Developmental Changes in Adolescence and Risks for Delinquency

“Peaks, Slumps, and Bumps”: Individual Differences in the Development of Creativity in Children and Adolescents

“…They interpreted this result as a compensating effect, in which the “wave” of DT might be in a “slump” when the wave of reasoning is at its “peak” (see also Guignard & Lubart, in press). Many similar examples can be found in the neurodevelopmental literature, highlighting, for example, a temporal gap between the development of the socioemotional system and the cognitive control systems in adolescence, leading to maladaptive behavior such as risk taking and impulsivity (e.g., Barbot & Hunter, ), which could also have implications for the development of person‐level resources important for creativity.…”

Friends With My Future Self: Longitudinal Vividness Intervention Reduces Delinquency

“…On a related note, recent advances of research into the neurobiological development of the brain suggest that at least some of the constituent components of self‐control are likely to develop more in accordance with the age–crime curve than others and might therefore be conceptually closer to the vividness of the future self concept. Specifically, this research has shown that risk seeking and impulsivity, which are conflated in most existing measures of self‐control (Burt, Sweeten, and Simons, ), develop along different maturational timetables (Barbot and Hunter, ; Casey, Jones, and Hare, ; Steinberg, ). As Steinberg et al (: 39) remarked, researchers “interested in the course of ‘future orientation’ should bear in mind that different aspects of future orientation may follow different developmental trajectories and reach adult levels of maturity at different ages.” These findings tie in nicely with the vividness concept as they imply that the ability of people to consider the future is likely to develop with age.…”

“…In contrast, similar to future orientation, i.e., the capacity and inclination to project events into the future (Steinberg, ), we expect that vividness of the future self increases with age; being weak during adolescence and developing considerably toward early adulthood. As Barbot and Hunter (: 22–3) remarked, adolescents' relatively limited life experience means that they perceive future time differently from adults in the sense that they are less able to perceive the proximity of the future and are consequently less inclined to heavily weigh future consequences. To an adolescent, short‐term consequences are therefore likely to have far greater salience than consequences located several years away in the future, whereas long‐term consequences of present‐day decisions are likely to seem more immediate with increasing age (Barbot and Hunter, ; Steinberg, ).…”

“…Neurobiological and identity changes are among the most salient changes in adolescent development, and both neurobiological and identity perspectives provide insights from different angles to understand adolescent behavior, such as the propensity for risky behaviors, impulsivity, and emotional liability that emerge in adolescence. At the same time, the identity formation process provides further insights in that it guides the expression of these behaviors (e.g., breaking the law in the need for exploration or to integrate into a peer group), and such maladaptive behaviors can crystallize into a persistent delinquent identity (Barbot and Hunter, ). Therefore, extending this approach to the study of delinquency, by situating how neurobiological changes and identity formation processes result in delinquency, could shed new light on these phenomena.…”

“…For example, 5 years of time represents one third of a 15‐year‐old's life but only one fifth of a 25‐year‐old's life. Thus, 5 years into the future is subjectively further away for a 15‐year‐old than for a 25‐year‐old (Barbot and Hunter, ). Furthermore, in the experimental condition, the background clearly displayed the year 2028, i.e., exactly, 15 years after the time of study.…”