Section 8: Adolescence
Adolescence is a time of rapid cognitive development. Biological changes in brain structure and connectivity in the brain interact with increased experience, knowledge, and changing social demands to produce rapid cognitive growth. These changes generally begin at puberty or shortly thereafter, and some skills continue to develop as adolescents age. Development of executive functions, or cognitive skills that enable the control and coordination of thoughts and behavior are generally associated with the prefrontal cortex area of the brain. The thoughts, ideas, and concepts developed during this period of life greatly influence one’s future life and play a major role in character and personality formation.
There are two perspectives on adolescent thinking: constructivist and information-processing. The constructivist perspective, based on the work of Piaget, takes a quantitative, stage-theory approach. This view hypothesizes that adolescents’ cognitive improvement is relatively sudden and drastic. The information-processing perspective explains cognitive development in terms of the growth of specific components of the overall process of thinking.
Improvements in basic thinking abilities generally occur in five areas during adolescence:
Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development
| Table 1. Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development | |||
| Age (years) | Stage | Description | Developmental issues |
| 0–2 | Sensorimotor | World experienced through senses and actions | Object permanence Stranger anxiety |
| 2–7 | Preoperational | Use words and images to represent things but lack logical reasoning | Pretend play Egocentrism Language development |
| 7–11 | Concrete operational | Understand concrete events and logical analogies; perform arithmetical operations | Conservation Mathematical transformations |
| 11– | Formal operational | Utilize abstract reasoning and hypothetical thinking | Abstract logic Moral reasoning |
During the formal operational stage, many adolescents are able to understand abstract principles that have no physical reference. Most can now contemplate abstract constructs such as beauty, love, freedom, and morality. Most adolescents are no longer limited by what can be directly seen or heard. Additionally, while younger children solve problems through trial and error, adolescents demonstrate hypothetical-deductive reasoning, which is developing hypotheses based on what might logically occur. They are able to think about all the possibilities in a situation beforehand and then test them systematically (Crain, 2005).
During this stage of cognitive development, individuals are typically able to engage in true scientific thinking. Formal operational thinking involves accepting hypothetical situations. Individuals in this stage can understand the concept of transitivity, which means that a relationship between two elements is carried over to other elements logically related to the first two, such as if A<B and B<C, then A<C (Thomas, 1979). For example, when asked: If Maria is shorter than Alicia and Alicia is shorter than Caitlyn, who is the shortest?
Not everyone reaches the formal operational stage. Many adults do not regularly demonstrate formal operational thought, and in small villages and tribal communities, it is barely used at all. A possible explanation is that some individuals’ thinking has not been sufficiently challenged to demonstrate formal operational thought in all areas.
School is the main contributor in guiding students towards formal operational thought. With students at this level, the teacher can pose hypothetical (or contrary-to-fact) problems: “What if the world had never discovered oil?” or “What if the first European explorers had settled first in California instead of on the East Coast of the United States?” To answer such questions, students must use hypothetical reasoning, meaning that they must manipulate ideas that vary in several ways at once and do so entirely in their minds.
The hypothetical reasoning that concerned Piaget primarily involved scientific problems. His studies of formal operational thinking, therefore, often look like problems that middle or high school teachers pose in science classes. In one problem, for example, a young person is presented with a simple pendulum to which different amounts of weight can be hung (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958). The experimenter asks: “What determines how fast the pendulum swings: the length of the string holding it, the weight attached to it, or the distance that it is pulled to the side?” The young person is not allowed to solve this problem by trial and error with the materials themselves but must find a way to solve it mentally. To do so systematically, he or she must imagine varying each factor separately while also imagining the other factors that are held constant. This kind of thinking requires a facility at manipulating mental representations of the relevant objects and actions—precisely the skill that defines formal operations.
As you might suspect, students with an ability to think hypothetically have an advantage in many kinds of schoolwork: by definition, they require relatively few “props” to solve problems. In this sense, they can, in principle, be more self-directed than students who rely only on concrete operations—certainly a desirable quality in the opinion of most teachers. Note, though, that formal operational thinking is desirable but not sufficient for school success and that it is far from being the only way that students achieve educational success. Formal thinking skills do not ensure that a student is motivated or well-behaved, for example, nor does it guarantee other desirable skills.
The fourth stage in Piaget’s theory is really about a particular kind of formal thinking, the kind needed to solve scientific problems and devise scientific experiments. Since many people do not normally deal with such problems in the normal course of their lives, it should be no surprise that research finds that many people never achieve or use formal thinking fully or consistently or that they use it only in selected areas with which they are very familiar (Case & Okomato, 1996). For teachers, the limitations of Piaget’s ideas suggest a need for additional theories about development—ones that focus more directly on the social and interpersonal issues of childhood and adolescence.
One of the major premises of formal operational thought is the capacity to think of possibility, not just reality. Adolescents’ thinking is less bound to concrete events than that of children; they can contemplate possibilities outside the realm of what currently exists. One manifestation of the adolescent’s increased facility with thinking about possibilities is the improvement of skill in deductive reasoning (also called top-down reasoning), which leads to the development of hypothetical thinking. This provides the ability to plan ahead, see the future consequences of an action, and provide alternative explanations of events. It also makes adolescents more skilled debaters, as they can reason against a friend’s or parent’s assumptions. Adolescents also develop a more sophisticated understanding of probability.
Adolescents’ newfound meta-cognitive abilities also have an impact on their social cognition, as it results in increased introspection, self-consciousness, and intellectualization. Adolescents are much better able to understand that people do not have complete control over their mental activity. Being able to introspect may lead to forms of egocentrism, or self-focus, in adolescence. Adolescent egocentrism is a term that David Elkind (1967) used to describe the phenomenon of adolescents’ inability to distinguish between their perception of what others think about them and what people actually think in reality. Elkind’s theory on adolescent egocentrism is drawn from Piaget’s theory on cognitive developmental stages, which argues that formal operations enable adolescents to construct imaginary situations and abstract thinking.
Accordingly, adolescents are able to conceptualize their own thoughts and conceive of other people’s thoughts. However, Elkind pointed out that adolescents tend to focus mostly on their own perceptions, especially on their behaviors and appearance, because of the “physiological metamorphosis” they experience during this period. This leads to adolescents’ belief that other people are as attentive to their behaviors and appearance as they are to themselves. According to Elkind (1967), adolescent egocentrism results in two distinct problems in thinking: the imaginary audience and the personal fable. These likely peak at age fifteen, along with self-consciousness in general.
Imaginary Audience. Elkind (1967) uses the term imaginary audience to describe the phenomenon of an adolescent anticipating the reactions of other people to him/herself in actual or impending social situations. Elkind argues that the adolescent’s preoccupation could explain this kind of anticipation that others are as admiring or as critical of them as they are of themselves. As a result, an audience is created, as the adolescent believes that they will be the focus of attention. “The imaginary audience is the adolescent’s belief that those around them are as concerned and focused on their appearance as they themselves are” (Schwartz et al., 2008, p. 441). Elkind believed that the construction of imaginary audiences would partially account for a wide variety of typical adolescent behaviors and experiences, and imaginary audiences played a role in the self-consciousness that emerged in early adolescence. However, since the audience is usually the adolescent’s own construction, it is privy to his or her own knowledge of him/herself. According to Elkind, the notion of an imaginary audience helps to explain why adolescents usually seek privacy and feel reluctant to reveal themselves–it is a reaction to the feeling that one is always on stage and
Personal Fable. Elkind (1967) also addressed that adolescents have a complex set of beliefs that their own feelings are unique, special, and immortal. Personal fable is the term Elkind created to describe this notion, which is the complement of the construction of the imaginary audience. Since adolescents usually fail to differentiate their own perceptions from those of others, they tend to believe that they are important to so many people (the imaginary audiences) that they come to regard their feelings as something special and unique. They may feel that only they have experienced strong and diverse emotions, and therefore, others could never understand how they feel. This uniqueness in one’s emotional experiences reinforces the adolescent’s belief in invincibility, especially to death.
Adolescents’ belief in personal uniqueness and invincibility becomes an illusion that they can be above some of the rules, disciplines, and laws that apply to other people, even with consequences such as death (called the invincibility fable). This belief that one is invincible removes any impulse to control one’s behavior (Lin, 2016). Therefore, adolescents will engage in risky behaviors, such as drinking and driving or unprotected sex, and feel they will not suffer any negative consequences.
As adolescents become able to think abstractly and hypothetically, they exhibit many new ways of reflecting on information (Dolgin, 2011). For example, they can demonstrate greater introspection or thinking about one’s thoughts and feelings. They can begin to imagine how the world could be, which leads them to become idealistic or insist on high standards of behavior. Because of their idealism, they may become critical of others, especially adults, in their lives. Additionally, adolescents can demonstrate hypocrisy or pretend to be what they are not. Since they are able to recognize what others expect of them, they will conform to those expectations for their emotions and behavior, which are seemingly hypocritical to themselves.
While Piaget emphasized the sequence of cognitive developments that unfold in four stages, others suggest that thinking does not develop in sequence, and that advanced logic in adolescence may be influenced by intuition. Cognitive psychologists such as Kuhn (2013) often refer to intuitive and analytic thought as the dual-process model, the notion that humans have two distinct networks for processing information. Intuitive thought is automatic, unconscious, and fast, and it is more experiential and emotional. In contrast, analytic thought is deliberate, conscious, rational (logical), and slower.
While these systems interact, they are distinct (Kuhn, 2013). Intuitive thought is easier, quicker, and more commonly used in everyday life. As discussed in the adolescent brain development section, the earlier maturation of the limbic system compared to the prefrontal cortex may make teens more prone to emotionally intuitive thinking than adults. As adolescents develop, they gain logic/analytic thinking ability and sometimes regress, with social context, education, and experiences becoming major influences. Simply put, being “smarter” as measured by an intelligence test does not advance cognition as much as having more experience in school and in life (Klaczynski & Felmban, 2014).
Executive functions, such as attention, increases in working memory, and cognitive flexibility steadily improve from early childhood onward. Studies have found that executive function is very well-developed in adolescence. However, self-regulation, or the ability to control impulses, may still fail. A failure in self-regulation is especially true when there is high stress or high demand on mental functions (Luciano & Collins, 2012). While high stress or demand may tax even an adult’s self-regulatory abilities, neurological changes in the adolescent brain may make teens particularly prone to more risky decision-making under these conditions.
Because most injuries sustained by adolescents are related to risky behavior (alcohol consumption and drug use, reckless or distracted driving, and unprotected sex), a great deal of research has been done on the cognitive and emotional processes underlying adolescent risk-taking. In addressing this question, it is important to distinguish whether adolescents are more likely to engage in risky behaviors (prevalence), whether they make risk-related decisions similarly or differently than adults (cognitive processing perspective), or whether they use the same processes but value different things and thus arrive at different conclusions. The behavioral decision-making theory proposes that adolescents and adults both weigh the potential rewards and consequences of an action. However, research has shown that adolescents seem to give more weight to rewards, particularly social rewards, than do adults. Adolescents value social warmth and friendship, and their hormones and brains are more attuned to those values than to long-term consequences (Crone & Dahl, 2012).
Some have argued that there may be evolutionary benefits to an increased propensity for risk-taking in adolescence. For example, without a willingness to take risks, teenagers would not have the motivation or confidence necessary to leave their family of origin. In addition, from a population perspective, there is an advantage to having a group of individuals willing to take more risks and try new methods, counterbalancing the more conservative elements more typical of the received knowledge held by older adults.
As we continue through this module, we will discuss how cognitive development influences moral reasoning, as well as psychosocial and emotional development. These more abstract developmental dimensions (cognitive, moral, emotional, and social dimensions) are not only more subtle and difficult to measure, but these developmental areas are also difficult to tease apart from one another due to the inter-relationships among them. For instance, our cognitive maturity will influence the way we understand a particular event or circumstance, which will, in turn, influence our moral judgments about it and our emotional responses to it. Similarly, our moral code and emotional maturity influence the quality of our social relationships with others.
Adolescents spend more waking time in school than in any other context (Eccles & Roeser, 2011). Secondary education is traditionally grades 7-12 and denotes the school years after elementary school (known as primary education) and before college or university (known as tertiary education). Adolescents who complete primary education (learning to read and write) and continue on through secondary and tertiary education tend to also have better health, wealth, and family life (Rieff, 1998). Because the average age of puberty has declined over the years, middle schools were created for grades 5 or 6 through 8 as a way to distinguish between early adolescence and late adolescence, especially because these adolescents are different biologically, cognitively, and emotionally and definitely have different needs.
Transition to middle school is stressful and the transition is often complex. When students transition from elementary to middle school, many students are undergoing physical, intellectual, social, emotional, and moral changes (Parker, 2013). Research suggests that early adolescence is an especially sensitive developmental period (McGill et al., 2012). Some students mature faster than others. Students who are developmentally behind typically experience more stress than their counterparts (U.S. Department of Education, 2008). Consequently, they may earn lower grades and display decreased academic motivation, which may increase the rate of dropping out of school (U.S. Department of Education, 2008). For many middle school students, academic achievement slows down, and behavioral problems can increase.
Regardless of a student’s gender or ethnicity, middle school can be challenging. Although young adolescents seem to desire independence, they also need protection, security, and structure (Brighton, 2007). Baly, Cornell, and Lovegrove (2014) found that bullying increases in middle school, particularly in the first year. Just when egocentrism is at its height, students are worried about being thrown into an environment of independence and responsibility. Additionally, unlike elementary school, concerns arise regarding structural changes– students typically go from having one primary teacher in elementary school to multiple different teachers during middle school. They are expected to get to and from classes on their own, manage time wisely, organize and keep up with materials for multiple classes, be responsible for all classwork and homework from multiple teachers, and at the same time develop and maintain a social life (Meece & Eccles, 2010). Students are trying to build new friendships and maintain ones they already have. As noted throughout this module, peer acceptance is particularly important.
Another aspect to consider is technology. Typically, adolescents get their first cell phone at about age 11, and simultaneously, they are also expected to research items on the Internet. Social media use and texting has increased dramatically, and the research finds both harm and benefits to this use (Coyne et al., 2018).
Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior among school-aged children that involves a real or perceived power imbalance. The behavior is repeated, or has the potential to be repeated, over time. Bullies are more likely to target members of the same sex and those who are socially isolated. Both kids who are bullied and who bully others may have serious, lasting problems, like aggression, anxiety, depression, and suicidal behavior. It is a prevalent problem during the middle and high school years, exacerbated by access to technology and the means to easily spread damaging information online. These are some key statistics about bullying from StopBullying.gov:
Figure 8. Cyberbullying comes in many forms.
Victims of bullying can experience negative physical, social, emotional, academic, and mental health issues. Victims are more likely to experience depression, anxiety, loneliness, health concerns, and disengage from school. Victimization may lead to suicide or violent retaliation; 12 of 15 school shootings in the 1990’s had a history of being bullied (US DHHS, 2021b).
Many organizations, schools, teachers, parents, and lawmakers are working to address the issue of bullying. One example is that of ReThink, a technology designed by teenager Trisha Prabhu to recognize bullying online and encourage posters to reconsider their behavior (watch Trisha Prabhu’s TED talk)
As adolescents enter high school, their continued cognitive development allows them to think abstractly, analytically, hypothetically, and logically, which is all formal operational thought. The high school emphasizes formal thinking in an attempt to prepare graduates for college, where analysis is required. Overall, high school graduation rates in the United States have increased steadily over the past decade, reaching 83.2 percent in 2016 after four years in high school (Gewertz, 2017). Additionally, many students in the United States attend college. Unfortunately, though, about half of those who go to college leave without a degree (Kena et al., 2016). Those who do earn a degree, however, do make more money and have an easier time finding employment. The key here is understanding adolescent development and supporting teens in making decisions about college or alternatives to college after high school.
Academic achievement during adolescence is predicted by interpersonal (e.g., parental engagement in adolescents’ education), intrapersonal (e.g., intrinsic motivation), and institutional (e.g., school quality) factors. Academic achievement is important in its own right as a marker of positive adjustment during adolescence, but also because academic achievement sets the stage for future educational and occupational opportunities. The most serious consequence of school failure, particularly dropping out of school, is the high risk of unemployment or underemployment in adulthood that follows. High achievement can set the stage for college or future vocational training and opportunities.
https://www.world-trust.org/healing-justice
Human Growth and Development by Ryan Newton is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License,
Individual and Family Development, Health, and Well-being by Diana Lang, Nick Cone; Laura Overstreet, Stephanie Loalada; Suzanne Valentine-French, Martha Lally; Julie Lazzara, and Jamie Skow is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License,
Human Development by Human Development Teaching & Learning Group under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License,
Baly, M.W., Cornell, D.G., & Lovegrove, P. (2014). A longitudinal investigation of self and peer reports of bullying victimization across middle school. Psychology in the Schools, 51(3), 217-240.
Brighton, K. L. (2007). Coming of age: The education and development of young adolescents. Westerville, OH: National Middle School Association.
Case, R. and Okamoto, Y. 1996. The role of central conceptual structures in the development of children’s thought. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 61, (1–2, Serial No. 246).
Chein, J., Albert, D., O’Brien, L., Uckert, K., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Peers increase adolescent risk-taking by enhancing activity in the brain’s reward circuitry. Developmental Science, 14(2), F1-F10.
Coyne, S.M., Padilla-Walker, L.M., & Holmgren, H.G. (2018). A six-year longitudinal study of texting trajectories during adolescence. Child Development, 89(1), 58-65.
Crain, W. (2005). Theories of development concepts and applications (5th ed.). Pearson.
Crone, E.A., & Dahl, R.E. (2012). Understanding adolescence as a period of social-affective engagement and goal flexibility. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 13(9), 636-650.
Dolgin, K. G. (2011). The adolescent: Development, relationships, and culture (13th ed.). Pearson.
Eccles, J. S., & Roeser, R. W. (2011). Schools as developmental contexts during adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 225-241.
Elkind, D. (1967). Egocentrism in adolescence. Child Development, 38, 1025-1034.
Gewertz, C. (2017, May 3). Is the high school graduation rate inflated? No, study says (Web log post). Education Week.
Inhelder, B. & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence. NY: Basic Books.
Kena, G., Hussar, W., McFarland, J., de Brey, C., Musu-Gillette, L., Wang, X., & Dunlop Velez, E. (2016). The condition of education 2016. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Klaczynski, P. (2001). Analytic and heuristic processing influences on adolescent reasoning and decision-making. Child Development, 72 (3), 844-861.
Klaczynski, P.A. & Felmban, W.S. (2014). Heuristics and biases during adolescence: Developmental reversals and individual differences. In Henry Markovitz (Ed.), The developmental psychology of reasoning and decision making, pp. 84-111. NY: Psychology Press.
Kuhn, D. (2013). Reasoning. In. P.D. Zelazo (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of developmental psychology. (Vol. 1, pp. 744-764). Oxford University Press.
Linn, P. (2016). Risky behaviors: Integrating adolescent egocentrism with the theory of planned behavior. Review of General Psychology, 20(4), 392-398.
Luciano, M., & Collins, P. F. (2012). Incentive motivation, cognitive control, and the adolescent brain: Is it time for a paradigm shift? Child Development Perspectives, 6(4), 394-399.
McGill, R.K., Hughes, D., Alicea, S., & Way, N. (2012). Academic adjustment across middle school: The role of public regard and parenting. Developmental Psychology, 48(4), 1003-1008.
Meece, J.L. & Eccles, J.S. (Eds.). (2010). Handbook on research on schools, schooling, and human development. Routledge.
Parker, A. K. (2013). Understanding and supporting young adolescents during the transition into middle school. In P. G. Andrews (Ed.), Research to guide practice in middle grades education, pp. 495-510. Westerville, OH: Association for Middle-Level Education.
Rieff, M.I. (1998). Adolescent school failure: Failure to thrive in adolescence. Pediatrics in Review, 19(6).
Ryan, A. M., Shim, S. S., & Makara, K. A. (2013). Changes in academic adjustment and relational self-worth across the transition to middle school. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1372-1384.
Schwartz, P. D., Maynard, A. M., & Uzelac, S. M. (2008). Adolescent egocentrism: A contemporary view. Adolescence, 43, 441-447.
Seifert, K. (2012). Educational psychology. Retrieved from http://cnx.org/content/col11302/1.2
Steinberg, L., Icenogle, G., Shulman, E.P., et al. (2018). Around the world, adolescence is a time of heightened sensation-seeking and immature self-regulation. Developmental Science, 21, e12532.
Thomas, R. M. (1979). Comparing theories of child development. Wadsworth.
U.S. Department of Education Mentoring Resource Center (2008). Making the transition to middle school: How mentoring can help. MRC: Mentoring Resource Center Fact Sheet, No. 24. Retrieved from http://fbmentorcenter.squarespace.com/storage/MiddleSchoolTransition.pdf.
Lifespan Development Copyright © 2024 by Jennifer Ounjian is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.