Family conflict shapes how adolescents take risks when their family is affected

Numerous studies have established that the social context greatly affects adolescent risk taking. However, it remains unexplored whether adolescents' decision‐making behaviors change when they take risks that affect other individuals such as a parent. In the current study, we sought to investigate how the social context influences risky decisions when adolescents' behavior affects their family using a formalized risk‐taking model. Sixty‐three early adolescents (M_age = 13.3 years; 51% female) played a risk‐taking task twice, once during which they could make risky choices that only affected themselves and another during which their risky choices only affected their parent. Results showed that adolescents reporting high family conflict made more risky decisions when taking risks for their parent compared to themselves, whereas adolescents reporting low family conflict made fewer risky decisions when taking risks for their parent compared to themselves. These findings are the first to show that adolescents change their decision‐making behaviors when their risks affect their family and have important implications for current theories of adolescent risk taking.     

Developmental patterns of change in the influence of safe and risky peer choices on risky decision‐making

Adolescents take more risks when peers monitor their behavior. However, it is largely unknown how different types of peer influence affect adolescent decision‐making. In this study, we investigate how information about previous choices of peers differentially influences decision‐making in adolescence and young adulthood. Participants (N = 99, age range 12–22) completed an economic choice task in which choice options were systematically varied on levels of risk and ambiguity. On each trial, participants selected between a safer choice (low variability in outcome) and a riskier choice (high variability in outcome). Participants made choices in three conditions: a solo condition in which they made choices with no additional information, a social condition in which they saw choices of supposed peers, and a computer condition in which they saw choices of a computer. Results showed that participants’ choices conform to the choices made by the peers, but not a computer. Furthermore, when peers chose the safe option, late adolescents were especially likely to make a safe choice. Conversely, when the peer made a risky choice, late adolescents were least likely to follow choices made by the peer. We did not find evidence for differential influence of social information on decisions depending on their level of risk and ambiguity. These results show that information about previous decisions of peers are a powerful modifier for behavior and that the effect of peers on adolescents’ decisions is less ubiquitous and more specific than previously assumed.     

Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain's reward circuitry

The presence of peers increases risk taking among adolescents but not adults. We posited that the presence of peers may promote adolescent risk taking by sensitizing brain regions associated with the anticipation of potential rewards. Using fMRI, we measured brain activity in adolescents, young adults, and adults as they made decisions in a simulated driving task. Participants completed one task block while alone, and one block while their performance was observed by peers in an adjacent room. During peer observation blocks, adolescents selectively demonstrated greater activation in reward-related brain regions, including the ventral striatum and orbitofrontal cortex, and activity in these regions predicted subsequent risk taking. Brain areas associated with cognitive control were less strongly recruited by adolescents than adults, but activity in the cognitive control system did not vary with social context. Results suggest that the presence of peers increases adolescent risk taking by heightening sensitivity to the potential reward value of risky decisions.     

Adolescent mice,unlike adults,consume more alcohol in the presence of peers than alone

One hallmark of adolescent risk‐taking is that it typically occurs when adolescents are with peers. It has been hypothesized that the presence of peers primes a reward‐sensitive motivational state that overwhelms adolescents' immature capacity for inhibitory control. We examined this hypothesis using a rodent model. A sample of mice were raised in same‐sex triads and were tested for alcohol consumption either as juveniles or as adults, with half in each age group tested alone and half tested with their cagemates. The presence of ‘peers’ increased alcohol consumption among adolescent mice, but not adults. The peer effect on human adolescent reward‐seeking may reflect a hard‐wired, evolutionarily conserved process through which the presence of agemates increases individuals' sensitivity to potential rewards in their immediate environment.     

Is it all in the reward? Peers influence risk‐taking behaviour in young adulthood

The presence of peers is suggested to increase risk‐taking behaviour by heightening response to reward. The current study investigated this using a computerized financial risk‐taking task which was performed twice by a group of young adults (n = 201, median age 19.8 years): once alone and once while in the presence of two peers. An overall increase in risk‐taking was observed when with peers compared to when alone (CHANGE). CHANGE was positively associated with self‐reported levels of reward responsiveness and fun seeking while older age and lack of perseverance were associated with reduced CHANGE. The association between risk‐taking when with peers and both resistance to the influence of peers and age was indirect through reward responsiveness. Reward responsiveness was positively associated with impulsiveness. Only in those who showed a peer‐related decrease in risk‐taking (1/3 of participants), risk‐taking in the presence of peers was associated with increased impulsiveness. The current findings suggest an important role for reward responsiveness in risk‐taking behaviour and demonstrate the influence of peers. Increased understanding of these processes has direct implications for prevention and intervention efforts. Placing risk‐taking behaviour within varying (social) contexts with an eye for differences in personality, development, and emotions provides ample scope for future research.     

Rewards decrease risky decisions for adolescent drivers: Implications for crash prevention

Motor vehicle crashes (MVCs) are a major contributor to adolescent mortality. Adolescent drivers are more likely to make risky decisions in the presence of peers. However, rewards have also been shown to improve decision making in adolescence. Our goal was to determine if peer observation and reward effects on decision-making were dependent upon adolescent driving styles.Twenty-four healthy adolescents played a driving game in a 2 (no peer; peer) × 2 (no rewards; rewards) within-subjects experiment. Driving styles were measured by self-report.Rewards favoring safe choices reduced risky decision making, but this effect was especially robust for adolescents with driving styles that increase risk of MVCs (i.e., dangerous, fast, angry, or distracted styles). Findings suggest that rewards for safe driving can be an effective mechanism for reducing MVCs, especially for the most at-risk drivers, if they can be made appetizing to adolescents.     

Peers influence adolescent reward processing,but not response inhibition

Most adolescent risk taking occurs in the presence of peers. Prior research suggests that peers alter adolescents’ decision making by increasing reward sensitivity and the engagement of regions involved in the processing of rewards, primarily the striatum. However, the potential influence of peers on the capacity for impulse control, and the associated recruitment of the brain’s control circuitry, has not yet been adequately examined. In the current study, adolescents underwent functional neuroimaging while they completed interleaved rounds of risk-taking and response-inhibition tasks. Social context was manipulated such that the participants believed they were either playing alone and unobserved, or watched by an anonymous peer. Compared to those who completed the tasks alone, adolescents in the peer condition took more risks during the risk-taking task and exhibited relatively heightened activation of the striatum. Activity within this striatal region also predicted individual differences in overall risk taking. In contrast, the presence of peers had no effect on behavioral response inhibition and had minimal impact on the engagement of typical cognitive control regions. In a subregion of the anterior insula engaged mutually by both tasks, activity was again found to be sensitive to social context during the risk-taking task, but not during the response-inhibition task. These findings extend the evidence that the presence of peers biases adolescents towards risk taking by increasing reward sensitivity rather than disrupting cognitive control.     

When do peers influence adolescent males' risk taking? Examining decision making under conditions of risk and ambiguity

Risk taking is highly prevalent among adolescent males, and a range of studies have shown that decisions become riskier if a peer is present. However, previous studies have typically provided participants with explicit probabilities of risk in each situation. This does not accurately reflect adolescents' real‐world risk taking, where decisions are made in ambiguous situations alongside their peers. Aiming for a more ecologically valid design, the present experiment manipulated situational ambiguity and examined its interplay with group decision making and developmental factors. Adolescent males (N = 202) aged 12–15 completed a “Wheel of Fortune” task and then self‐reported their score, presenting an opportunity to cheat as a measure of antisocial risk taking. As predicted, adolescents were more likely to take risks when probabilities were ambiguous rather than explicit. Further, higher levels of gambling choices were made by groups in ambiguous, but not risk situations. Age significantly predicted gambling in ambiguous conditions, whereas developmental dispositions (risk perception, reward sensitivity, and inhibitory control) did not play a role. Findings provide an insight into the social and situational conditions under which adolescent males engage in reckless behavior.     

Sensitivity to reward and risky driving,risky decision making,and risky health behaviour: A literature review

Young driver road safety has persisted as a global problem for decades, despite copious and diverse intervention. Recently the influence in reward sensitivity, which refers to the individual’s personal sensitivity to rewards, has received attention in health-related research, including more generally through decision making in risky circumstances, and in risky driving behaviour specifically. As such, a literature review and synthesis of the literature regarding reward sensitivity in relation to risky driving, risky decision making, and risky health behaviour, with a focus on literature in which adolescents and young adults feature, is timely. Thirty-one papers were identified, and the literature revealed that young drivers with greater reward sensitivity engage in more risky driving behaviours including speeding, crashes and traffic violations; and that individuals with greater reward sensitivity engage in more risky decision making and other risky health-related behaviours (such as drinking and drug use). Adolescents and young adults exhibit heightened sensitivity to rewards in the presence of peers, which has considerable implications for young driver road safety as research consistently demonstrates that carrying peer passengers places all vehicle occupants at greater risk of being involved in a road crash. Consideration of the influence of reward sensitivity in young driver road safety, and other adolescent/young adult health-related safety, appears to be a promising avenue of intervention, with gain-framed messages more likely to be accepted by young drivers with greater reward sensitivity. Future research in jurisdictions other than Australia and Europe will increase our understanding of the influence of reward sensitivity, and exploration of the differential impacts of reward-responsiveness and fun-seeking specifically are warranted.     

Mother still knows best: Maternal influence uniquely modulates adolescent reward sensitivity during risk taking

Adolescent decision‐making is highly sensitive to input from the social environment. In particular, adult and maternal presence influence adolescents to make safer decisions when encountered with risky scenarios. However, it is currently unknown whether maternal presence confers a greater advantage than mere adult presence in buffering adolescent risk taking. In the current study, 23 adolescents completed a risk‐taking task during an fMRI scan in the presence of their mother and an unknown adult. Results reveal that maternal presence elicits greater activation in reward‐related neural circuits when making safe decisions but decreased activation following risky choices. Moreover, adolescents evidenced a more immature neural phenotype when making risky choices in the presence of an adult compared to mother, as evidenced by positive functional coupling between the ventral striatum and medial prefrontal cortex. Our results underscore the importance of maternal stimuli in bolstering adolescent decision‐making in risky scenarios.     

Eye blink rate predicts reward decisions in adolescents

The ventral striatum displays hyper‐responsiveness to reward in adolescents relative to other age groups, and animal research on the developmental trajectory of the dopaminergic system suggests that dopamine may underlie adolescent sensitivity to reward. However, practical limitations prevent the direct measurement of dopamine in healthy adolescents. Eye blink rate (EBR) shows promise as a proxy measure of striatal dopamine D2 receptor function. We investigated developmental differences in the relationship between EBR and reward‐seeking behavior on a risky decision‐making task. Increasing EBR was associated with greater reward maximization on the task for adolescent but not adult participants. Furthermore, adolescents demonstrated greater sensitivity to reward value than adults, as evinced by shifts in decision patterns based on increasing potential reward. These findings suggest that previously observed adolescent behavioral and neural hypersensitivity to reward may in fact be due to greater dopamine receptor activity, as represented by the relationship of blink rate and reward‐seeking behavior. They also demonstrate the feasibility and utility of using EBR as a proxy for dopamine in healthy youth in whom direct measurements of dopamine are prohibitively invasive.     

Parental rearing behavior prospectively predicts adolescents’ risky decision‐making and feedback‐related electrical brain activity

The present study examined the role of parental rearing behavior in adolescents’ risky decision‐making and the brain's feedback processing mechanisms. Healthy adolescent participants (n = 110) completed the EMBU‐C, a self‐report questionnaire on perceived parental rearing behaviors between 2006 and 2008 (T1). Subsequently, after an average of 3.5 years, we assessed (a) risky decision‐making during performance of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART); (b) event‐related brain potentials (ERPs) elicited by positive (gain) and negative feedback (loss) during the BART; and (c) self‐reported substance use behavior (T2). Age‐corrected regression analyses showed that parental rejection at T1 accounted for a unique and significant proportion of the variance in risk‐taking during the BART; the more adolescents perceived their parents as rejecting, the more risky decisions were made. Higher levels of perceived emotional warmth predicted increased P300 amplitudes in response to positive feedback at T2. Moreover, these larger P300 amplitudes (gain) significantly predicted risky decision‐making during the BART. Parental rearing behaviors during childhood thus seem to be significant predictors of both behavioral and electrophysiological indices of risky decision‐making in adolescence several years later. This is in keeping with the notion that environmental factors such as parental rearing are important in explaining adolescents’ risk‐taking propensities.     

Too good to be true? Psychological responses to uncommon options in risk–reward environments

Risks and rewards, or payoffs and probabilities, are inversely related in many choice environments. We investigated people's psychological responses to uncommon combinations of risk and reward that deviate from learned regularities (e.g., options that offer a high payoff with an unusually high probability) as they evaluated risky options. In two experiments (N = 183), participants first priced monetary gambles drawn from environments in which risks and rewards were negatively correlated, positively correlated, or uncorrelated. In later trials, they evaluated gambles with uncommon combinations of risk and reward—that is, options that deviated from the respective environment's risk–reward structure. Pricing, response times, and (in Experiment 2) pupil dilation were recorded. In both experiments, participants took more time when responding to uncommon compared to foreseeable options or when the same options were presented in an uncorrelated risk–reward environment. This result was most pronounced when the uncommon gambles offered higher expected values compared to the other gambles in the set. Moreover, these uncommon, high‐value options were associated with an increase in pupil size. These results suggest that people's evaluations of risky options are based not only on the options' payoffs and probabilities but also on the extent to which they fit the risk–reward structure of the environment.     

Peer influence on risk taking, risk preference, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: an experimental study

In this study, 306 individuals in 3 age groups--adolescents (13-16), youths (18-22), and adults (24 and older)--completed 2 questionnaire measures assessing risk preference and risky decision making, and 1 behavioral task measuring risk taking. Participants in each age group were randomly assigned to complete the measures either alone or with 2 same-aged peers. Analyses indicated that (a) risk taking and risky decision making decreased with age; (b) participants took more risks, focused more on the benefits than the costs of risky behavior, and made riskier decisions when in peer groups than alone; and (c) peer effects on risk taking and risky decision making were stronger among adolescents and youths than adults. These findings support the idea that adolescents are more inclined toward risky behavior and risky decision making than are adults and that peer influence plays an important role in explaining risky behavior during adolescence.     

Susceptible to Social Influence: Risky “Driving” in Response to Peer Pressure1

In 2 studies, college students were socially influenced to be risky or not in a driving simulation. In both studies, confederate peers posing as passengers used verbal persuasion to affect driving behavior. In Study 1, participants encouraged to drive riskily had more accidents and drove faster than those encouraged to drive slowly or not encouraged at all. In Study 2, participants were influenced normatively or informationally to drive safely or riskily. As in Study 1, influence to drive riskily increased risk taking. Additionally, informational influence to drive safely resulted in the least risk taking. Together, the studies highlight the substantial influence of peers in a risk‐related situation; in real life, peer influence to be risky could contribute to automobile accidents.     

Let's chat: developmental neural bases of social motivation during real‐time peer interaction

Humans are motivated to interact with each other, but the neural bases of social motivation have been predominantly examined in non‐interactive contexts. Understanding real‐world social motivation is of special importance during middle childhood (ages 8–12), a period when social skills improve, social networks grow, and social brain networks specialize. To assess interactive social motivation, the current study used a novel fMRI paradigm in which children believed they were chatting with a peer. The design targeted two phases of interaction: (1) Initiation, in which children engaged in a social bid via sharing a like or hobby, and (2) Reply, in which children received either an engaged (“Me too”) or non‐engaged (“I'm away”) reply from the peer. On control trials, children were told that their answers were not shared and that they would receive either engaged (“Matched”) or non‐engaged (“Disconnected”) replies from the computer. Results indicated that during Initiation and Reply, key components of reward circuitry (e.g., ventral striatum) were more active for the peer than the computer trials. In addition, during Reply, social cognitive regions were more activated by the peer, and this social cognitive specialization increased with age. Finally, the effect of engagement type on reward circuitry activation was larger for social than non‐social trials, indicating developmental sensitivity to social contingency. These findings demonstrate that both reward and social cognitive brain systems support real‐time social interaction in middle childhood. An interactive approach to understanding social reward has implications for clinical disorders, where social motivation is more affected in real‐world contexts.     

Parents,Peers, and Places: Young Urban Adolescents’ Microsystems and Substance Use Involvement

Limited research is available that explains complex contextual and interactive effects of microsystems such as family relationships, peer networks, and place-based influences have on urban adolescent substance use. We contend that research into these complex processes is improved by integrating psychological, social, and geographic data to better understand urban adolescent substance use involvement. Accordingly, we tested a longitudinal, 3-way moderation model to determine if the direct effect of teen–parent relationships on substance use involvement is moderated by peer network characteristics, which in turn is moderated by the risk and protective attributes within urban adolescents’ activity spaces, among a sample of 248 adolescents. Results revealed that peer networks moderate the effects of relations with parents on substance use involvement for those adolescents with higher levels of risk attributes within their activity space, but not for those who spend time in locations with less risk. Thus, the teen–parent relationship interacts with peer network characteristics, for those urban adolescents whose activity space is constituted within high-risk environments. We conclude that peer networks have important interactive effects with family relationships that influence substance use, and that this is particularly salient for young adolescents who are exposed to risky environments. This finding underscores the importance of continued study into the interrelations among microsystems of urban adolescents, and provides further support that substance use is a social practice that is constituted within the unique geography of young adolescents’ lives.     

Better Safe than Sorry: Risking Irresponsibility by Seeking Uncertainty

Research findings differ as to whether choosing a risky option is an efficient strategy for decision makers seeking to avoid responsibility for potential failures. A risky choice may leave the final outcome to chance factors, but the decision maker can still be held responsible for choosing risk. Further, it is unclear whether a risky choice is a responsible choice. The present article investigates the putative relationship between risk‐taking and responsibility by drawing a distinction between being responsible for the outcome (R1) versus acting responsibly (R2). Four experiments were performed, in which participants were presented with scenarios describing decision makers facing a choice between a risky (uncertain) option and a riskless (certain) option, framed in terms of losses or equivalent gains. The results showed that decision makers who chose the risky alternative were judged to have acted in a less responsible manner (R2), while still being held equally responsible for the outcome (R1), unless they were ignorant of the risks involved. Choosing risk did not absolve decision makers from blame, despite being less causal and less in control than those who chose the riskless option. Risky decision makers were also judged to be more personally involved. The dissociation between R1 and R2 ratings confirms earlier findings and serves to clarify an alleged relationship between risky choices and responsibility aversion. Framing effects for own choices were found in both scenarios. In contrast, responsibility ratings were only slightly affected by frame. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

School Substance Use Norms and Racial Composition Moderate Parental and Peer Influences on Adolescent Substance Use

Parental and peer influences on adolescent substance use have been well demonstrated. However, limited research has examined how parental and peer influences vary across school contexts. This study used a multilevel approach to examine the effects of school substance use norms and school racial composition in predicting adolescent substance use (a composite measure of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use) and in moderating parental and peer influences on adolescent substance use. A total of 14,346 adolescents from 34 schools in a mid‐western county completed surveys electronically at school. Analyses were conducted using hierarchical linear modeling. Results indicated that school‐level disapproval against substance use and percentage of minority students at school were negatively associated with adolescent substance use. School‐level disapproval moderated the association between peer substance use and adolescent substance use, with the association being stronger when school‐level disapproval was lower. School racial composition moderated the influence of parental disapproval and peer substance use on adolescent substance use. Specifically, both the association between parental disapproval and adolescent substance use and the association between peer substance use and adolescent substance use were weaker for adolescents who attended schools with higher percentages of minority students. Findings highlighted the importance of considering the role of school contexts, in conjunction with parental and peer influences, in understanding adolescent substance use.     

Emotion regulation and risk taking: Predicting risky choice in deliberative decision making

Only very recently has research demonstrated that experimentally induced emotion regulation strategies (cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression) affect risky choice (e.g., Heilman et al., 2010). However, it is unknown whether this effect also operates via habitual use of emotion regulation strategies in risky choice involving deliberative decision making. We investigated the role of habitual use of emotion regulation strategies in risky choice using the “cold” deliberative version of the Columbia Card Task (CCT; Figner et al., 2009). Fifty-three participants completed the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ; Gross & John, 2003) and—one month later—the CCT and the PANAS. Greater habitual cognitive reappraisal use was related to increased risk taking, accompanied by decreased sensitivity to changes in probability and loss amount. Greater habitual expressive suppression use was related to decreased risk taking. The results show that habitual use of reappraisal and suppression strategies predict risk taking when decisions involve predominantly cognitive-deliberative processes.