RISK TAKING IN ADOLESCENT Essay
Problems of childhood and adolescence have always been a zone of acute attention; it has become a significant subject of sociologists, psychologists, and anthropologists, while numerous programs and projects are being developed to do away with the wide spread problems children and adolescents face. Adolescence is an extremely difficult period for each person as it is a period of transition from being a child to being an adult. Still, a lot of questions concerning adolescents have not been solved yet. Taking risks while being an adolescent more often than ever before or after is one of the typical features which have not received a sole answer. This fact is indicated by statistics on binge drinking, ignoring contraceptives and automobile accidents, for instance. Therefore, in Risk Taking in Adolescence: New Perspectives from Brain and Behavioral Science Laurence Steinberg tries to find the answer to this wide-spread question. For that end, she explores the matter from the two sides, neuroscientific and behavioral. She also aims at disapproving the fact that greater risk taking comes from irrationality or ignorance, and applies several studies to support her counterargument. Steinberg should be credited for revealing a new perspective on risk taking. She explains that a need for taking risks comes from the interaction of two components: logical reasoning and psychosocial factors. And this is the conflict between these two components that leads to the statistics mentioned above. Logical reasoning develops quicker, but an adolescent is very dependent on his emotions and society around because it takes much longer for psychological capacities to form. These capacities are responsible for impulse control and regulation of emotions. That is why decision making improves only in adulthood and only after gratification is delayed risk taking becomes more moderate.
Further, the author tries to find an evidence of her hypothesis in both developmental neuroscience and behavioral psychology. As for physiological point of view, the interaction takes place between two brain networks. One of them is socioemotional network which is responsible for reward processing and impacted by hormonal changes. As for the location of this network, it embraces limbic and paralimbic areas of the brain, amygdala, ventral striatum, orbitofrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and superior temporal sulcus (Steinberg 2007, p. 56). Another network is cognitive-control network that is responsible for planning and forecasting situation and self-regulation as well. This network is localized in the lateral prefrontal and parietal cortices. It takes longer for the second network to gain influence, and in the competition of the two networks the first becomes more assertive. In this way, slow maturation of the cognitive-control system is claimed to be the main reason of the risk taking rates among adolescents, while logical-reasoning abilities of adolescents occur to be quite the same as those of adults. What is more, these speculations have been supported by behavioural science too.
Steinberg appeals to eloquent study, when the amounts of risks taken by examined teenagers in video games grew by 50% when they were surrounded by peers. At the same time, the lack of cross-talk between the networks leads to disability to inhibit response.
In fact, the article seems to be rather valuable for everyone who is interested in behavioural development and thus makes a significant contribution to the field of adolescent psychology in particular. It is also remarkable that the paper is written in a reasonable and comprehensive way, with sound application of figures and tables. The main value of the article is probably Stenberg’s focus on the role of peers in the reactions and decisions of adolescents. It has been investigated that teenagers spend much time with their peers, and their attitude is one of the most important stimulus for their actions. It goes without saying that socioemotional network is engaged in this process. When risk taking is rewarded by peers, it becomes natural for a teenager, and when there is a choice between conservative and rational decisions on the one hand and risky but potentially highly rewarded decisions on the other hand, teenagers choose the second. Steinberg (2007, p. 57) provides a valuable assumption: “It thus appears that the brain system that regulates the processing of rewards, social information, and emotions is becoming more sensitive and more easily aroused around the time of puberty.”
As for limitations, adolescents are scrutinized as a homogeneous social group, with no focus on gender, social or any other significant differences, but on the other hand, the way for approach has been drawn, which can be detailed by further research.
According to the data presented and conclusions made, Laurence Steinberg offers to look for a solution in changing contexts and not trying to influence cognitive development of adolescents. Altering knowledge and attitudes has not led to reduction of risk taking among them, therefore Steinberg recommends to take such measures as “raising the price of cigarettes, more vigilantly enforcing laws governing the sale of alcohol, expanding adolescents’ access to mental-health and contraceptive services, and raising the driving age” (Steinberg 2007, p. 58). These strategies can be argued or at least may become fuller, and that is probably a fertile ground for further research.
