scholarly journals Substance use changes and social role transitions: Proximal developmental effects on ongoing trajectories from late adolescence through early adulthood

2010 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 917-932 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Staff ◽  
John E. Schulenberg ◽  
Julie Maslowsky ◽  
Jerald G. Bachman ◽  
Patrick M. O'Malley ◽  
...  

AbstractSubstance use changes rapidly during late adolescence and early adulthood. This time in the life course is also dense with social role changes, as role changes provide dynamic context for individual developmental change. Using nationally representative, multiwave longitudinal data from age 18 to 28, we examine proximal links between changes in social roles and changes in substance use during the transition to adulthood. We find that changes in family roles, such as marriage, divorce, and parenthood, have clear and consistent associations with changes in substance use. With some notable exceptions, changes in school and work roles have weaker effects on changes in substance use compared to family roles. Changes in socializing (i.e., nights out for fun and recreation) and in religiosity were found to mediate the relationship of social role transitions to substance use. Two time-invariant covariates, socioeconomic background and heavy adolescent substance use, predicted social role status, but did not moderate associations, as within-person links between social roles and substance use were largely equivalent across groups. This paper adds to the cascading effects literature by considering how, within individuals, more proximal variations in school, work, and family roles relate to variations in substance use, and which roles appear to be most influential in precipitating changes in substance use during the transition to adulthood.

Author(s):  
Lisa Leslie ◽  
Colleen Flaherty Manchester ◽  
Yeonka Kim

This chapter advances a social role perspective on gender and the work–family domain—defined to include work and family time investments and attitudes and the work–family intersection (e.g., work–family conflict). A traditional view of social roles suggests that (1) gender has a main effect on the work–family domain, such that men (women) tend to have more work-oriented (family-oriented) and less family-oriented (work-oriented) experiences than women (men) and (2) gender moderates the effect of the work–family domain on valued outcomes (e.g., career success, family satisfaction, health), such that men and women have more favorable outcomes when work–family experiences align with traditional gender roles. In contrast, a dynamic view of social roles suggests that gender has little relevance for understanding the work–family domain. A narrative review of recent research reveals that gender differences often fail to align with traditional gender-based social roles, but also reflect some vestiges of traditional gender-based expectations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 87-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer M Cadigan ◽  
Jennifer C Duckworth ◽  
Myra E Parker ◽  
Christine M Lee

Author(s):  
Paula Ravitz ◽  
Robert Maunder

Chapter 4 describes a case of IPT treatment of major depressive disorder with a focus on role transitions, and how social roles are central to our sense of identity, how all individuals may hold numerous roles (partner, child, parent, sibling, neighbor, community member, etc.), besides having vocational roles (colleague, employee, employer, or professional). It looks at how social roles determine the ‘rules of engagement’ (around communication, sharing of responsibilities) and expectations we have of one another, and how a change in one’s social role (losing a job, moving to another city, becoming partnered, ending a spousal or long-term romantic relationship, adjusting to a disabling or disfiguring medical condition, becoming a new parent) can generate a shift in or loss of one’s sense of self. It examines how these role transitions also evoke changes in one’s needs for or access to social supports and how a role change can be stressful enough to provoke an episode of major depression, especially in individuals with limited social support, insecure or disorganized attachment, or a history of or genetic vulnerability to depression.


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 895-903 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan E. Patrick ◽  
Isaac C. Rhew ◽  
Melissa A. Lewis ◽  
Devon A. Abdallah ◽  
Mary E. Larimer ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0256939
Author(s):  
Jingshi (Joyce) Liu ◽  
Amy N. Dalton ◽  
Jeremy Lee

Social role disruption is a state involving upheaval of social identities, routines and responsibilities. Such disruption is presently occurring at a global scale due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which poses a threat not only to health and security but also to the social roles that underlie people’s daily lives. Our collective response to combat the virus entails, for example, parents homeschooling children, friends socializing online, and employees working from home. While these collective efforts serve the greater good, people’s social roles now lack continuity from what was authentic to the roles before the pandemic began. This, we argue, takes a psychological toll. Individuals feel inauthentic, or alienated and out-of-touch from their “true” selves, to the extent their social roles undergo change. As evidence, we report survey (Studies 1 & 4) and experimental (Studies 2 & 3) evidence that COVID-19-related role changes indeed increase inauthenticity. This effect occurs independent of (a) how positively/negatively people feel about COVID-19 (Study 2) and (b) how positively/negatively people feel about the role change itself (Studies 3 & 4). Moreover, we identify two moderators of this effect. First, this effect occurs when (and ostensibly because) the social roles undergoing change are central to an individual’s sense of self (Study 2). Second, this effect depends on an individual’s temporal perspective. People can safeguard their self-authenticity in the face of changing social roles if they stay focused on the here-and-now (the present and immediate future), rather than focusing on the past (pre-COVID-19) or future (post-COVID-19) (Studies 3 & 4). This advantage for present-focused coping is observed in both the U.S.A. (Study 3) and Hong Kong (Study 4). We suggest that the reason people feel more authentically themselves when they maintain a present focus is because doing so makes the discontinuity of their social roles less salient.


2017 ◽  
Vol 126 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel E. Gustavson ◽  
Michael C. Stallings ◽  
Robin P. Corley ◽  
Akira Miyake ◽  
John K. Hewitt ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document