Home
Introduction
The questions posed are vital to gaining a better understanding of adolescent behavior and the influence of peers on their risk taking tendencies. The authors provide marginal sources of background information through previous studies. There are areas within the introduction that are a bit vague. First, he authors define adolescents as ages 13-16, but their assessment of risky behaviors include examples such as driving and having unprotected sex- both of which are illegal for individuals of those ages. There are many unanswered questions throughout the introduction. For example, the authors point out that they do not know why adolescents engage in more risky behaviors while in groups. There are 3 hypotheses in the study and they are all clear.
Method
The study is not fully representative because of the way the participants were selected, the authors would do better to discuss the limitations in the generalization of their study. The adolescents were selected from day camps and community centers which could mean that they are in the same demographic, whereas the community college would not attract the same kind of people. This disconnect must be addressed more effectively in order for the reader to better understand the implications of the study. The majority of the participants were either White or African American, which further limits the study. It is not clear to the reader whether or not the groups of that the participants invited are part of the 306 individuals. The issue of the different levels of familiarity among the participants and their peer groups is another issue that needs to be further explained- their behavior could be influenced differently depending on their relationships with their peers. The game itself should be better explained because I don’t see how it relates to real world instances where one has to make risky decisions. There should also be an analysis of the fatigue effect that could have occurred over the 15 trials that the participants were instructed to do. The examples that were given in order to assess risk preference were not appropriate for the adolescent groups because they are not real life tasks that they can take part in, such as sex, driving under the influence, and breaking and entering. The same issue is present with the risky decision making examples. The measures used are valid, and they are appropriate for the questions being posed, however I do believe that the measures could be improved for a better understanding of this phenomenon.
The questions posed are vital to gaining a better understanding of adolescent behavior and the influence of peers on their risk taking tendencies. The authors provide marginal sources of background information through previous studies. There are areas within the introduction that are a bit vague. First, he authors define adolescents as ages 13-16, but their assessment of risky behaviors include examples such as driving and having unprotected sex- both of which are illegal for individuals of those ages. There are many unanswered questions throughout the introduction. For example, the authors point out that they do not know why adolescents engage in more risky behaviors while in groups. There are 3 hypotheses in the study and they are all clear.
Method
The study is not fully representative because of the way the participants were selected, the authors would do better to discuss the limitations in the generalization of their study. The adolescents were selected from day camps and community centers which could mean that they are in the same demographic, whereas the community college would not attract the same kind of people. This disconnect must be addressed more effectively in order for the reader to better understand the implications of the study. The majority of the participants were either White or African American, which further limits the study. It is not clear to the reader whether or not the groups of that the participants invited are part of the 306 individuals. The issue of the different levels of familiarity among the participants and their peer groups is another issue that needs to be further explained- their behavior could be influenced differently depending on their relationships with their peers. The game itself should be better explained because I don’t see how it relates to real world instances where one has to make risky decisions. There should also be an analysis of the fatigue effect that could have occurred over the 15 trials that the participants were instructed to do. The examples that were given in order to assess risk preference were not appropriate for the adolescent groups because they are not real life tasks that they can take part in, such as sex, driving under the influence, and breaking and entering. The same issue is present with the risky decision making examples. The measures used are valid, and they are appropriate for the questions being posed, however I do believe that the measures could be improved for a better understanding of this phenomenon.
