Research suggests that there is increased activity of neural pathways that use dopamine during adolescence. Some studies propose that there are actually lower baseline levels of dopamine in the brain, but there is a bigger release of dopamine in response to a rewarding/exciting situation. This explains why adolescents’ …show more content…
During early adolescence, there is a decrease in dopamine receptor density, both in the striatum and prefrontal cortex (Doremus-Fitzwater, Varlinskaya & Spear, 2010). It is believed that due to this decrease in dopamine, adolescents engage in novelty and sensation seeking activities, through natural or drug rewards, to increase dopamine availability (Steinberg, 2008).
There are however other physiological changes within reward processing regions which undergo change during adolescence and may also be influencing risk-taking (Doremus-Fitzwater, Varlinskaya & Spear, 2010).
Many believe that adolescents may be increased risk-takers because they do not recognise the risks involved. Interestingly, studies have shown that both adults and adolescents have similar evaluations and perceptions of risky behaviours and adolescents are just as aware of negative outcomes as adults are (Steinberg, 2008). However, even though adolescents are aware of negative outcomes, they place greater emphasis on the positive consequences of a situation, overriding potential negative consequences (Siegel, 2013). According to Siegel (2013), increased activation of the reward system in the adolescent brain also leads to hyperrationality, in which adolescents place more emphasis on the possible positive outcome, even though they are aware of the risks involved. This changes …show more content…
The study used a driving simulation game, and participants completed the activity alone or with peers. Results showed that risky decision-making decreased with age and participants took more risks when with peers (rather than alone). However, the adolescents were most strongly influenced by their peers to take risks, taking almost three times the number of risks in the presence of their peers compared to risks taken when they were