāri and jawabdāri emerged early and consistently, illustrating how moral obligations toward family, elders, and society are foundational to the moral worlds of children and young adolescents in India. They also reflected a deep concern for beizzati (the loss of honor) when reasoning about their moral decisions, highlighting the foundations of an encompassing sense of self. Notably, Divinity was prominent in middle childhood and decreased during adolescence. The forms of Divinity reasoning shifted from fear of divine punishment to a more nuanced understanding of the nature of Hindu divinity rooted in traditional customary practices and duty. The study contributes to the decolonization of moral psychology by empirically demonstrating that Indian adolescents navigate moral dilemmas by blending personal goals with relational obligations, emphasizing balance and contextualized moral judgment. These findings do not conform to Western ideas of increasing individualism and autonomy during adolescence at the expense of social responsibility.
In Pandya and Bhangaokar (2023), we examined the moral landscape of established adulthood (ages 35–45) through the lens of gendered roles and responsibilities in highly educated, upper-class Hindu families. Using qualitative interviews, we explored how men and women reason about potentials and obligations in the context of marriage, work, and family. Participants endorsed equality in competence but emphasized that women’s role engagement is more intense and multidimensional. Women expressed critique of patriarchal norms that constrain their participation in the workforce, while also demonstrating agency, multitasking, and adaptive negotiation. Men, despite awareness of women’s increased burdens, often reproduced traditional gender norms through passive acceptance. Yet decisions around balancing work and family were consistently embedded in an ethos of maintaining familial harmony, reflecting the cultural centrality of relational interdependence. The study situates established adulthood within the indigenous framework of Grihastha Āshrama (stage of the householder in the Hindu Āshrama Dharma Theory), where fulfilling obligations with integrity is considered a pathway to spiritual and moral maturity. These findings highlight that adulthood in urban India involves a continuous negotiation between globalization-driven individual aspirations and enduring dharmic expectations that prioritize family wellbeing, social cohesion, and moral responsibility. The paper thus expands global discussions on adulthood by incorporating indigenous moral principles and culture-specific markers of maturity and family wellbeing.
Finally, in Pandya and Bhangaokar (2025), we addressed a central lacuna in moral psychology—the neglect of non-Western worldviews in conceptualizing suffering. Using in-depth qualitative interviews with urban Hindu adults, we demonstrated that suffering is understood not only as a biomedical condition but as a phenomenon deeply embedded in metaphysical, ethical, and relational frameworks. Participants drew upon moral ideas such as karma (righteous deeds), swadharma (duty appropriate to one’s role, life stage, and nature), and samatvam (equanimity), interpreting suffering as both inevitable and purposeful. Rather than an experience to be eradicated through external intervention, suffering was described as a catalyst for self-refinement, spiritual growth, and moral responsibility. Suffering in the Hindu worldview is linked to the cultivation of dynamic, context-dependent discernment (viveka), humility, and righteous action. This view disrupts the dominant Western framing that separates psychological distress from moral meaning-making. By foregrounding culturally grounded, relational and spiritually-embedded meanings that remain underrepresented in dominant frameworks, this perspective broadens prevailing approaches to suffering. It challenges the biomedicalization of distress and highlights the need for models that acknowledge interpersonal, collective, and spiritual dimensions of human suffering. Our findings underscore that wellbeing in this worldview is not hedonic but interspersed with moral self-regulation, acceptance of impermanence, and striving toward moksha (spiritual liberation).
Together, these four studies offer a cohesive and robust program of research demonstrating that morality in India is pluralistic, relational, and culturally-centred. Across developmental periods—childhood, adolescence, established adulthood—and across social contexts—urban high- and low-SES—our work uses multiple qualitative methods that are culturally responsive. These insights pave the way for a global psychology that embraces multiple ontologies, recognizes socio-historical contexts, and enables culturally grounded methodologies to emerge from the field and contribute to the decolonization of psychological knowledge.
References
Pandya, N., & Bhangaokar, R. (2025). Suffering and self-refinement: Moral perspectives from a Hindu, Indian worldview. Psychology and Developing Societies, 37(1), 93–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/09713336251372670opens in new window
Pandya, N., & Bhangaokar, R. (2024). The development of moral reasoning in urban, high‐social class families from Gujarat, India: A longitudinal study from middle childhood to late adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 34(2), 281-295. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12955opens in new window
Pandya, N., & Bhangaokar, R. (2023). Equal but different: Views on gender roles and responsibilities among upper-class Hindu Indians in established adulthood. Journal of Adult Development, 30(1), 145-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-022-09417-4opens in new window
Pandya, N., Jensen, L. A., & Bhangaokar, R. (2023). Moral reasoning among children in India: The intersection of culture, development, and social class. Applied Developmental Science, 27(1), 48-67. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2021.2007770opens in new window
Contact
Niyati Pandya, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Human Development & Family Studies
Faculty of Family & Community Sciences
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, India
Email
Rachana Bhangaokar, PhD
Associate Professor and Chair
Department of Human Development & Family Studies
Faculty of Family & Community Sciences
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, India