Adolescent Influences and Adjustments What

Adolescent Influences and Adjustments

What are the influences in the lives of adolescents that have a direct impact on how they behave, how they see the world and how they interact within their home, school, and community environments? Which influences - of the many they encounter - have the most dramatic effect on adolescents? Why?

Among the many influences that are perhaps not discussed as thoroughly as need be are violent media - in particular, violent video games. It is not breaking any new ground to point out that many television shows and movies that adolescents are free to watch have multiple murders, misogynistic aggression, beatings, stabbings, shootings and other forms of violent behavior. Studies show that by the time a boy is in his teens, he has already witnessed tens of thousands of deaths on television and in movies - many of the deaths resulting from gratuitous violence.

VIOLENT VIDEOGAMES: But while violent images and actions from video games - that many boys play, some obsessively, addictively - have been discussed as having a potentially negative influence on adolescents, until recently, in depth, empirical research has not been published. Dr. Vincent P. Matthews, professor of radiology at the Indiana University School of Medicine in Indianapolis released the results of his ground-breaking study on how violent video games influence youthful users at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America in November, 2006.

Matthews' "brain-imaging study" - reportedly the first of its kind - revealed that "teenagers who played a violent videogame exhibited increased activity in a part of the brain that governs emotional arousal" (Springen, 2006). An article in Newsweek (published online by (www.msnbc.com) reports that Matthews "randomly assigned 44 physically and psychologically normal 13-17-year-old boys and girls (with boys outnumbering girls two-to-one)" to two separate groups. One group had a violent video game called "Medal of Honor: Frontline," to interact with for half an hour; the second group played a nonviolent videogame involving a car chase - "Need for Speed" - again, for a half an hour. While the two groups of teens were interacting with these videogames, researchers used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology to look closely at the brains of the kids.

When asked if violent video games make teens "more likely to commit violent acts" Dr. Matthews said that would be "speculation"; but he said "adolescents and young adults" who watch violent videogames "show increased aggressive behavior." Matthews went on in the interview to say in just 30 minutes, teens watching violent videogames have an "emotional arousal," and that parents should be aware that there are "...at least short-term effects" on the brain, and perhaps these episodes could "result in longer-term changes." That is a concern for some kids whose parents allow them to play for "hours and hours."

Matthews' empirical findings from the kids playing the violent videogame "showed more activation in the amygdalae" part of the brain, which is involved in emotional arousal, and "less in the prefrontal portions of the brain associated with control, focus, and concentration" (American School Board Journal, 2007).

There has been so much concern expressed recently about how violent media (especially violent videogames) influences adolescent behavior that nine states have passed laws "that make it a crime to give violent games to minors" (Decker 2007). Another state, Utah, may soon be the 10th state to pass a law protecting minors from very violent videogames. The Utah legislation (HB 50 "Material Harmful to Minors Amendment") has been put forward by Representative Scott Wyatt; it would make it unlawful to "sell, rent or give video games portraying 'inappropriate violence' to anyone under 18" (Warchol, 2007).

The word "inappropriate" is defined by the legislator as any violent game that appeals to the "...morbid interest of minors; is patently offensive; and has no literary, artistic, political or scientific value." The article by Warchol notes that many bills like this have failed to pass because they reportedly restrict "free speech."

Matthew Anderson, representing the Entertainment Software Association, told the Utah Legislature that while Wyatt's bill is well-meaning, his statistics show that "Eighty-three percent of the time parents are involved with the purchase of video games, and 89% of parents..." claim they do monitor what videogames their children play (Johnson, 2007). Meanwhile, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) assigns six letters for parents to use: "E" (everyone); "EC" (early childhood); "E 10" (everyone over 10 years); "T" (teens 13 and older); "M" (mature audiences 17 and older); and "AO" (equivalent of "X" rated movies). But in reality, do parents "really use these ratings when they buy games for their kids?" (Kalning, 2006). Some do, and some don't. Connie Brandt of Redwood City, California, told journalist Kalning that "...it's pointless" to try and keep M-rated videogames from her 15-year-old son Raymond. "...Even if I stopped him from buying certain games, he's still find a way to play them," she said.

PEER GROUP INFLUENCES (aggressive behaviors): A research article published in the journal Child Development (Espelage, et al., 2003) examines the "broader social context" of peer group pressure and aggressive behaviors (such as bullying) - taking research on these issues beyond just concepts such as "popularity" and "friendship." The study reflected in this article "systematically examined" the influences on middle school students that result from membership in aggressive peer groups. The researchers specifically looked into "social networks" to try and determine how "peer-group membership relates to aggression."

To conduct their research, the scholars surveyed 422 Middle School students "in a Midwestern town" (93% Caucasian, 1% African-American, 2% biracial, 4% other ethnicities) through two sessions, each about 45 minutes to groups ranging in size from 7 to 15 students. They were assured of confidentiality, and told there would be a drawing in each classroom session for a $10 gift certificate (to be used at a music and book store). The survey consisted of three sections: demographic questions; bullying and fighting scales; and peer-nomination tasks. In the bullying part of the survey, students were asked to list up to three students who "often tease other students."

The upshot of the research shows that while there has been ample documentation of homophily ("within-group similarity") within adolescent peer groups "with respect to delinquency and aggression," this particular study is the first such research to "systematically evaluate this hypothesis as it pertains to subtypes of aggression (bullying and fighting behavior)" among adolescent peer groups.

What does that mean for teachers and parents? The research verifies that: a) students affiliate with individuals "who bully and fight at the same frequency" not just with those who bully on certain occasions; b) peer influence "differs across subtypes of aggression"; c) males self-reported more bullying and fighting than did females; d) "peers (not the victim or bully) were involved in an astounding 85% of bully episodes... [and peers were active participants] in the episode" 30% of the time, observed the interaction 23% of the time, and intervened 12% of the time in these incidents of bullying.

PEER GROUP INFLUENCES (gifted students): In the Journal of Secondary Gifted Education (Lee, 2002) a study was described regarding the influence adolescent peer relations may have, positive or negatively, on the "development of academic and creative talents." In this research, a talented 12-year-old named Chris - and five of his peers - were studied. Four areas of academic and creative development were part of the study: competition, support, motivation and role modeling. The young man Chris plays classical guitar, is a talented artist and hockey player, and scored in the 99th percentile on the math portion of a nationally standardized achievement test. For this research, Chris choose five of his peers (four boys and a girl) as "his closest friends." The girl was considered by Chris to be an intellectual peer; there of the boys were athletic peers; the fourth boy was a musical and artistic peer to Chris.

The methods used were "semi-structured interviews, observations, and review of documents." The results, according to Lee, show that in addition to having valuable friendships with his peers, gifted student Chris, through the peer interactions, developed "future aspirations" along with present academic and creative talent.

The first phase of learning in a gifted student's talent development is of course his parents; and this research shows the enormous influence in his second phase of learning - from his peers. It was Chris's peers who introduced him to roller hockey and classical guitar, not his parents or his family or teachers. Overall, writer Lee's research showed that "adolescents develop their occupational identities through their interactions with significant peers after comparing themselves to the peer group." For a talented adolescent, peers have a significant influence on motivation, talent development, and achievement.

PEER GROUP INFLUENCES (smoking): Kimberly Kobus, a PhD at the University of Illinois at Chicago, has written a research piece ("Peers and adolescent smoking") that delves into the processes of influence regarding adolescent smoking. Her data in the Society for the Study of Addiction to Alcohol and other Drugs (Kobus 003) reflects the fact that more than a third of high school students smoke at least once a month, and by the age of 18, about two-thirds of teenagers have smoked at lease occasionally. The key years during which experimentation occurs - between 13 and 16.

Kobus discusses influences that launch an adolescent's smoking habit from several perspectives. First, the "social learning theory": relationships that are "more intimate" and that are developed "earlier in the youth's experiences" and thought to be more important; and youths are more likely to "imitate the smoking habits" (or non-smoking habits) of those with whom they have the closes and most frequent contact. Second, the "primary socialization theory" takes into consideration influences of the family, schools, and peer clusters; this theory also gives consideration to an adolescent's "individual personality traits" like self-esteem, anxiety, "sensation seeking and psychopathology" that are "direct influences on drug use and deviance," Kobus writes. When the bonds a youth has with family and school are "weak," the role of peer clusters is "heightened"; and of course if the individual has low self-esteem, the peer cluster plays an even more dramatic influential role.

The third theory is the "social identity theory": the self-concept of an adolescent is a combination of two self-images ("I am a smoker"), and ("I belong to the smoking group"). And when "personal identity" is a salient factor, the norms of the social group take a back seat; but then "social identity" is stronger, the adolescent will act in concert with the peer group, Kobus continues. The fourth theory is the "social network theory"; individuals that are central or "highly connected" central members of a peer group are not always the most influential, despite what might seem to be the case. When the issue at hand is "non-controversial" the central person may have great influence; but when the issue is controversial, the "marginal individual" is more important to the group. Finally, in summary, Kobus explains that teenagers do not always feel "direct pressure" from their peers to smoke; rather, they experience a "self-pressure to smoke if others around them do."

THE TIMING of PUBERTY (as an influence): The authors of this research (Dorn, et al., 2003) in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence explain that two hypotheses have stood out for years in terms of the influence that the timing of puberty's arrival has on an individual. One, the "maturational deviance hypothesis" asserts that an adolescent experiences stress and adjustment problems when puberty is "off-time" (either early or late). Why? Because the social support factors with peers are "less available," according to the research. The second hypothesis, "early-maturational" or "early timing" hypothesis posits that early arrival is a disadvantage especially for girls; "...the opportunity was passed for completion of normal developmental tasks of middle childhood." Also, when boys or girls develop earlier they face "greater pressure" since they appear to be more mature physically and so socially, they're categorized as older, and expected to do more adult-like things, for which they are not ready. Hence, early puberty has a strong influence on behavior, as there is pressure to associate with an older more mature peer group.

Early maturing boys are "more likely to participate in antisocial or deviant behavior," the authors point out, while late maturing girls have "more positive outcomes" because they are more emotionally prepared. The research article reports on a study involving 52 girls (9-14) and 56 boys (10-15) from mostly upper-middle class Caucasian families, who were in five different stages of pubertal development. The results of this study show that "pubertal timing was a significant statistical predictor of self-image and behavior problems" in most instances. In fact, the study (which involved close monitoring of hormonal levels through blood sampling and parental participation in behaviors) concluded that, "...it was always later maturing adolescents who had more negative self-image or more behavior problems." In particular, later puberty timing in boys related to "more negative behavior" than in girls.

GENETIC & ENVIRONMENTAL INFLUENCES: Meanwhile, a scholarly and sometimes technically esoteric article in Developmental Psychology (Johnson, et al., 2006) looks into the genetic and environmental influences on academic achievement during adolescence; this empirical, longitudinal and quantitative study points out that academic achievement is an "important predictor of adult outcomes" because our society is increasingly technological. So, achievement in school, for an adolescent, is often associated with "lower rates of negative outcomes" (teen pregnancy, criminal behavior) and "higher levels of positive outcomes" (stability in employment, etc.). That said, the research discussed in this article points out the rather obvious "environmental factors" that influence adolescents in school (stress caused by parental break-up, job loss, violence in the home, poor parental mental health, poverty) along with not-so-obvious genetic factors (children face genetic risks that mirror their parents' characteristics).

The researchers in Minnesota selected their participants for this study by approaching "90% of the like-sex twin pairs born in Minnesota" who were approximately 11 years old; their parents were also a large part of the research. They research ended up with 443 pairs of girls and 381 pairs of boys (whose parents signed permission slips), with follow-ups when the twins turned 14. The results of the studies reported by this article are summarized here; "We observed strong genetic influences and moderate shared environmental influences" on the participants' achievement levels, Johnson concluded.

The research also revealed "genetic influences on linear changes in achievement" which implies to those conducting the study that "some biological involvement exists in whatever developmental mechanisms operate during adolescents" that eventually lead to academic achievement. In other words, the "biological involvement" influences relate to puberty; and the genes that are involved in an adolescent's increased expression of behaviors and depression as well as the genes that are part of cognitive maturation had, in the research, "an overall change in achievement" (either good or bad, depending in most cases on "parental expectations for academic achievement during adolescence").

The bottom line following all the statistical research, for girls and boys, their IQ, relationships, and "family risk" factors / influences were stronger at the environmental level than at the genetic level. And it is worth noting this research was among Caucasians, with "very few people in abject poverty," and that the methods used were based on an assumption that "genetic and environmental influences are independent."

PARENTING INFLUENCES (on adolescent ALCOHOL use and IMPULSIVE behaviors): "The more permissive the mother or father, the more impulsive were the daughters and sons, respectively" (Fromme 2006), according to summaries of several articles in the journal Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. In that same context, a father's authoritativeness ("high warmth, high control") was "negatively related to sons' impulsivity" and a mother's authoritarianism ("low warmth, high control") was positively related to daughters' impulsivity. Translate that like this: authoritative fathers create less impulsive sons (with reference to drinking and other deviant behaviors) but authoritarian mothers result in more impulsive daughters.

Also, family environmental factors do influence whether a child grows up to be an alcoholic, the research confirms. Even in a family where parents are alcoholics, "family cohesion" was found to "mediate" the relation a child encounters with exposure to parental alcohol misuse and the child's own "sense of self-worth." In other words, even though the parents abuse alcohol, if the family is close-knit the child's sense of self-worth can be good.

But if the family has little cohesion, the opposite is true, and environmental factors in this case do contribute to a child abusing alcohol just as his family does. In another study (summarized in Fromme's article), "negative parenting" tended to mediate the relation between parent "internalizing problems" and "child affective problems" - but not child anxiety problems. When there is positive ("high-positive") involvement by parents, it was found to "moderate the relations between parent externalizing problems and child internalizing problems." That basically means, the adolescent is less likely to keep feelings inside if parents interact well in spite of their talking out loud about their problems (due in large part to excessive drinking).

FAMILY INFLUENCES on DETAINED ADOLESCENTS (with sexually transmitted diseases): Research published in the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry (Crosby, et al., 2006) indicates that adolescents are "disproportionately infected by sexually transmitted diseases (STDs)" and those adolescents under lock and key in juvenile detention centers are a "highly vulnerable population" when it comes to acquiring STDs. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that rates of gonorrhea among adolescent detainees were 7 times greater among males and 10 times greater among females than rates among adolescents in the general population, the article explains.

So, where does family come into this equation? Crosby's article entails the results of a study in Georgia involving detainees from 8 regional youth detention centers (RYDCs), whose male to female ration was 3 to 1; each of the 8 RYDCs held a maximum of 30 adolescents (average age 15.4 years). Eighty-five percent of the detained adolescents agreed to participate in the study (47.7% African-American, 46.1% Caucasian). Carefully constructed questionnaires were put in place to assess "frequency of parent monitoring" (prior to and during detention) in terms of how often detainees had talked to their parents about AIDS, sex, condoms, pregnancy prevention, and STDs. Urine samples were frequently taken.

The results (findings) are made more significant by the fact that a biological outcome was verified through science (urine samples). And the results showed that "perceptions of parental monitoring" was in fact "inversely associated with incidence of biologically confirmed STD diagnosis"; i.e., the less influence parents had, the more likely STDs would result. This is not a surprising outcome, but because the STDs can be verified, and not just reported by youths, it is considered nearly empirical evidence of the importance of parental influence.

The most important benefits of parental monitoring, the study continued, "...may only be experienced by detained adolescents" who are at least 16 years old, female, and of minority ethnicity. It is presumed by the researchers that females are more responsive to monitoring "because of gender socialization." Infrequent monitoring by parents "was significantly associated with a decreased diagnosis of STDs," Crosby concludes. The study's findings also suggest that for those adolescent detainees who are "emancipated" from their parents, Big Brother-type relationships with adolescents could be meaningful. After all, given the high rates of STDs in juvenile detention facilities, and given that about 100,000 adolescents may be incarcerated on any given day, society can't just give up on these young people.

MATERNAL DEPRESSION MAY PRODUCE ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS: A study in Community Mental Health Journal (Mowbray, et al. 2006) reviews past research (using structural equation modeling) which indicated that mothers who suffered from maternal depression caused what later turned out to be boys with "conduct disorder or hyperactivity" - but not so much in the case of girls. On the other hand studies using "hierarchical regression" have found that - when comparing teacher reports - "anxious and depressed mothers" gave birth to girls who were "defiant" and had attention deficit disorder symptoms (but not boys).

Of the seventy-eight mothers - "largely poor, urban, minority" - who were part of the study (average age 31.99 years), 14% were schizophrenic; 43.6% had major depressive disorder; 16.7 were bi-polar; and 25.7% had mixed psychotic and effective disorders.

The first of two hypotheses that were presented in this research - that maternal depression makes a "significant contribution to predictions of mothers' rating for children's behavior problems" - was not verified. In fact, mere depression in a mother did not make her children "more likely" to become problems in school and society. However, the second hypothesis - that the "level of maternal depressive symptoms" makes a significant contribution to predicting problem behaviors among her children - was verified. When "psychotic symptoms" were added to the depression, children of those mothers exhibited both "externalizing and internalizing behavior problems" in school. And so, to one degree or another, depending on which study one reads, children born of mothers with psychological problems are likely to have some problems during their school years.

PARENT-CHILD CONFLICT INFLUENCES ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR (in negative ways): A study reported in Social Indicators Research (Suldo, et al., 2004) reflects the fact that authoritative parenting (including "strictness-supervision," social support/involvement) are related to life satisfaction (LS) for adolescents. A survey of 1201 middle and high school students - who participated in a self-reporting project - indicated a "statistically significant relationship between each "authoritative parenting dimension and adolescent LS."

The study was conducted because while there have been numerous surveys of LS in adults, the well being of youth has not been researched enough, the authors say, and indeed because there have been many recent "childhood expressions of anger at school" - it was a good time for this research. The specific factors that are associated with American adolescents' LS are "family structure, parent-child conflict, social support, and authoritative parenting." Interestingly, research alluded to in this article indicates that when an adolescent disagrees with mother, that exerts "a greater influence than family structure (i.e., married or divorced) or parental relations" per se.

And while other studies have found links between authoritative parenting and adolescent well-being, this particular survey claims to have pinpointed a "strong relationship between [certain] dimensions of authoritative parenting and adolescent's LS." Those results lead the researchers to conclude that "strictness-supervision, social support/acceptance-involvement, and psychological autonomy granting" are "significantly related to LS in early, middle, and late adolescents."

The bottom line in this piece: the more adolescents perceive their parents are "...monitoring their activities, providing them with emotional and instrumental support," along with encouraging them to be individuals and be independent thinkers, "the higher their LS is likely to be." And as adolescents grow older, environmental factors replace the role their parents play. And what does all of this mean for teachers? Communities should be helping parents develop skills that "promote adolescent well-being," and along with other heal promotion programs, parental social support training could greatly help provide the right influences for adolescents, and reduce the violence and other deviant behaviors in middle school.

RISKY PARENTAL BEHAVIOR (and ADOLESCENT sexual activity): This article, published in the Milbank Quarterly (Wilder, et al., 2002), reviews the well-reviewed subject of irresponsible sexual behavior among adolescents. And it points out that parents play a "crucial role" in defining the behavior of their children, regarding sexual activities. But it goes farther: parents who "exhibit unsafe behaviors are especially likely to have children with similar tendencies," Wilder writes. That does not sound very groundbreaking on the surface, but based on data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which used data on the sexual behavior of 19,000 adolescents, it offers insights on influences into adolescent behaviors that are pertinent to this research. (Risky behaviors by parents means they drink perhaps to excess, they smoke, and they don't use seatbelts.)

For example, when parents exhibit risky behaviors it encourages adolescents to "make the transition to perceived adulthood" sooner than they might otherwise have, and that adulthood usually involves sexual activity but doesn't necessarily involve condom usage. Risky parental behavior also influences the "timing of first coitus." In other words, if your parents smoke and drink frequently, and you're a middle school boy, you're more apt to have sex earlier than boys whose parents don't drink or smoke - or who only have perhaps an occasional social drink.

The upshot of this research is that 38% of American boys and girls (grades 7 through 12) have had sexual intercourse. And adolescents whose parents smoke are "especially likely to be sexually active," and they're more likely to smoke, drink, "associate with substance-using peers, and participate in delinquent activity." Hence, "risk" is "reproduced across the generations." Also, when the mother had sex at an early age, their children are "significantly more likely to become sexually active before age 14," according to Wilder's article.

FAMILY PLANNING CLINCS and ADOLESCENTS: An article in Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health (Jones, et al., 2005) reports that about 68% of 1,526 women under the age of 18, who attended a total of 79 family planning clinics, reported a "high level of connectedness with parents." And of the adolescent girls who were part of the survey reported in this article, those under the age of 15 "were more likely than 17-year-olds to indicate that a parent knew they were at the clinic," and indeed to report that 'a parent suggested the clinic." This information is by way of confirming similar data reported in this paper, that adolescents with strong relationships with their parents are less likely to be reckless when it comes to intimate sexual behaviors.

Knowing that apparently an increasing number of adolescents (especially girls) are influenced by their parents - and not just their peer group - is encouraging news for those who work with middle school children - teachers, counselors, administrators, and policymakers. Jones writes that "Connectedness with parents is typically measured as a composite...of closeness, satisfaction with the overall relationship, satisfaction with communication, and perceptions of caring and feeling loved and wanted by family members."

While the majority of adolescent girls in family planning clinics "perceive parents to disapprove of their having sex," two-thirds perceive their parents approve of using contraceptives if they are sexually active. Interestingly, adolescents from "relatively better-off households," who live with both parents or whose mother had a college diploma, "had reduced odds of indicating that a parent knew they were at a clinic." Forty percent of adolescent females said in the survey their parents did not know they were there - and half of those say they are highly connected with their parents.

BOYS' BELIEFS ABOUT DELINQUENT BEHAVIOR: An article in the Journal of Research on Adolescence explains the sifts in parent and peer influences on the development of boys' believes about delinquency. Writer Dustin a. Pardini, et al. (Pardini, 2005) explores the attitudes and influences of 481 boys from the Pittsburgh Youth Study. One of the results of the study was the fact that during middle adolescence, "increasingly tolerant beliefs about delinquency were related to subsequent increases in delinquent peers," Pardini writes. The upshot of these changes in adolescence has potential for actually "preventing the formation of beliefs favoring delinquency," which would certainly be good news for teachers in middle school.

The article continues, indicating that "high levels of conflict and low emotional attachment between parents and children have been associated" with an indifference on the part of adolescents for the "emotional well being of others." What is negative in the home is then transferred to others in school and the community, who often don't understand the origins of the bad behavior. During the developmental period, it is no secret that adolescents spend more time with their peers than their parents. Hence, the acceptability of delinquency becomes easy for adolescents because there is ample time for a process called "deviancy training," Pardini explains. Discussions about rule-breaking are held on a "regular basis," and the validity of these peer conversations is sealed through "shared laughter." The deviancy training is the same thing as what used to be called "bull sessions." Meantime, the beliefs that are learned during deviancy training become more and more at odds with family and parental values.

One potential way for parents and teachers to combat the power that is generated in the deviancy training among adolescents is to foster "pro-social exchanges between group members and strictly enforcing group rules about deviant interactions." This may sound like a good idea, and it may be, but trying to "enforce" regulations among adolescents could only increase their resolve to continue down the path of deviancy. One key moment in terms of timing for these pro-social regulations is during transition into middle school, Pardini writes, since "the structure of peer groups is most likely to be in flux."

HETEROSEXUAL RISK BEHAVIOR (among urban adolescents): The article by O'Donnell, et al., in Journal of Early Adolescence, focuses on strategies designed to empower parents to talk with their adolescents; it also focuses on parents and teachers having a better understanding of "precursors to early sexual initiation." In other words, if parents and schools don't understand today's adolescent community, and the dynamics they go through to experiment with each other's sexuality, no progress will be made on the health and safety front. The survey published in this article involved beginning middle school students in a high poverty area.