The Gift and the Trap: Working the “Teen Brain” Into Our Concept of Youth

Abstract

Progressive developments in scanning technologies over the last decade have led to a surge of new research into the structure and function of the brain and into differences between the brains of teenagers and other adults. This work has not been free of controversy, notably around the question of deficits in the capacity of young people concerning risk-taking behavior. In a previous article, Michael Males mounted a challenge to this body of work, arguing that it exaggerated the propensity of young people to take risks and ignored the impact of external contextual and sociological factors. In responding to Males’s article, this article not only supports his concern about deficit models of adolescence but also explores the way that the new brain science takes us beyond the century-old binary between biological determinism and social constructionism. It calls for renewed scholarly effort to develop theory and discourse that will allow us to think about young people’s responses in terms of the interaction between biology, experience and social context, and individual agency.

Deconstructing Youth

“…This insight supports arguments from Kelly (2012), Sercombe (2010aSercombe ( , 2010b, Bessant (2008) and Males (2009;) that scanning technology does not provide direct, discourse-free, values-neutral evidence to explain youth behaviour. It also supports claims from critical neuroscience and its call for a 'reflexive turn' in the neuroscientific field (Choudhury et al, 2009, p. 65).…”

“Not right in the head”: How should teachers assess new talk about teenagers?

“…According prominence in this discussion to the socially constructed nature of teen brain discourse does not endorse dismissal of the important influence of biological factors in shaping adolescents' accomplishments and vulnerabilities (Sercombe, 2010). Rather, its goal has been to advocate for vigilant attention to the power and operation of authoritative voices in configuring societal stereotypes of young people, and the "social scripts" they make less or more available to adolescents and adults whose lives continue to meet and mix in schools.…”

“…Second, there is the problem of flawed methodology and/or the limited connectedness to "real-life" social contexts of much research to date even when conducted with human participants. There is little space to discuss this issue here (for useful critiques see Bessant, 2008;Epstein, 2007;Males, 2009;Sercombe, 2010;Vul, Harris, Winkielman, & Pashler, 2009), but it is a significant matter often hidden by writing that accords extremely speculative findings the status of established fact (a characteristic of many of the above examples).…”

“All Gas and No Brakes!”

“…Although a constructionist perspective on the nature of adolescence should not have total disregard for the role of biological factors in proscribing and shaping individual accomplishments (Sercombe, 2010), it does require any talk of adolescence as a time of storm and stress avoids implying it is a period characterized only by turmoil (Arnett, 1999) and it cannot but oppose a reinscribing of "out of control" in language more essentialist than even Hall would likely have approved. If we assume the way we talk about young people helps establish the conditions for how we treat them, and, if Lakoff and Johnson are correct, that metaphors originating from hard science are most likely to be conferred the authority of absolute truth, then "all gas no brakes" must be taken seriously.…”