Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/125

Click to flip

125 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Adolescent Work:
2/3 of adol waking hrs.
History: 1) school or wking became schoon and wk. 1870s - rare 17 yr old in school. Today 17 yr old is in school and working. Combination contrib. to stress.
1900's compulsory education laws
Lengthed school number of yrs (still want to work), farm environ still have to work; certain ages (under scrutiny aain inc to 21...) Harder to wk full time.
1) 1930-40’s:
2) Fair Labor Standards Act:
1) Low Employment rates (Great Dep), 5% of 16-17 yr olds employed, not even enough for adults. 2) < 16 not allowed to work more than (18 hrs/school wk and 40 hrs nonschool wk)
50's and 60's:
Gradual increase, emphasis on wk inc (12 yrs but also work for students, primarly to help parents) service economy grew (ex fast food) conveniences, music; needed employees-> cheap, low skills, low responsibilities.
Current Rates
1. 80% work In U.S. before:
2. Who works?
1) h.s. grad (37% in canada, 20% in sweden, 2% in japan), 2/3 at any given time; trend may not continue. 2) Family income as a predictor? Most likely as adol->middle class; poor->harder to find jobs in poor neigh. Not meant to supplement income, optional; Meaning changes.
Different Types of work by gender
Waitors/waitresses: most gender neutral occupations. Male: bus boys, lawn/construc/newspaper delivery. Females: maids, babysitters. Earn 70-80 cents/dollar, more educ but paid less for female occup. Influences: parents, friends, assumptions.
School & work
1. ____ hrs/week does not interfere with school work
2. > __ hrs/wk affects grades.
1. 10-15
2. Lowers GPA (does not matter for 1/2 not going to college), more delinquency, A) vs too busy to get in trouble, not causal. B) parents supervise less C) More financial autonomy and need parents less. Unrealistic idea of how wk income and expenses add up. Adults have expenses, >$500 month vs teen (richer than ever for $8/hr jobs).
3. Class:
4. Less participation:
3. Less hw if most students wk, challenged less, lower expec, European 4-5 hrs/day vs American avg 1/2 hr/day.
4. In extracurric. if more than 20 hrs/wk.
Effects of Work:
1. Quality of Teen Jobs
Rough, unpleasant (McDon. actually best employers if students stay long enough for scholarship), benefits?, large range (many only meet need vs teach; most wk with other teenagers vs socializing with adults. Little adult contact.
Autonomy/Self-Reliance Effects
Workplace Cynicism
Meeting a commitment outside school such as being punctual; responsibility, learn about getting fired, effort vs performance less valued. Why work harder than nec? Same money; ethics implicitely taught problematic (taking resources, longer lunch hrs).
1. Social Responsibility
2. Financial lessons of teen work
3. Mixed
1. Value of contributing to society, theoretical? Even those in need of appreciation are undercut by using money for luxury items. 2. Pre-mature affluence relative to how hard you work; distorted picture, why go to college? 3. Should be great in theory, anser for 'meaningful' time spent...
Adolescent Leisure Activities:
Introduction & Methods
1. Experience Sampling Methods
How much should you have? ex. uva students spend as much time socializing as for wk; Americans are ambivalent. Ambrose Pierce's statement about having fun. 1. Beeper/palm pilot randomly beeping and write down; hundreds of kids, hundreds fo times.
Older adolescents spend more time in:
productive activities (b/c of addition of work and chores); often 50 hr wk, school, hw, employment (not unusual), as much time as adults not counting chores.
Effects of Leisure
1. Our ambivalence about leisure
2. Where much "work" of development may go on.
3. View that teens should have zero leisure time
Extracurric, wk, rest, social devel: instruc, time management. 2. Use leisure time to learn about enjoyable activities, relationships, values, interact. 3. Question is rather whether enough? Creativity.
4. Displacement hypothesis for time better spent
School extracurricular activities
1. Social class effects
4. Socializing does NOT have value, TOO much leisure time. [solitude/daydreaming possibly linked to pos wellbeing] 1. Mc and UC vs lower; more partic in extracurr act, more unstruc time for lc. Athletics: 1/2 of all adol (largest), next frequent activities: music, academic-based clubs. (College bound, 1/2, 1/2, 1/2)
3. gender differences
4. Effects on kids of extracurricular participation
3. Athletics. Girls: better achiev in sciences (schoolbased activities gear to later male act) Racial mixing more likely to occur, esp athletics.
4. Pos cor w/ selfesteem, predicts involvement for extracurr act in adulthood and college/community. More engaged in school (ex gpa for teams vs wk).
TV & Media
1. Up to __ hours a day
As intensely exposed to media as any part of culture, shifted w/ iming/text messaging but like socializing. 1) up to 8 hrs; some while doing hw.
2. Exposure to popular culture.
Directly, through friends (advice/source unimpor/from media to friends to you), magazines goal to sell ad space, presentations b/c watched vs true (there are no rules for conduct...), appeals to baser desires, odds of being murdured est to be 10 times as large, odds of kidnapping overest, shark attacks. Halloween myths(10 yr per->5 days after halloween, none w/ razors, poisoning usu from parents abusing children; major metropolitan areas.) Future doctors/lawyers (save lives, running: hoax, dramatic. 49 min: reading lawbks/memos; 30 sec: continuance? 30 sec: arguing of 50 min show in reality.
Media:
3. Adolescents matter
Gives Am a common culture; cultural literacy unites (shakespeare was really popular w/ teenagers/loer classes) Some pos effects of media across geog. 3. to economy, sales market ($200/month purely discretionary income).
1. Race/ethnicity as the largest taboo in American Society
2. Race as a Social Construction
2. Idea exists more in minds than physical world; Ancestors: Ex. 1/16 of heritage Af Am blood->Af Am (More powerful gene...?), 30% of whites have more than 10% Af Am genes today in US. Af Am have larger percentages of Euro-Am genes; sensitivity to certain medications-> genetics vs societal definition.
3. Changing Composition of the U.S.
40% of adol are Not of white/Euro-Am descent. 16% of those 40% are Af Am; 19% are Hisp Am, 4% Asian Am; 1% Nat Am. By 2020 1/2 of all adol will be non-white. Plurality culture; 40% of youths in Calif are recently? immig; recent media attention.
African Americans
1. demographics
16% of all youths. Only group coming to US against will; US founded by people leaving restric vs Af Am. One group w/ no expec to assimilate to larger culture.
African Americans
2. History
Last 50 yrs: high school grad rates inc from 7% (1940) to 66% (1990) vs 26 to 79% for whites. College grad from 1.3% to 11.3% vs 4.9 to 22%. Gap INC but numbers inc x10. Since 1990 these changes stopped in esp college but also hs. Gap inc slightly financial; challenges to affirm action.
African Americans
2. History
Black males less college rates; 3:2 from black females. Gender imbalance anyway; educ attainment most signif; black males after college have same income as white hs graduates.
Hispanic Americans
1. Demographics
19% of all teenagers, rapid inc due to immig. Status: pov rates equal to Af Am. Less rigid racism than from Af Am. [intermarriage rates higher than btwn blacks and whites] Less seg btwn groups, less readily disting.
Asian Americans
1. Demographics
2. Stereotypes
3. History
4%; closer to whites in achiev (some subgroups do better); half are on welfare at some pt; SE Asia: escaping usu and less pos results. Racisim in history, reverse quotas to dec majority in college.
Native Americans
1. Demographics
2. History
3. Status in Society
1% of all teens; had a sub-ord status vs effort to blend in; ex. cowboys and indians; equal or higher levels of poverty; little attention but low-off group.
European-Americans
1. What it means to be "white"
2. Being “European-American" vs. "Ethnicity Doesn’t Matter"
3. What Defines a European-American Culture?
60%; Ethnicity doesnt matter: luxury of majority; ex age 13-15 students, whites did nto know ethnic groups (ex. cool kids); only recog in minority. Definitions: Christmas, easter/passover vs kwanza; thanksgibing; Justice orientation (property rights, indiv value), language.
Ethnocentrism
1. Definition
2. Examples
3. Fallacies
Belief that one's own culture is superior to all others. Diff btwn cultures mark areas where other cultures are inferior. - Most common and natural error in human thought in all groups. Ex. '60s report of Af Am families: problems b/c matriarchal (vs poverty, racism; cultural diff make them worse off, this should not be Assumed.)
Ethnocentrism
4. Textbook and its presentation
Racism & Minority Status
1. Shared characteristics of what it means to be a minority
Teen preg in black families linked to single parent familes; "ethnicity -> see minority culture" 1. Heightened self-cons, isolated, intruder/alien, nervous, distracted from task at hand, fear (ex one in 50,000 town of other ethnicity)
Racial-Ethnic Minoritiy: temporary vs permanent in US
2. Examples of racism:
Affect on you and views of other people (esp in adol); young person high achieving but cannot escape minority status (ex film). 2. Ex. DWB, driving while black, resisting means charged for assault.
2. Examples of racism:
Present; housing sales: shown diff quality houses; submit resumes, names, wh more likely to be called; buying a car: loan w/ better interest rate for wh. College admissions: legacy based but af am historically not in college. Beh acceptable for whites (angry) vs blacks (feared) Ex. Jesse Jackson, DC, more nervous of black youths. Intersec. -> lock doors
2. Examples of racism:
3. Hard vs soft
After Ok City bombing by two whtie men (not cautious of wh males for bombs); treating af/asian Am as representative of group; view that black should help their own; dating (marriages: 2% interracial vs 15% if distrib more evenly); Hard Racism: all aware of, racial epithets. Soft: Have no intent to be racist, ingrained stereotypes diff in cultural affects on beh; faculty in grad school may invite for sports those of same ethnicity.
4. About a million dollars
5. Racism by other than Whites
6. Biases in research developed for white people.
To be black if white.
5. B vs B; ethnic min against whites, not exempt from being racist, but more powerful if from majority. Natural tendency to assimilate w/ similar people. Biases: only in one lecture to discuss ethnic min...relate to all adol issues.
Social Context & Adolescent Development: Race (cont.), Poverty & Gender
A. The problem with labels
A. Correct way; cacausians vs white; changes in preferences. How important: Ex easier to make assoc w/ unplease and black names. Measure of implicit attitudes, not consc aware of; assoc over time; difficult to blame: media exposure. Predict beh: small correl.
What makes ethnicity happen? 1) Maintenance of kindship and friendship netwks. Shorthand.
Residential stability (neighbors); common occup (dry clearning, bus), common instit/services (church), who I am - group part of. Common culture->not nec phy struc ex. cath/prot; jews/palest in middle east. Primitive human instinct/shared w/lizards. Ethnicity evolves from these.
2) Ethnicity & dominant vs subordinate groups
Minority: more apparent vs an accent. Notice more if in min. Subord->pressure to conform to majority's cultural norms. Domin->no feedback to keep beh in check (ex polish people jokes), 'problematic' does not nec occur to people.
3) Ethnicity as:
I. Ethnicity & Develop.; Strategies: assimiliation.
3) created and maintained by soc forces; pride, keep iden. 1) assimiliation: melting; part of maintstream; blend in; 1930-80s->immig should blend in. Society not letting? Irish not signific, Af Am not let and assim difficult.
I. 2) Marginality
3) Separation
2) Cannot fit in; 'lay low'; not call attention to yourself; 'not a big deal.' 3) Active/Assertive: 'do not fit in? not nec for me.' Not sure price is not too high or not wanted by society. usu creates hostility from maj culture.
4) Biculturism
Join larger group but maintain iden of subgroup. Ex Manhattan at its best->still displaying cultures but wking together.
Codeswitching:
Modify beh to match group; ex. meeting w/ a wh professor vs friends in dress, lang, actions. Not nec noticed by maj group of min group.
Est ethnic identity:
Superimposed:
1) understand your own culture 2) find ways to relate to maj culture 3) how to deal w/ prejudice (challenge, avoid) Superimposed: iden devel tasks (ex bill clinton's code switching in lang->socioeconomic)
Gender 1) Masculinity & Femininity in adol. Different from sex. Stereotype trait:
Inventories:
Male: assertiveness vs quiet, passive, caring. Inventories: masc, fem, androgenous.
Boys vs Girls
Gender intensification*(Matters More) in adol.
Boys inc in masc -> most pos outcomes. Girls inc in adrogency -> most pos (w/ peers, school, etc) (for selfesteem and peer acceptance). Gender inten: besides sex/romance mattering more; six yr olds vs 12 yo more likely hassled if w/ dolls.
3. Urban Girls
Fem, poor, etc. Min&Female&Poor. Diff forms of oppression: phy threats and abuse; psy threats; sexism w/ culture and families (esp for poor) 'boys will be boys.
4. Strengths and problems coping w/ ineq
Best->Deconstruc Approach (or Crit Perspec.) Ex. no books, no light to study; abuse. Recog as fundamentally unfair and diff rules. (Not for everyone wking hard means getting ahead; stay in power) Angry perspec but helps cope->fight back incentive.
Poverty: Basic Statistics
1. 100 million youths in poverty worldwide
2. 22% of youths in U.S are low income...
16% (1 of 6) of youths in poverty
3. Poverty line for a family of 4 ~17,049/year(2000)’ $1420/mo
Ex. two people full time at min wage w/ 2 kids, 2006; chart
Poverty: Who’s in poverty
1. Minority youths
2. Single-parent family youths
1. 35% hisp; 11% of wh youths. 2. 47% of single par mothers have children in poverty. 1/12 chance adol are poor if two-parents. Gender-> Single par is father (1/4) chance to be poor (twice if mother) After divorce income of father goes up per capita if mother has the children.
3. Two-parent families
4. Geography 5.Urban & Rural Poverty
(Poor are better off in wealthy neigh. Medium income in middle class neigh)
More two-parent families so 1/2 of all poor children live in these. 4. Highest pov rates in SOUTH. More pov in urban and rural areas. Change-> urban pov is more concentrated (ex unemp rate 25% in '60s) Now umemp usu 70% for really poor neigh. Not good sense of how to get jobs for children.
6. Causes of changing demographics in U.S.
Liberal: Worse than ever. Pov rates lowest in Great Society; steady for last 30-40 ya. Now better well off than 30-40 yrs ago. (Cars common). Bigger soc class GAP today. Internet: compet w/ educ across world. ex ford motor: lower min wage, as competitive
G. Primary Correlates of adolescent poverty
-School failutre, dropping out, less likely to enroll in college, greater unemp, greater out of wedlock childbearing.
H. Blaming the Victim
1. Theory
Makes us uncomfortable; why diff? Not wking hard vs don't have bks. Ex why was Pearl Harbor in the Pacific?? Only asked of them: Af Am b/c of family struc, cultural diff the cause. vs wealthy: hyper-achiev, laziness about phy wk, lack of empathy for lower-off, not said if in dominate culture.
I. Influence of Race, Gender, & SES on everyday decisions. XVIII. Problem behavior theory/ Delinquency & Aggression
Top 1% controls 30%. How to think about diff btwn adol problems for treatment? What predicts serious trouble vs light/mod? Parental influence? Can these prob be treated?
B. Internalizing and Externalizing Problem Behaviors
1. Definitions
Internalizing: symptoms experienced internally; depressed, eating disorders, anxiety, psychosomatic, can lead to suicide. Ext: problems for others, delinquency, agress/violnce impinging on others.
2. Overlap between types
(Alcohol and drug use falls into both; usu classified as ext) Surveys of symptoms have .6 correl betwn two groups (int/ext), As ext inc, int inc. Skew correlation; decent chance delingquent child also depressed. Difficult for simple disease models: co-occur.
3. Overlap within types 4. Culture and expression of deviance
Delinquent more likely to be aggressive, alcohol using, drug using. 4. How expressed depends on culture. Permissive, US external. Restrictive: Thailand, Japan, int (inc anxiety and inc depression)
C. Externalizing Behaviors:
1. Assessments via "official" records
Diversion: 100 caught. Citizen Div minus 40, Police Div minus 30, Station Div if parents have lawyers minus 15.
1. Arrests: distorted. Depends on activity but also getting caught (If parents overreact and mention therapy vs parents not at home). cont. Keep record, Arrest/Pretrial div: minus 7.5. Postponed trial and dismissed: 5.025 left (formally convic) Trail w/probation 2.51; then trial w/ incar.
2. Types of diversion and effects on official records. Inaccurate official records.
Citizen, Police, Station, Arrest/Pretrial, Postponed trial->Dismissed, Trialw/Probation, Trial w/Incarc. Poor less likely to get out of sys; af am. Asking (anony) fairly honest (acknow crimes->peers say yes; records)
3. Status Offenses vs. Adult Criminal Behavior
Status: not illegal if not juvenile (under 18/21) Ex drinking, truancy, running away, out of control w/ parents, smoking
4. Changing trends in juvenile courts
Begun in late 1800s: Paternalistic idea (children still maturing, firm guiding hand, help, not formal w/ lawyers). Then more like adult court: 1960s sup ct dec-> treated children badly; some more reasonable than others. Incarcerated for a long time (ex w/ min evid->assumed). Juveniles therefore need signific protec->lawyers, appeals.
4. Changing trends in juvenile courts
5. Parens Patriae Doctrine -
a. CHINS PINS
Crime wave (coddling is crazy), dismantling cts-> if over 16 go to adult ct; >13 go to adult ct. 5. State as parent (take over as a surrogate parent) Still happens w/ minor offenses.
CHINS PINS: child in need of supervision. Must show grades, curfew, etc to ct or taken away from home; an option for parents to file usu, sometimes soc wkers.
D. Historical trends in delinquency
1. Public Perceptions
2. Increases 1950's - 1980's
3. Striking decreases in...
1.Over past 20 yrs: actually much better.
2. Up x4, cohort inc. 3. Dec in 1990s: exctly as in 1965, Adol and overall. Why: economy improved in early 90s, still better than in 70s and 80s, changed families->less stressed.
3. Striking decreases
Roe v Wade influence: 1972 abortion legal. Number inc, crime rate peak 16-20. Dec after (16 yrs) decision. Some states leg abortion earlier w/ proportional crime dec. Not an arg for abortion. Presence of unplanned births is a problem (need better supports); Theory.
4. Violent crimes
Homicide, mugging. Inc similarly but has not dec as much (1/2 of 1960s high vs 1/4 of '60s) (usu more correl). Guns Access inc (fighting back to bullies wks but not w/ guns). Juv Hom still uncommon. After Columbine.
4. Violent crimes
Ex metal detec in Charlottesville; statistics: 1/2,000 yrs; vs 1000s for suicide, driving drunk, etc. 50 chances every 1000 yrs. Metal detec: see school as more alienated from admin. Not communic, telling admin. Backfires: false sense of sec->take out person at metal detec first. Metal detec more understandable for urban schools.
E. Problem Behavior Syndrome Theory. Film: Scared Straight. How delinquents differ:
1/2 of crimes by 10-17 yo. 1/2 of burglaries from adol. Bigger impact on treatment programs than all research combined :-( Delin: worse in school, parents less strict, pessimistic, angry, did not care about school, parents w/ delinq histories.
Problem Behavior Syndrome Theory.
1. Several Problem Behaviors Co-Occur
2. Explanation: Unconventionality
1. Ext problem beh co-occur. One overall syndrome? Three beh go together (delin, drug use, early sexual beh). 2. Delinq->property. Drug->escape from prob => Unconventionality (of conven norms; do not care about anything) Less likely to be affil w/ relig instit.
3. Kandel’s Rebutta
One beh leads to others (drinking-contact-while drunk) Causing one another. Sometimes do NOT occur together (well in school) Ex sexual beh (diff track) Not a strong correl; most delinq not heavy drug users.
F. Delinquency Explanations: Gottfredson & Hirschi’s Social control theory
40 yrs; children born delinq. Become att to parents-> care about soc rules. (But, not att to parents why care about norms?) (Become att but parents are criminals?) Psy most ingored SC Theory.
Explanations: Parenting
1. Patterson’s coercive interaction cycles
1. Patterson's coercive interac cycles. Poor skills w/ peers-> rejec by normal peers-> more delin, delinq & assoc w/ dev peers. (Parents relieved children came home-> acceptable beh? Until stopped by police)
Patterson’s coercive interaction cycles: How Pattern Occurs
Parents less strict often just unsucc at it; less successful w/ peers/bossy, usu get your way. Leads to rejec by normal peers (even if your parents do) Other rejec peers (deviant peers)-> Cluster together. Very chaotic; aggressive; not good friends but stay together/associate; not supportive. Leads to more delinq, accept norms.
2. Permissive, neglectful parenting vs. Parental Monitoring and control
Do not teach skills to manage->no impulse control. Ex houses used for parties. Did not care as much (about rules); do not keep track of children. Very crisis oriented (only go to therapy that day, do not need therapy if given probation)
2. Permissive, neglectful parenting vs. Parental Monitoring and control cont.
Learn conseq of rules? Not caught/no rules: why follow rules. Wks for use until age 5 in school w/ peers. Age 12,13: can get in trouble w/ law. Shocked about conseq when enforced.
3. Abusive, harsh parenting.
Correl w/ delinq; other side of permiss/opposites? Actually go together. Permissive to a pt, then really harsh and abusive. Easy way out for parents: letting it go. Really bad beh->lash out, Feels most NATURAL at the time. Consistent w/ permissive parenting.
3. Abusive, harsh parenting. Why not effective?
1) Undermines rel w/ child to iden w/ values/norms. Interventions do not make up for pain (phy). Parents must rely on children basically wanting to comply w/ most rules. 2. Punishment wks less well than pos reinforcement. Unpleasant to think about punishment vs pos reward wking toward (keep in mind) want to think about rules for reward. Used still by parents, not just for ignorance.
Crime Measures, Random-Effects Model (of scared straight)
More likely to commit criminal beh, more harmful than doing nothing. Currently extreme boot camp versions. Why: societal harsh parenting. Easy ans seems agreeable. Angry reaction/satsifying to punish/revenge. Legis: constit want fast results. Other movies have lower produc values, 80-90%-> not serious trouble makers anyway (scared straight basis for impressive results) Short term effects: vomitting; 2 days later. Parents beating children see immed, satis effects.
4. Autonomy & Relatedness
Lack of connec, hostile -> predicts delinq (soc att/control theory); Lack of autonomy w/ parents more likely; esp hostile beh (frustration in other rel)
5. Attachment and Delinquency
Esp dismissing attach->not thinking about relat->not thinking about rules->delinquency. Maternal control matters more if high or low if securely attached. Must have a good relat. - Also preocc/ambiv (attach with parents) more likely to be ambiv (always thinking about; different kinds of delin (cry for help) ->Not that destruc to undermine relat; probably less delinq after adol.
Explanations: Parenting
6. Limitations
6. Treated as family problems vs societal and indiv.
Explanations: Poverty
1. Parents’:
2. Increased exposure to violence and crime
3. Only available route to achieve status
4. Discounting the future
1. diminished opportunity for supervision (mult jobs, bad hrs) Like permissive/neglec parents. 2. Inc interac w/ criminals (ex how to sell drugs)3. Most drug dealers do not do well and end up in jail or injured. Usu one may do well for a while->affects children's percep. 4. Adol; not worth as much as present (also uncertain); more likely for poor adol.
J. Explanations: Peer Influences
Explanations: "I didn’t do it." (Denial)
Influences: More likely modestly to engage in crime. Usu chose delinquent friends b/c like themselves. J. Personal exp: 90-95% arrested by "mistake"; compelling stories; usu 95% are guilty.
L. Explanations: Intergenerational transmission/ heritability
1. Related To Parents’ Behavior When Adolescents
2. Adoption Studies
Parent's criminal beh predicts your level, back as adol. 1) Parenting factors (lazy...) 2)Genetic (adoption and twin studies, the inc similarity genetically the more likely for similar delinq levels) (Adoption process flaws study) Iden twins more similar in delin levels than fraternal. Sizable but not overwhelming effects.
Intergenerational transmission/ heritability
3. Possible Mediators
3. Impulsivity, ADD inherited and therefore more vulnerable to delinq (remembering rules, school) Sensation seekers (partly inherited) risk taking -> delinq in wrong condit (vs business success)
M. Explanations: Intrapsychic Factors
1. Self-efficacy for adaptive behavior
2. Debunking the self-esteem myth
2. Self-esteem has NO relation w/ delinq (Ex believe to deserve more...) Actually self-ef: belief that you can engage in an important beh successfully if you try. Do not have belief that they can succeed in conventional world, to control impulses, have good careers (specific tasks vs general self-esteem) Can steal well. Telling adol-> value yourself not effective.
3. Interpersonal Negotiations Strategies
4. Lack of Impulse Control
3. Usu fight or flight; disagreements as arousing, stressful. (prisoners ex.) 4. (ex. ques: could you if you tried to control yourself->usu say no) Feel they have no choice.
5. Lack of Empathy
N. Specific Explanations for Aggression - Dodge’s Theory
Not caring about victims; usu not total lack (missing part of brains...); usu dismissing attach, bad experiences. N. "Hostile Attributional Biases" Aside from delinq, very violent adol despite neg conseq usu have HAB. Ambig situations seen hostile toward them. Ex showing vignette.
1. Perceptual biases in ambiguous situations
2. Links to behavior
("Hostile Attributional Biases") Usu identical ratings if inc or dec agression in situation but difference if ambig. Expec from past relat. 2. Act aggressively after interpretations.
3. Girls & Aggression
3. vs physical (hitting); Relational aggression (Trying to hurt another's reputation or relat w/ others) Males (usu phy); females (relat more often). Same processes for same effects. Romantic partners by age 20, half of All have been in relat w/ phy agg. Females As likely (if not more) to engage in phy agg. Males are more likely to make more serious injuries. (successful methods for girls are verbal)
O. Age patterns in Deviant Behavior
Any criminal beh: Age 8,9 to 17 inc x10 in levels (opportunity) Drop off by 30 (1/5 of peak), nothing can prevent adol crime? Not true anymore. Peak age 15-18 of most societal crimes. Why dramatic inc 9-15? Why drop after 18? Something makes the rates dec...
1. Why does delinquency increase so dramatically in early adolescence?
No clear an. Most obvious: More capable as age inc; ex run faster to mug and run; stronger; smarter (but, 9 yo should commit crimes just poorly or easier crimes like stealing) Phy skills for x10 inc? Also: Autonomy, breaking away from parent's wants. Less close to parents, more room for trouble, go to bed later, unsupervised. Hormonal changes (inc in testos->more risk taking) Marginal person: long period w/ not much to do. Ex puppies: bored, restless, destructive (some better at delaying gratific) Terrie Moffit...
2. Why does it decline so precipitously at end of adolescence? (Moffit)
A way of acting old (ex drinking, smoking) Similar to marginality idea -> cannot show adulthood in many other ways (job, voting); Ex vandalism-angry-effecting the world. (Rates at 30 low: cannot run as fast as 15 ya, not as good at being delinq? age 24: do not need to prove adulthood) More likely to have a job, be educ, which are conventionally 'adult.'
2. Why does it decline so precipitously at end of adolescence? cont
Adults have legitimate resources to gain possessions (money); Relationship formation: (Criminal beh drops most strongly when Married. Risky beh drops (car insur rates); due to SOC CONTROL THEORY, tied to someone else? Or someone else responsible for> Or controls immature impulses.) Brain devel continues into 20s, risk-taking areas of brain as well. Sense of invul declines w/ more life exp; too much wk for adol take power from parents but later connects to society.
Reason summary
1) (Physical) 2) Act old, marginality 3) Relationship: marriage a clear link. 4) Brain devel
3. Terrie Moffitt’s theory: Adolescence-limited delinquents
4. Terrie Moffitt’s theory: Life-course persistent offenders
No deviat beh before 10; normal for adol.
4. Trouble conforming to norms all of life. Ex 4th grade to 27... Slight inc in adol. Most serious offenders are life-course persis (muggers/rapers/robbers); Identify by age beginning. Multiple forms of offending? Group is smaller but account for most serious crime. High rates. Ex. selling drugs, violent, sexually abused as child, foster care, phy health problems. Lack many options. How to treat?
P. Prevention
1. Scared Straight & Boot Camp type programs
1. Type of adol: Diversion, not worried about as much by courts... Avg child has a 34% of re-offending. Avg control child 27% child of re-offending. (Need to do more than 3 hrs??)
P. Prevention
1. Boot Camp type programs
2. “Nothing works.”
Data not promising, similar to harsh parenting and discourages. With other juvenile delinq. 2. '80s, '90s had a basis, indiv therapy did not wk either (no incentive, not honest, what to advise?). Groups: therapy to change peer group values. Almost ALWAYS makes MORE delinq. IATROGENIC: pathology producing effects. Ex. scared straight's netwking group. OUTWARD BOUND: some good but back to same environ.
3. Juvenile/adult prison “Three strikes and you’re out.”
To adult prisons; keep in longer; Life imprisonment. Not a cheap option. [yr in jail for a child: sec, housing, guards, avg cost in VA/US: $78,000 /prisoner/yr. Rest of lives if 16 now: $600,000.
4. Comprehensive family treatment programs
Aka Multisystemic family therapy. Indiv therapy not enough, schools not enough, combination. Ex 30ft hole, 10ft ladder; infection. Parents treated (depressed?), family therapy, school (easier classes), parents wk to change peer group (curfew), 5+ months, 5-10 hrs/wk seems costly but not compared to prison cost/yr. Data: around country, begin w/ hard-core crim. (struck out), After 4 yrs: re-arrest for control (60-70%), re-arrest for treatment (25%), Dramatic Effect.
5. The larger choice about how to handle juvenile delinquents
Talk about why w/ juveniles or jail; mercy bears richer fruits than stricter justice-> Lincoln. Film: not dramatic, change environ, org, prevent vs react. Soc environ: community also as judge of competence. 1) Opportunity for pos activities 2) Skills 3) Rewards for succ. Schools: Team Learning (pressuring another). Trends should not inc school size, perhaps have an economy of scale: subschools. Peer group: most suscep if not successful in family and school.
Film cont.
- strengthen society
Peers: Broadened by student team learning; have own economy and values; responsible roles can counteract neg influences, interact w/ adults. Community Experiences for Career...(CE2): study/wk in job sites; ties school and community; ex hospital may adopt schools. Youths in Action (decision-making process in community. volunteer tutors), ease transition to adult roles.
Substance Use and Abuse
A. Media Frenzies
Trends 1975-2001.
Coverage level presently; 15 ya: extensive coverage (like today's war in iraq), election issue, most concern when use at lowest. 1970s: least media concern and highest use. *Peak in late 70s, 1992 rates 40% of peak (cocaine slightly later rise), 1988 major election issue. Also more worried in 1988 and therefore adol use declined. Half of aol have tried marj prior to leaving hw. (slightly higher rates than for drugs in general) *Recent Rise/Rebound in drug use*
C. Bad Drugs vs. Really Bad Drugs: Assessing Harm to Society
1. Long-term Death Rates from Different Drugs
Cig/alcohol/mar vs cocaine/heroin/lsd. Earlier deaths: 2,500 yr die b/c of hard drugs. [2800 killed on sept 11th) 25,000 alcohol, mar (often driving deaths), 250,000 cig. Nicotine far more addictive than alcohol or mar and perhaps more than cocaine or heroin. For a small group cig are incredibly addictive. Dramatic drugs not nec the biggest problem.
D. Recreational use vs. abuse
Prediction of Future problem behaviors from use at different ages
Children exp in hs at low levels are better adjusted than those abstaining. Correl not equal to causation. Abstainers also include nervous, narrow-minded. Children not connec to other adol, w/out opportunities. Chart: Less pop inc from 7-9@13,14; 23%@15, 30%@16,17; 36%@18. More pop, sec att: 9-26%@13,14; 42%@15; 52%@16,17; 68%@18. INC steadily. Meeting norms of group.
1. Is experimentation ever healthy? Categories:
- CAGE:
1) Experimentation but not regular user (1-3 times: not usu unhealthy children correlationally); 2) Users recreationally (fun, affect moods, not affecting rest of life; easily may become true abusers) 3) True abusers (usu define themselves as recreational users. WHO: def of alcoholism: 3 drinks/day on average; 2/day on avg is heavy; More than 5 for men and 4 for girls in 3-hr per is Binge drinking. CAGE: cut down (you know your level is too high if you tried); Annoyed w/ others for bothering you about your use; Guilty for use or actions while using; Eye opener (ex first thing in morning). Answer yes to 2: abusers. Movie (traffic, cocaine use necessarily abuse? )
E. Risk factors for Abuse
Individual factors
Unlike other problems, indiv factors: Personality (angry, impulsive, risk takers, go w/ moment; more likely to be depressed, more likely to have achiev prob (causes? unsure), gender: males more for most drugs; equal for nicotine. Girls use more tranquilizers to relax vs disinhibiting.
E. Risk factors for Abuse
Interpersonal factors
More distant and hostile; less sense of self-efficacy for social rel; no coping; dismissing att; history of suicide attempts; escape method from emotions.
E. Risk factors for Abuse
Societal influences
Clear: great for altering state of mind, reason for coffee. Ok for using drugs to treat depression; head aches. No move to stop cig (gov gains tax revenues), alcohol to alter mood. Message to adol: do not use certain drugs; dishonest-> should Not use to alter mood; is it logical? Long-term neg effects.
Value of misconduct by friends
Less popular influenced if peers value it (inc slightly); Popular are less affected by friends against but moreso for approval. Not pressured into dec but choose to b/c valued; usu high status. Graph: less popular effect more level than popular, pos inc.
Adolescent minicultures
Adol know pop culture things adults do not, but also vice versa. Trends of certain drugs popular among h.s.-> gradually neg effects down and use declines. Ex. Heroine popular in late 1960s and in late 70s for junkies and slums and rate dec for 10 yrs; late 80s next generation inc use. Little attention gives message of few neg effects; struc diff months later and then new drug.
3. Family factors
(More in college group in general, poor bonding w/ parents; profile: spare time and money, parents also abuse drugs. Successful treatment usu involves family)
Race and class: More likely to occur if whites vs minority (abuse across all types, cocaine vs crack w/ minority vs wealthy) Wealthy more at risk for drug use, tie to societal norms. Permissiveness, lack of involvement, *Rejection from parents.
Substance Abuse Prediction
- Age
- Genetic factors
Early use diff from later; 11-13 (unus, other problem beh as well) MUCH higher risk than 16-17 for alcohol and mar. - Close relatives w/ serious drug abuse problem inc a LOT; exp alcohol differently, enjoy more, like to have more, more risk/pleasure. Generalized to other drugs.
- Tolerance factors of family
- Tolerance by peers a big factor
Not a big deal inc lik for alco use. Af Am: little tolerance. - usu do not drink much more than peers (selected heavy-drinkers) Ex diff group each day w/ one night per group vs every night for indiv. Difficult to cut back and stay w/ friends.
- Geog
7. Protective factors
(cig still most fatal even if adjusted for numbers and casual users vs hard drugs)
- More likely to in NE and West US; wealth/income vs south. Cultural acceptance. 7. Close family rel, higher academic achiev and Strong Achiev orient helps (questionable at times, no guarantee) for ex: (Academic vs interpersonal effects, perhaps one suffers for use during free time but not the other)
F. What is and is not a "drug" that’s being abused.
1. Gateway drug theory
1) Small effect to use harder drugs (from alco/mar) (Difficult for definitive research-> most began w/ alcohol but also drank milk. Is it causal? Start early: at risk anyway; wks through Exposure, esp at young age, to diff crowd to see use and have access. No evidence for Physical effects (crave harder drugs?)
G. Specific Drugs
1. 55% of h.s.srs. have used; 30% of hss smoke somewhat regularly, 17% daily (1/5*). Race: wh/hisp slightly higher. (Daily 25, 28% vs 5% if Af Am) Stereotype for af am not true. Spending usu from those addicted since teenagers (drug company's income) would have happened anyway later? More sense of risks as adults.
1. Nicotine
Dropped in last 5 yrs-> 1) Huge price inc (tabacco settlement w/ fed gov, states->raised price and therefore profits did not dec). Price influences teenagers vs adults, already addicted. 2) Controversial: no more anti-sm ads from tabacco companies which inc likelihood (not for 'smart' children, rebellion). (At the very least no effect.)
2. Alcohol
2. Suppressant/Depressant: inhib parts of brain first (like brakes turned off first); more relaxed/social. Rebound effect: power det on number; ex 2-3 drinks (First 3-4 hrs: most relaxed-> 5,6 hrs rebound as wearing off.) Arousal higher than starting. Ex. bed at 2:30, wide away at 10 (jittery). More alcohol: longer depressed and extended rebound. Hungover part of rebound; drink more to bring down->cycle. Ex. drink in afternoon, agitated at night.
2. Alcohol
70% of hss in last yr
50% of hss in last 30 days, regular.
1/3 of hss binge (more than 5 in a row in past 2 wks),
15% of 8th graders binge. College: binge drinking inc signif & dec after college. Problem esp if genetic predisposition, even w/out accidents happen.
2. Alcohol
- Most people overest likelihood other college students drink.
Basis for major intervention, 25-30% do not drink (hss used alcohol ever 85%). Study: early al use in adol inc likelihood to be dep-> changes in brain receptors. Age 14 (controlled for other risk factors-> brain still forming) Minimal changes after drinking age inc (slight b/c very normative before, ex colleg drinking contests w/ professors)
3. Marijuana
1/2 of hss tried; 1/3 of hss have used in past yr, 1/5 used in past month (ongoing). Ten yrs ago clearly less dangerous than alcohol...debated whether/how addictive; alcohol in low doses no effect vs neg effects of mar. Usu not health related: 1) Impurity problem: illegal tendencies of drug dealers, laced w/ other substances; maliciously or to try other substances.
3. Marijuana
2) Exposure to people selling harder drugs tell children they are not harmful. 3) Heavy use: Two signific effects: a) Dec motivation for anything b) Dec testos levels, not totally understood but Hormonal effects.
4. Cocaine
5% of WHITE ADOL have used coke
10% of HISP
2% of Af am
People exper casually and not continue and others become addicts and destroy lives. Percent of hss who used cocaine in last yr: 1980s (10% when used by rich and thought to have few side effects) 6% (regular) 1988,89 DRAMATIC drop, 1991 only 3% in last yr. Then since 1991 to 1999 inc to 7%, dec to about 5%.
Ecstasy
(5. Inhalants, ecstasy, steroids, heroin, lsd, etc. Changes yr to yr, does not matter which more popular in some sense...)
Dramatic inc 50% in yr; 2000) 36% said large neg side effects, 52% in 2002. After 2000) inc numbers, then dec. (New interest for younger gen)
H. Prevention:
1. Raising the price
2. Education
1. Most effective (More be uc and middle class) 2. Info, not proven effective (DARE, little/no deterrent effects vs anecdotes; policy not needed any more, wasting time/money; no dec in programs in last 10 yrs...) One-sided educ, all bad effects.
3. Social competence training
Better effects but not impressive; mixed messages in general. When offered drugs what to do. (Mar fatalities usu related to driving; ecstasy users have brain alterations yrs later; Riddolin stimulant, teenagers)