Some of his ideas I find interesting and that I am still thinking through, include his distinction between ethical and moral aims/considerations, what I consider the paradox of justice (i.e., injustice is ubiquitous but knowing the proper way to maintain just relations is not), and the role he gives the norm of reciprocity (e.g., a version of this being the Golden Rule) in understanding the human story. His book informs my upcoming papers on Daredevil and the X-Men.

This book takes a deep dive into the notion of justice, from the lenses of both secular and biblical morality. As such, it has been helpful in my approach to X-Men narratives in an in-progress paper exploring the nature of (meta)physical, social, and psychological beliefs in Grant Morrison’s New X-Men run.

As multiple publications aim to tie a constructivist analysis of superhero media to civics or civil discourse [From Wakanda to America (2018), Black Panther (2021), Comics and Citizenship (2023)], I am interested in scholarly analysis of superheroes along civic dimensions. This book, focusing specifically on political polarization, explores this relationship in a thoughtful and relatable manner.

Dyson’s examination of how children spoke about, wrote about, engaged in play involving superheroes opened my ideas to the possibility of a scholarly agenda centered on superheroes. I wrote about this influence, particularly in the context of children’s social and moral development in educational spaces, back in 2020.

Coming across Jackson Jr.’s book proved very beneficial, as his anthropological investigation into how Harlemites discussed, understood, and acted in accordance with beliefs about what it meant to be black living in Harlem provided a good backdrop against which I could explore Luke Cage’s multifaceted and complex relationship with the neighborhood.

In addition to the content match, their book also informs my scholarship due to its multifaceted research methodology. They combine content analyses with ethnographic data from their time spent immersed within comic book fan culture to provide a robust portrait of why questions about what is moral, legal, and criminal animate readers’ engagement with superhero comics.

Martin, J. F. (2025, May). The Primacy and Potential of Superhero Narratives: Insights from   Developmental Psychology.  Paper presented at the Art of Storytelling: Archetypes in Focus Conference for the London Arts Based Research Center, Oxford University [I Presented Online].

• Relevant publication(s): Black Panther (2021), Comics and Citizenship (2023), Superheroes and Children’s Moral Understanding (2023), and Social Superheroes (2024)

Although it did not inform my scholarship directly, indirectly, it fits my interdisciplinary sensibilities. Their deep dives on issues related to race/ethnicity, identity, development, and influences on their intellectual enterprises were fascinating. It is the type of book I would like to see more of.

Due to his relevance for TOM, Flavell indirectly influences my work through his early emphasis on trying to understand the world from the (developing) child’s point of view. Regarding TOM, work in this area was recently incorporated into my brief analysis of a young Oswald Cobb in HBO’s The Penguin, and a conference presentation I gave today on superhero narratives and developmental psychology.

By drawing parallels between processes in children’s cognitive, social, and moral development, Gibbs articulates a view of moral development in thoughtfully and sincerely tries to make the case for a constructivist approach to moral development while also incorporating aspects of other psychological approaches to (the development of) moral understanding (e.g., socialization, Moral Foundations Theory) that have valuable contributions. He does so by trying to relate the cognitive and affective (emotional) aspects of moral development while also studying moral judgment capacities of atypical (e.g., antisocial) youth.

Although my current grounding in Social Cognitive Domain Theory takes me away from some of Selman’s core assumptions (and those of other structural developmental scholars like Kohlberg), some ideas and aims still inform my approach to the study of moral development and superhero media more broadly.

Like Flavell’s early work on role-taking, Selman’s work on social perspective taking was influential in the subsequent development of Theory of Mind as well as other approaches combining aspects of children’s moral development with their social development. Thus, it also informs my approach to the study of children’s understanding of superheroes on some level.

Campbell’s investigation into the cross-cultural themes (e.g., sacrifice, resilience, justice) within various stories told and preserved throughout the centuries fits well with my work. One of the guiding assumptions of this work, shared yesterday in a conference presentation, is that in many ways, superheroes reflect and appeal to certain abstract concepts that research from various approaches suggest are generally understood across cultures in fundamentally similar ways. This “conceptual consistency” may also help explain the genre’s cross-generational appeal.

This book gave me a good starting point for thinking about the psychology behind our understanding of heroes and villains more broadly. A psychology borne out through anecdotal experiences and apparent when I reflect on my experiences watching various media with clearly defined heroes and villains. Although not cited in my recent study on adults’ perceptions of moral transgressions committed by superheroes and supervillains, the findings reported by Allison and Goethals, as well as subsequent findings in similar studies, were influential to the study’s approach.

This book is an indirect influence on my current scholarship at best. Nevertheless, I think Oden’s examination of the role of various cultural influences and exchanges in amalgamating what we come to understand as the broader Christian worldview is important for my thinking as an interdisciplinary scholar.

I found Curtis’s argument in the article concerning viewing superheroes through the lens of sovereignty very interesting at the time. The more papers I wrote and wanted to write concerning superheroes and moral development, the more I kept coming back to this idea. So, reading the book was a must.

I do not think I have been this stimulated by a book intellectually since I read Solomon Asch’s Social Psychology (1952) in my doctoral program. I think this is a must-read for anyone interested in what research in archeology (Wengrow) and anthropology (Graeber), as a whole, brings to bear on our understanding of human social relations. Among the many ideas I found interesting and relevant to my broader scholarship aims on some level is their view that evidence from their respective fields suggests three freedoms fundamental to humanity: the freedom to move (relocate), the freedom to disobey authority, and the freedom to reorganize social relations.

I am so glad to have found this book, as it was one of the most intellectually engaging analyses of superheroes from a Christian perspective that I have read. It informs and “walks alongside” much of my thinking in this area.

In many ways, this book, along with Neal Curtis’ Sovereignty and Superheroes, has influenced my thinking regarding moral development and superheroes from a secular perspective, as Adam Barkman’s Imitating the Saints has from a religious perspective. It identifies many aspects of popular superheroes and their missions that jive well with how I think about them.