- Why was it important for Lewis to show that her three groups of subjects did not differ in expected educational attainment?
Research and experimentation relies upon controlled conditions and in the research conducted by Lewis, consistent participant attributes in order to draw conclusions from the results. Lewis found that it was important to show that her three groups of subjects did not differ in expected educational attainment. She asked classroom teachers to estimate the eventual post high school educational achievement of the participants as a check on possible academic differences among the grade level groups. This was to ensure that her results would not be compromised by commenting for example on the results from the group grade level 7 to 8 in comparison to the results of the grade level 12 group when 40% of the grade level 12’s had below average academic performance. Academic performance could have an impact on a participant’s ability to understand and consequently respond appropriately to the staged scenarios. Lewis could be assured that her results could be compared and reported on as being consistent, reliable and controlled by ensuring that the academic levels of the majority of participants were comparable.
Your Task
- Comment on the decision making demonstrated by each participant using the five categories of decision making assessed by the scenarios (include your table of findings). While you cannot draw conclusions about developmental differences based on such a small sample, how did your findings compare to those reported by Lewis?
In conducting this experimental study there were five categories of decision making that each participant was to be assessed against. These categories were:
- Awareness of risks;
- Awareness of future consequences;
- Advice seeking;
- Revision of attitudes in light of new information;
- Recognition of vested interests (Lewis, 1981, p. 538).
In both studies there was a significant increase with grade level, or age, in the awareness of risks. The younger participants in both studies had reduced awareness of risk. The majority of older participants were able to identify risk awareness. In the Gardiner study the 18 year old participant highlighted the risk of the procedure going wrong and the effect that would have on appearance or health. There was no mention of any risk awareness when the 12 year old was presented with the same scenario.
In Lewis’ study she found that there was a significant increase with grade level, or age, in the awareness of future consequences of decision making. The same result was also evident in Gardiner’s findings. The 18 years old participant stated that she would ask if there was any possibility that the lump will have harmful health effects in the future. There was no acknowledgement of an awareness of future consequences by the 12 year old participant.
When asked who advice would be sought from, both studies showed that the participants would seek advice from parents, peers and a doctor. There was one difference in both studies however. In Lewis’ study she found that only older participants commented on assistance being sought from a specialist. The opposite was found in Gardiner’s study. No conclusions can be drawn from this finding, however, due to there being such a small sample. The 12 year old highlighting advice being sought from a specialist may be a product of personal experience and not due to general cognitive developmental trends.
As indicated in Lewis’study, there were no grade level differences found in the participant’s ability to revise attitudes in light of new information. This was not the case in the Gardiner study. The 12 year old unconditionally believed the scientist and expressed status justification whereas the 18 year old requested the seeking of additional information and held no status justification views. Again, no conclusions can be drawn from this finding due to there being such a small sample and the differences may relate to personal experience and not be due to general cognitive developmental trends.
Both studies found a significant increase with age in measuring the comprehension of vested interests.
Gardiner Study - Participant 1: 12 years of age
Gardiner Study - Participant 2: 18 years of age
- Comment on the reliability and validity of your data. How could it have been improved?
The reliability and validity of the data in the Gardiner study is questionable due to there being such a small sample size and no recognition of potential academic achievement. The reliability of the results could be improved by drawing on a much larger sample size and extracting data from teachers on potential academic achievement to ensure all participants used in the study are consistent and reliable subjects. Using such a small sample size in this study has resulted in inconclusive findings when the results were compared to the Lewis study. It must also be noted that the data was collected from the use of scenarios which may not be a reliable indicator of real-life behaviour. Role playing using another adolescent instead of a written scenario may achieve more realistic indications about how adolescents make decisions and seek advice.
- The study by Lewis required participants to respond to problems portrayed in
scenarios (although Lewis tried to make it appear ‘real’ by using a peer counselling format). Do you think studies that use scenarios can tell us much about performance in real life? To what extent do you think the advice given by your participants in response to the scenarios informed you of how these individuals make important decisions in their day to day life?
The use of scenarios in research can be effective but should not be used solely to make recommendations and base decisions on the way people interact and make decisions in the real world. The use of scenarios in this experiment would be beneficial if accompanied with more realistic role playing. This would allow the observer to gain a more meaningful insight into how individuals make decisions in real life due to the ‘real life’ spontaneity and human interaction experienced constantly by us all on a daily basis. The scenarios in the experiment did allow a feel for how individuals make important decisions in their day to day life but should not be used to generalise, categorise or make recommendations as they are not communicated in a fashion that is natural to us all in the ‘real world’.
- Lewis’ study is one of the few studies available on adolescent thinking and reasoning about real life problems. Why is this type of research important? What recommendations would you make to policy makers on the basis of Lewis’ findings.
Study on adolescent reasoning and thinking is important as like infants, young children and middle and old aged adults they are an important part of society. Adolescents who do not learn to get along with others by the time they reach adulthood are likely to face obstacles in the years ahead (Castrogiovanni, 1999). Studying adolescent thinking and reasoning about real life will provide this group with advice and tips on attainment of social independence, healthy relationships and fulfilled lives as they approach adulthood. Study in this area also provides legislators, law and policy makers, academia and society in general a sense for the issues impacting adolescents such as eating disorders, drugs and alcohol use, sex, depression, career development and academic achievement and strategies to impact positively on them.
It could be argued that adolescents in grades 10 to 12 could be given extended decision making rights on the basis of Lewis’ findings as the findings show that this group is able to recognise vested interests, future consequences, risks and effective advice seeking strategies when making a decision. It is not recommended that extended decision making rights be extended to this group based on Lewis’ study alone as the data was collected from the use of scenarios which may not be a reliable indicator of real-life behaviour and there is no illustrated relationship between advice giving and decision making. There is also no finding as to why differences were found across the age groups. More study and research needs to be conducted in this area before recommendations to policy makers are made.
References
Castrogiovanni, D. (1999). Adolescence: Change and Continuity. Peer Groups. Retrieved May 1, 2003, from nxd10/adpeer1.htm.
Field, T. (2002). Adolescents’ parent and peer relationships. Retrieved May 1, 2003, from print.jhtml.
Kail, R.V. & Cavanaugh, J.C. (2000). Human Development: A Lifespan View. Second Edition. California: Wadsworth/Thomas Learning.
La Greca, A.M. (1998). Social anxiety among adolescents: linkages with peer relations and friendships. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, April 1998. Retrieved May 1, 2003, from www.findarticles.com.
Lewis, C.C. (1981). How adolescents approach decisions: Changes over grades seven to twelve and policy implications. Child Development, 32, 538-544.
Nettle, E. (2001). Adolescence: a discussion on the physical, cognitive, moral and social changes that occur in adolescence. Retrieved May 1, 2003, from .
Steinberg, L. (1998). Parent-Child Relationships. Gale Encyclopaedia of Childhood and Adolescence. Retrieved May 1, 2003, from www.findarticles.com.
Weiten, W. (2002). Psychology Themes & Variations. Fifth Edition, Briefer Version. California: Wadsworth/Thomas Learning.
Appendix 1.1 – Participant’s Consent Form
My name is Nicole Gardiner and I am undertaking a student activity as part of course work in the subject PSY202 – Developmental Psychology at Charles Sturt University. The student activity requires the voluntary participation of an adolescent.
This activity investigates adolescent decision making. You will be required to read three scenarios. The scenarios are presented as problems from adolescents the same age and sex as you who are asking for your advice. You will be required to make suggestions about what they need to think about to solve the problems presented in the scenarios. Your suggestions will be captured on a tape recorder. Feel free to talk freely as I will not be in the room when you record your responses. The activity may take approximately 30 minutes.
Participation is voluntary and you can withdraw your permission to partake in the activity at any time. Please note that your confidentiality is assured at all times. The tape of your recorded responses will only be used by myself to transcribe your answers. It will then be destroyed. No identifying information such as your name or address accompany my report or data results.
I confirm that I have read the above information and agree to participate in the activity.
______________________________ ______/______/______
Participant’s Signature Date
______________________________ ______/______/______
Parent’s Signature (if applicable) Date
PSY202 – Developmental Psychology Nicole Gardiner – Student # 1227692
Assignment 1
