When Do those "Risk-Taking Adolescents" Take Risks? The Combined Effects of Risk Encouragement by Peers, Mild-to-Borderline Intellectual Disability and Sex.

IF 3.6

Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology Pub Date : 2020-04-01 DOI:10.1007/s10802-020-00617-8

Eline Wagemaker, Hilde M Huizenga, Tycho J Dekkers, Annematt L Collot d'Escury-Koenigs, Elske Salemink, Anika Bexkens

{"title":"When Do those \"Risk-Taking Adolescents\" Take Risks? The Combined Effects of Risk Encouragement by Peers, Mild-to-Borderline Intellectual Disability and Sex.","authors":"Eline Wagemaker, Hilde M Huizenga, Tycho J Dekkers, Annematt L Collot d'Escury-Koenigs, Elske Salemink, Anika Bexkens","doi":"10.1007/s10802-020-00617-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Adolescents with mild to borderline intellectual disability (MBID) show more daily life risk taking than typically developing adolescents. To obtain insight in when these \"risk-taking adolescents\" especially take risks, we investigated main and interaction effects of (a) MBID, (b) sex, and (c) type of peer influence on risk taking. The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) was used as a proxy of real-life risk taking. 356 adolescents (12-19 years, 51.7% MBID, 63.4% boys) were randomly assigned to one of three BART peer-influence conditions: solo (no peers), positive risk encouragement (e.g., 'You are cool if you continue') or negative risk encouragement (e.g., 'You are a softy if you do not continue'). The main finding was that boys with MBID took more risks than typically developing boys in the negative risk encouragement condition. Boys with MBID also took more risks in the negative risk encouragement condition compared to the solo condition, whereas typically developing boys did not. There were no such effects for girls. Surprisingly, boys with MBID took less risks in the solo condition than typically developing boys. We conclude that boys with MBID especially show high risk taking when peers belittle or threat with exclusion from the peer group. Prevention and intervention programs should specifically target boys with MBID to teach them to resist negative risk encouragement by peers.</p>","PeriodicalId":14810,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10802-020-00617-8","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-020-00617-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 18

Abstract

Adolescents with mild to borderline intellectual disability (MBID) show more daily life risk taking than typically developing adolescents. To obtain insight in when these "risk-taking adolescents" especially take risks, we investigated main and interaction effects of (a) MBID, (b) sex, and (c) type of peer influence on risk taking. The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) was used as a proxy of real-life risk taking. 356 adolescents (12-19 years, 51.7% MBID, 63.4% boys) were randomly assigned to one of three BART peer-influence conditions: solo (no peers), positive risk encouragement (e.g., 'You are cool if you continue') or negative risk encouragement (e.g., 'You are a softy if you do not continue'). The main finding was that boys with MBID took more risks than typically developing boys in the negative risk encouragement condition. Boys with MBID also took more risks in the negative risk encouragement condition compared to the solo condition, whereas typically developing boys did not. There were no such effects for girls. Surprisingly, boys with MBID took less risks in the solo condition than typically developing boys. We conclude that boys with MBID especially show high risk taking when peers belittle or threat with exclusion from the peer group. Prevention and intervention programs should specifically target boys with MBID to teach them to resist negative risk encouragement by peers.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

那些“爱冒险的青少年”什么时候会冒险?同伴、轻度至边缘性智障和性别对风险鼓励的综合影响。

轻度至边缘性智力残疾的青少年比正常发育的青少年表现出更多的日常生活冒险行为。为了了解这些“爱冒险的青少年”在什么时候会特别冒险，我们调查了(a) MBID、(b)性别和(c)同伴影响类型对冒险行为的主要影响和相互作用。气球模拟风险任务(BART)被用作现实生活风险承担的代理。356名青少年(12-19岁，51.7%的MBID, 63.4%的男孩)被随机分配到三种BART同伴影响条件中的一种:单独(没有同伴)，积极的风险鼓励(例如，“如果你继续你就很酷”)或消极的风险鼓励(例如，“如果你不继续你就是个胆小鬼”)。主要发现是，在负风险鼓励条件下，MBID男孩比正常发育的男孩承担更多的风险。与单独条件相比，MBID男孩在负风险鼓励条件下也承担了更多的风险，而正常发育的男孩则没有。对女孩没有这样的影响。令人惊讶的是，与正常发育的男孩相比，患有MBID的男孩在独处的情况下承担的风险更小。我们的结论是，当同伴轻视或威胁并排斥他们时，患有MBID的男孩尤其表现出高风险行为。预防和干预项目应该专门针对有MBID的男孩，教他们抵制来自同伴的消极风险鼓励。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology Multiple-

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology brings together the latest innovative research that advances knowledge of psychopathology from infancy through adolescence. The journal publishes studies that have a strong theoretical framework and use a diversity of methods, with an emphasis on empirical studies of the major forms of psychopathology found in childhood disorders (e.g., disruptive behavior disorders, depression, anxiety, and autism spectrum disorder). Studies focus on the epidemiology, etiology, assessment, treatment, prognosis, and developmental course of these forms of psychopathology. Studies highlighting risk and protective factors; the ecology and correlates of children''s emotional, social, and behavior problems; and advances in prevention and treatment are featured. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology is the official journal of the International Society for Research in Child and Adolescent Psychopathology (ISRCAP), a multidisciplinary scientific society.