Law and Human Behavior

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 183–193 | Cite as

“It’s a Rush”: Psychosocial Content of Antisocial Decision Making

  • Kathryn Lynn Modecki
Original Article


Changes in the juvenile justice system have led to more serious sanctioning of adolescents (Heilbrun, Goldstein, & Redding, 2005). A salient question for understanding whether such sanctions are appropriate pertains to whether adolescents are less mature than adults in making decisions that lead to antisocial activity. The current study codes for psychosocial content of antisocial decision making in adolescents (ages 12–17), young adults (18–23), and adults (ages 35–63). Results suggest that adolescents and young adults display increased psychosocial content in their antisocial decision making relative to adults. However, the unique effect of psychosocial content on self-report criminal behavior was significantly greater among adolescents than among adults, whereas for young adults this was not the case. Implications for legal policy are discussed.


Adolescents Decision making Juvenile delinquency Psychosocial maturity 



Special thanks to Victoria Banyard, Cesar Rebellon, Nancy Guerra, and Michelle Little for continued feedback on previous versions of this manuscript. Many thanks to Amanda Bemis, Eleanor Boisvert, Amanda Scott, and Rachel Ripperger for assistance in coding. I also wish to thank the Editor and a number of anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback, which contributed significantly to the completion of this manuscript. This research was funded in part by a dissertation year fellowship from the University of New Hampshire, grants-in-aid from the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues and from the American Psychology-Law Association, and NIH Training Grant #T32 MH 018387.


  1. Allard, P., & Young, M. C. (2002). Prosecuting juveniles in adult court: The practitioner’s perspective. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 2(2), 65–77. doi: 10.1300/J158v02n02_04.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Bar Association. (2004). Youth in the criminal justice system: Guidelines for policymakers and practitioners. Retrieved January 27, 2008 from:
  3. Arnett, J. (1994). Sensation seeking: A new conceptualization and a new scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 16(2), 289–296. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(94)90165-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aronson, J. D. (2007). Brain imaging, culpability, and the juvenile death penalty. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13(2), 115–142. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.13.2.115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brannen, D. N., Salekin, R. T., Zapf, P. A., Salekin, K. L., Kubak, F. A., & Decoster, J. (2006). Transfer to adult court. A National Study of how juvenile court judges weigh pertinent Kent criteria. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 12(3), 332–355. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.12.3.332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cauffman, E. E. (1996). Maturity of judgment: Psychosocial factors in adolescent decision-making. Dissertation Abstracts International, 57(09). (DAI Publication No. AAT 9706949).Google Scholar
  7. Cauffman, E., & Steinberg, L. (2000). (Im)maturity of judgment in adolescence: Why adolescents may be less culpable than adults. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 18(6), 741–760. doi: 10.1002/bsl.416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cauffman, E., & Woolard, J. (1999). The future outlook inventory. Instrument developed for the MacArthur Juvenile Competence Study. Unpublished measure available from the first author, Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine.Google Scholar
  9. Davies, P. L., & Rose, J. D. (1999). Assessment of cognitive development in adolescents by means of neuropsychological tasks. Developmental Neuropsychology, 15(2), 227–248.Google Scholar
  10. Elliott, D. S., & Ageton, S. S. (1985). Reconciling race and class differences in self-reported and official estimates of delinquency. American Sociological Review, 45, 95–110. doi: 10.2307/2095245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the life cycle. Psychological Issues, 1, 1–171.Google Scholar
  12. Feld, B. C. (1987). The juvenile court meets the principle of the offense: Legislative changes in juvenile waiver statutes. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 78(3), 471–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Ford, M., Wentzel, K., Wood, D., Stevens, E., & Siesfeld, G. A. (1990). Processes associated with integrative social competence: Emotional and contextual influences on adolescent social responsibility. Journal of Adolescent Research, 4, 405–425. doi: 10.1177/074355488944002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fried, C. S., & Reppucci, N. D. (2001). Criminal decision making: The development of adolescent judgment, criminal responsibility, and culpability. Law and Human Behavior, 25(1), 45–61. doi: 10.1023/A:1005639909226.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Giedd, J. N., Blumenthal, J., Jeffries, N. O., Castellonos, F. X., Liu, H., Zijdenbos, A., et al. (1999). Brain development during childhood and adolescence: A longitudinal MRI study. Nature Neuroscience, 2(10), 861–863. doi: 10.1038/13158.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grisso, T., Steinberg, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., Scott, E., Graham, S., et al. (2003). Juveniles’ competence to stand trial: A comparison of adolescents’ and adults’ capacities as trial defendants. Law and Human Behavior, 27(4), 333–363. doi: 10.1023/A:1024065015717.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heilbrun, K., Goldstein, N. E., & Redding, R. E. (Eds.). (2005). Juvenile delinquency: Prevention, assessment, and intervention. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. In Re Gault, 387 U.S. 1 (1967).Google Scholar
  20. Kent v. United States, 383, U.S 541 (1966).Google Scholar
  21. Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62, 1049–1065. doi: 10.2307/1131151.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lewis, C. C. (1981). How adolescents approach decisions: Changes over grades seven to twelve and policy implications. Child Development, 52, 538–544. doi: 10.2307/1129172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Modecki, K. L. (2008). Addressing gaps in the maturity of judgment literature: Age differences and delinquency. Law and Human Behavior, 32(1). doi: 10.1007/s10979-007-9087-7.
  24. Muthen, L. K., & Muthen, B. O. (2004). Mplus: The comprehensive modeling program for applied researchers. User’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Muthen & Muthen.Google Scholar
  25. O’Conner, D. B., Archer, J., & Wu, F. W. C. (1992). Measuring aggression: Self-reports, partner reports, and responses to provoking scenarios. Aggressive Behavior, 27, 79–101. doi: 10.1002/ab.2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Osgood, D. W., McMorris, B. J., & Potenza, M. T. (2002). Analyzing multiple-item measures of crime and deviance I: Item response theory scaling. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18(3), 267–296. doi: 10.1023/A:1016008004010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Redding, R. E., & Fuller, E. J. (2004). What do juvenile offenders know about being tried as adults? Implications for Deterrence. Juvenile & Family Court Journal, 55, 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Reyna, V. F., & Farley, F. (2006). Risk and rationality in adolescent decision making: Implications for theory, practice, and public policy. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7, 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Roper v. Simmons, 125 S.Ct. 1183 (2005).Google Scholar
  30. Salekin, R. T. (2002). Juvenile transfer to adult court: How can developmental and child psychology inform policy decision making? In B. L. Bottoms, M. Bull Kovera, & B. D. McAuliff (Eds.), Children, social science, and the law (pp. 203–232). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Salekin, R. T., Rogers, R., & Ustad, K. L. (2001). Juvenile waiver to adult criminal courts. Prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication-maturity, and amenability to treatment. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 7(2), 381–408. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.7.2.381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Salekin, R. T., Yff, R. M. A., Neumann, C. S., Leistico, A. R., & Zalot, A. A. (2002). Juvenile transfer to adult courts. A look at the prototypes for dangerousness, sophistication-maturity, and amenability to treatment through a legal lens. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 8(4), 373–410. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.8.4.373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Scott, E. S., & Grisso, T. (1997). The evolution of adolescence: A developmental perspective on juvenile justice reform. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 88(1), 137–189. doi: 10.2307/1144076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Scott, E. S., Reppucci, N. D., Antonishak, J., & Degennaro, J. T. (2006). Public attitudes about the culpability and punishment of young offenders. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 24, 815–832. doi: 10.1002/bsl.727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scott, E. S., Reppucci, D., & Woolard, J. L. (1995). Evaluating adolescent decision making in legal contexts. Law and Human Behavior, 19(3), 221–244. doi: 10.1007/BF01501658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Siegel, A. W., Cousins, J. H., Rubovits, D., Parsons, J. T., Lavery, B., & Crowley, C. (1994). Adolescent perceptions of the benefits and risks of their own risk-taking. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2, 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Snyder, H. N., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders, victims: 2006 National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.Google Scholar
  38. Sowell, E., & Jernigan, T. (1998). Further MRI evidence of late brain maturation: Limbic volume increase and changing asymmetries during childhood and adolescence. Developmental Neuropsychology, 14, 599–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sowell, E. R., Thompson, P. M., Holmes, C. J., Jernigan, T. L., & Toga, A. W. (1999). In vivo evidence for post-adolescent brain maturation in frontal and striatal regions. Nature Neuroscience, 2(10), 859–861. doi: 10.1038/13154.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (1996). Maturity of judgment in adolescence: Psychosocial factors in adolescent decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 20(3), 249–272. doi: 10.1007/BF01499023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Steinberg, L., & Monahan, K. C. (2007). Age differences in resistance to peer influence. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1531–1543. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Steinberg, L., & Scott, E. S. (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility, and the juvenile death penalty. The American Psychologist, 58, 1009–1018. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.12.1009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tapp, J. L. (1976). Psychology and the law: An overture. Annual Review of Psychology, 27, 359–404. doi: 10.1146/ Scholar
  44. Viljoen, J. L., & Wingrove, T. (2007). Adjudicative competence in adolescent defendants. Judges’ and defense attorneys’ views of legal standards for adolescents in juvenile and criminal court. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 13(3), 204–229. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.13.3.204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Walker, L. (1989). A longitudinal study of moral reasoning. Child Development, 60(1), 157–166. doi: 10.2307/1131081.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Woolard, J., Reppucci, N., & Redding, R. (1996). Theoretical and methodological issues in studying children’s capacities in legal contexts. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 219–228. doi: 10.1007/BF01499021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yurgelun-Todd, D. (2007). Emotional and cognitive changes during adolescence. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 17(2), 251–257. doi: 10.1016/j.conb.2007.03.009.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yurgelun-Todd, D. A., Killgore, W. D. S., & Clintron, C. B. (2003). Cognitive correlates of medial temporal lobe development across adolescence: A magnetic resonance imaging study. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96(1), 3–17. doi: 10.2466/PMS.96.1.3-17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zimring, F. E. (1998). Toward a jurisprudence of youth violence. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, 24, 477–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Psychology-Law Society/Division 41 of the American Psychological Association 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Prevention Research CenterArizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations