TL;DR
Get gifts for the two of you delivered free — and shop member deals
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Access to Prime Big Deal Days deals on October 6–7
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
A Gottman Institute report draws on studies suggesting that teenagers may understand a danger yet give more weight to possible rewards in emotionally charged situations. Laboratory research also found greater risk-taking when peers were watching, pointing to the value of discussing the appeal of a choice and planning for real-life situations.
The Gottman Institute has published a report on research suggesting that teenagers may take more risks in emotionally charged situations not because they fail to recognize danger, but because a possible reward can feel especially compelling. The report says peer presence can also affect decisions, a distinction it argues parents should account for when talking with teens about alcohol, drugs, speeding and other risky activities.
The report draws on psychologist Laurence Steinberg’s review of adolescent risk-taking research, which challenges the assumption that teenagers simply do not understand danger. Steinberg’s account, as summarized by the institute, describes adolescence as a period when sensitivity to rewards increases while the ability to regulate behavior continues to develop. In an exciting moment, a teenager may give more weight to what could go well than they would when considering the same decision calmly.
In four experiments, psychologist Bernd Figner and colleagues asked teenagers and adults to play versions of a card game designed to prompt either emotionally engaging or more deliberative choices. Teenagers took more risks than adults in the emotionally engaging version, but not in the deliberative one. The finding points to the circumstances surrounding a decision as a factor; it does not establish that every teenager will respond the same way outside a laboratory.
A separate simulated-driving study by Jason Chein and colleagues found adolescents took more risks when friends watched and showed greater activity in brain regions involved in processing rewards. The friends watched from another room and could not urge participants on during the task. The institute notes that these were laboratory experiments, not observations of teenagers at parties or in cars.
Why the Reward Can Outweigh the Warning
The research offers parents a way to talk about risk that goes beyond repeating possible consequences. A teenager considering a drink, a ride with a speeding driver or a dangerous stunt may also be thinking about belonging, impressing friends or trying something new. Asking what feels appealing can reveal the reasoning behind the choice and make it possible to address the specific assumption, such as believing a familiar driver is safe because nothing bad happened on an earlier trip.
The peer finding also suggests that a conversation at home may not fully prepare a teenager for a decision made in front of friends. Parents can discuss the uncomfortable moment of refusing, help a teen practice language that feels natural, and agree on a way to leave or call for help. These steps are practical advice from the report, not interventions shown by the cited experiments to prevent risk-taking.
The distinction matters for safety because understanding a hazard and acting on that understanding are not identical. A plan made before an emotionally charged situation can give a teenager options when the immediate social or emotional reward feels more important than a distant consequence.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What the Experiments Tested
The source is a Gottman Institute report that combines research summaries with guidance for parents; it is not itself a new clinical trial or a report of a newly announced study. Its central research examples compare decision-making under different conditions: emotionally engaging versus deliberative choices in the card-game experiments, and driving behavior with or without peers watching in a simulator.
Those settings limit what can be concluded. A card game and simulated driving do not reproduce the full pressures, risks or relationships involved in a party or a real car journey. The results described in the report concern group-level differences under specific study conditions; they do not predict an individual teenager’s choices or establish that peer presence alone causes dangerous behavior in everyday life.
The report translates that research into three suggested conversations: ask what makes the activity attractive, rehearse how to refuse or respond to pressure, and make arrangements specific. It recommends knowing where a teenager will be, who will be there and how they will get home, including agreeing that they should not ride with someone who has been drinking or using drugs.
“Young people become more sensitive to rewards during adolescence while continuing to develop their ability to regulate their behavior.”
— The Gottman Institute, summarizing psychologist Laurence Steinberg’s research review
peer pressure resistance training for teens
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Limits of the Available Evidence
The report does not provide the publication date or full bibliographic details for the studies it discusses. It also does not give sample sizes, effect sizes or enough methodological detail to assess how large the reported differences were. The findings described are from laboratory tasks, and the source does not establish how strongly they predict behavior in particular real-world settings.
It remains unclear from this material whether the suggested parent conversations reduce risk-taking or improve safety outcomes; the report presents them as practical guidance, not as a tested prevention program. Teenagers also differ from one another, and the summary does not support treating adolescent risk-taking as inevitable or attributing a specific choice to brain development alone.
teen risk-taking conversation guide
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Planning Before the Next Outing
The report recommends that parents discuss plans before a teenager goes out, including the expected setting, companions and route home. They can agree on a clear rule against riding with someone who has used alcohol or drugs and decide in advance whom the teenager can contact if plans change. Practicing a refusal and discussing what a supportive friend might do can make the plan more concrete.
Afterward, the institute advises asking how the evening unfolded and giving the teenager room to explain what they hoped would happen. The source does not announce a follow-up study or new policy. Its immediate next step is a planned conversation and a workable way home, while the research described remains limited to the specific experiments summarized in the report.
adolescent emotional regulation tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Does the report say teenagers do not understand danger?
No. The report cites psychologist Laurence Steinberg’s review, which challenges the idea that adolescent risk-taking is simply a failure to recognize danger. It describes reward sensitivity and developing behavioral regulation as factors that may shape choices.
What did the card-game experiments find?
In four experiments summarized by the institute, teenagers took more risks than adults in an emotionally engaging version of a card game, but not in a more deliberative version. The report says the difference depended on the decision-making conditions.
Did friends have to pressure participants for risk-taking to increase?
Not in the simulated-driving study described. Adolescents took more risks when friends watched, and those friends were in another room and could not encourage them during the task. The experiment does not establish how peer presence affects every real-world situation.
What does the report suggest parents discuss before an outing?
It suggests asking what makes the activity appealing, practicing how to decline, and agreeing on specific plans for the outing and the journey home. It also advises making clear that a teenager should not ride with someone who has been drinking or using drugs.
Does the report show that these conversations prevent risky behavior?
No. The source presents the conversations as practical parental guidance, but it does not report that they were tested as an intervention or that they reduce risk-taking.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
