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.

Age differences in future orientation are examined in a sample of 935 individuals between 10 and 30 years using a delay discounting task as well as a new self-report measure. Younger adolescents consistently demonstrate a weaker orientation to the future than do individuals aged 16 and older, as reflected in their greater willingness to accept a smaller reward delivered sooner than a larger one that is delayed, and in their characterizations of themselves as less concerned about the future and less likely to anticipate the consequences of their decisions. Planning ahead, in contrast, continues to develop into young adulthood. Future studies should distinguish between future orientation and impulse control, which may have different neural underpinnings and follow different developmental timetables.

Adolescents take more risks in the presence of their peers, but the mechanism through which peer presence affects risky decision‐making is unknown. We propose that the presence of peers increases the salience of the immediate rewards of a risky choice. The current study examined the effect of peer presence on reward sensitivity in a sample of 100 late adolescents ages 18 through 20 (M=18.5) using a delay discounting task, which assesses an individual's preference for immediate versus delayed rewards. Participants were randomly assigned to complete the task alone or with 2 same‐age, same‐sex peers observing. Consistent with our prediction, adolescents demonstrated a greater preference for immediate rewards when with their peers than when alone. Heightened risk taking by adolescents in the company of their friends may be due in part to the effect that being with one's peers has on reward sensitivity.

Still Misused After All These Years? A Reevaluation of the Uses of Bronfenbrenner's Bioecological Theory of Human Development A theoretical review published in 2009 revealed that scholars who stated that their research was based on Urie Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory of human development rarely used it appropriately.To what extent has the situation changed since then? We used the same methods to identify relevant articles as had been used in the 2009 article and found 20 publications whose authors explicitly claimed that Bronfenbrenner provided the theoretical foundation for their study. Although 18 of those publications included citations to the mature (mid-1990s) version of Bronfenbrenner's theory, only two appropriately described, tested, and evaluated the four major concepts of Bronfenbrenner's theory-proximal processes, person characteristics, context, and time. Failure either to correctly describe the theory or to critically test its central concepts poses significant problems for the future of family studies and developmental science. We discuss potential ways to improve this situation through metatheoretical, methodological, and pedagogical reflections.

There has been a burgeoning interest in gratitude in adults, adolescents, and children, with most scholars examining the relations between variations in level of gratitude, treated largely as an emotional state, and measures of well-being. In this paper we explain why we think that gratitude should be defined as a virtue, as discussed by neo-Aristotelian virtue ethicists, rather than simply as an emotional state. Defining gratitude as a virtue has clear developmental implications (no child or adolescent could be considered virtuous in the Aristotelian sense), allowing us to consider its likely precursors. It also has cultural implications, as one might expect cultural variations in how gratitude is cultivated in the young. We then discuss methods we think are helpful in allowing an understanding of the development of gratitude, and provide some supportive evidence for its development in different cultural contexts.

Considering gratitude as a virtue, rather than a positive emotion, requires measures different from those more commonly used and which conflate gratitude with appreciation. We here describe those measures, explaining why they are appropriate to the study of gratitude as a virtue. We then discuss how each measure was coded for this special issue, the manner of recruitment of our participants across the seven research sites (Brazil, Guatemala, the United States, Russia, Turkey, China, and South Korea), the overall hypotheses, and the analytic strategies used. Keywords gratitude, children, adolescents, methods, analyses As was discussed in the paper by Merçon-Vargas, Poelker, and Tudge (2018), the Development of Gratitude Research Group (DGRG) treats gratitude as a virtue and, as such, accepts a three-part definition of gratitude. This definition requires (a) that a benefactor freely and intentionally provides some benefit

Purpose Despite USA’s emphasis on children as consumers with great spending power, little is known about their actual spending preferences and how they might be linked to personal character traits such as materialism and gratitude. This study aims to address this literature gap by examining children’s spending preferences in an imaginary windfall scenario, as well as main and interactive effects of materialism and gratitude on such preferences. Design/methodology/approach This was a school-based research study. Survey methodology was used in which self-report measures were collected from 247 7-14-year-old children (58 per cent male). Findings Results suggest that materialism was significantly associated with saving resources and allocating less money to charity. Gratitude was related to more charitable giving. One interactive effect was found whereby the link between more materialism and saving was attenuated by high levels of gratitude. Contrary to expectations, no age or gender differences in spending preferences or materialism were found, but older children and girls reported higher gratitude than did younger children and boys. Research limitations/implications Although cross-sectional data limit conclusions regarding directionality, the results have implications for understanding children’s consumer behavior, as well as children’s well-being, self-regulation and ability to delay gratification. Practical implications The results suggest that materialism, with its emphasis on consumption, and gratitude, with its positive feedback loop that encourages prosocial connections, are particularly relevant avenues to continue examining in future research on youth consumer patterns. Social implications Gratitude not only promotes social connectedness but also is more environmentally sustainable in promoting appreciation for what one has rather than wanting more. Uncovering ways that these characteristics are linked to hypothetical and, ultimately, actual spending behavior reflects a meaningful contribution to the field. Originality/value This paper fills gaps in the literature by examining links between specific character traits and potential spending behaviors, with deeper implications for children’s psychosocial development, self-regulation and environmental sustainability.

No abstract