Samenvatting
Samenvatting artikelen college 3 justitieel ingrijpen
- Instelling
- Universiteit Van Amsterdam (UvA)
Volledige samenvatting van de artikelen voorgeschreven voor college 3 van justitieel ingrijpen
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 2 van de 10 pagina's
Voorbeeld 2 van de 10 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
College 3Artikel Defoe
Abstract
Social neurodevelopmental imbalance models posit that peer presence causes heightened
adolescent risk-taking particularly during early adolescence. Evolutionary theory suggests that
these effects would be most pronounced in males. No main effect of peer presence on the
employed risky-decision making task was found. However, the results showed a gender by
peer presence moderation effect. Namely, whereas boys and girls engaged in equal levels of
risks when they completed the stoplight game alone, boys engaged in more risk-taking that
girls when they completed this task together with two same-sex peers. In contrast, adolescent
phase did not moderate peer presence effects on risk-taking. Finally, the results showed that
performance on the stoplight game predicted self-reported real-word risky traffic behavior,
alcohol use and delinquency. Taken together, using a validated task, the present findings
demonstrate that individual differences (gender) can determine whether the social
environment (peer presence) affects risk-taking in early and mid-adolescents.
Inleiding
Most risk behaviors that peak in adolescence occur when adolescents are with their peers. Past
studies have often focused on similarity in risk-taking behaviors among peers, with the
assumed mechanism being social learning. Current advances in adolescent brain research
suggest that mere peer presence leads to heightened adolescent risk-taking.
Neurodevelopmental imbalance models postulate that heightened adolescent risk-taking
occurs, particularly in emotionally arousing contexts, wherein adolescent’s hyperresponsive
motivational-reward system in the brain gets triggered, resulting in a pronounced imbalance
with their relatively immature cognitive control system. Peers increase risk-taking particularly
in adolescence, because the mere presence of peers activates the same brain regions as
rewards do, and in that sense, peers can be considered as socially rewarding.
The sociobiological theory of male competitiveness posits that risk-taking is a primarily male
phenomenon, and especially so when males are in presence of other male counterparts. This is
because, males’ fitness is assumed to stem from success in social interactions, wherein
competition could arise. For males especially, engaging in risky behaviors during adolescence
(such as violent or delinquent acts) may serve a signaling function that one is tough or strong,
enhancing one’s reputation or status in the group.
The social neurodevelopmental imbalance model suggests that during early adolescence, at
the onset of puberty, an imbalance occurs between the hyper-responsive reward processing
, regions and slowly maturing cognitive control regions, which triggers risk-taking. It is
therefore to be expected that early adolescents would engage in more risks than older
adolescents. Although an imbalance in the brain around early adolescence might make an
individual more vulnerable to engage in risks, apparently ecological factors such as increases
in risk exposure as adolescents age ultimately contribute to higher risk-taking levels among
older adolescents versus younger adolescents in the real-world. However, in the laboratory
where risk exposure is equal for all ages, younger adolescents engage in more risks perhaps
because of delayed cognitive ability (e.g., inhibitory control). As for adolescent-phase
moderated peer influences, early adolescence is expected to be the period of heightened
susceptibility for peer influence as a result of a hypothesized neurodevelopmental imbalance
caused by pubertal changes around that period (Somerville et al. 2010; Steinberg 2007).
Namely, particularly during early adolescence, peer presence is hypothesized to amplify the
rewarding aspects of risks, which prevents adolescents from exercising inhibitory control.
The current article investigates whether peer presence, gender and adolescent phase predict
adolescent risk-taking on a laboratory task, and if the hypothesized peer presence effect is
moderated by gender and/or adolescent phase (study one). The second study in focusses on
the criterion validity of the stoplight came (voorspelt dit ander risico gedrag goed).
Conclusie
The current results showed no general peer presence effect on heightened adolescent
risktaking, but instead peer presence effects only existed for boys. These results contradict
social neurodevelopmental imbalance models that do not posit gender differences, however
they do support the evolutionary theories on gender differences in peer influence on risk-
taking. Namely, they suggest that heightened adolescent risk-taking in the presence of peers
might be gender specific, for both earlyand mid-adolescents. In the real-world, adolescent
boys evidently engage in more (antisocial) risk-taking behaviors than adolescent girls,
however the current experimental study raises an interesting observation that this gender
difference might particularly arise when adolescent boys are in the company of samegender
peers. Taken together, the present findings demonstrate that individual differences (i.e.,
gender) could determine how the social environment (i.e., peer presence) could affect
adolescent risk-taking. Furthermore, the current study demonstrated that the stoplight game
has adequate criterion validity, as it predicted heightened adolescent real-world risk-taking
behaviors such as risky traffic behavior, alcohol use and delinquency above and beyond
predicting sensation-seeking.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper IrisStruick. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 83637 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen