Adolescent Risk-Taking Behavior in the United States

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica M. Sales ◽  
Charles E. Irwin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
The United States ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Risk Taking Behavior

Student Risk-Taking Behaviors: When Do School Counselors Break Confidentiality?

2008 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 2156759X0801100
Author(s):  
Michael Moyer ◽  
Jeremy Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
School Counselors ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
The United States ◽  
High School Counselors ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Student Risk ◽  
Perceived Dangerousness ◽  
Risk Taking Behaviors

A total of 204 middle and high school counselors from across the United States responded to a survey in which they were asked to determine whether they view specific adolescent risk-taking behaviors of varying intensity, frequency, and duration as warranting parental notification. Results suggest that counselors’ perceptions that it is ethical to break confidentiality and report the risk-taking behaviors increased when the behaviors were more intense, more frequent, and of longer duration. Further, although there was less ambiguity regarding the perceived dangerousness of some behaviors (e.g., suicidal ideation), all behaviors showed some variance or disagreement among respondents with regard to their willingness to break confidentiality. Implications and suggestions for school counselors are considered.

scholarly journals 0199 Sleep and Risk Taking Behavior in United States Army Soldiers: A Four Study Mega-Analysis

SLEEP ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A78-A78
Author(s):  
J Mantua ◽  
W J Sowden ◽  
C Mickelson ◽  
J J Choynowski ◽  
A F Bessey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Sleep Duration ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Military Service ◽  
The United States ◽  
Combat Experience ◽  
The Us ◽  
Risk Taking Behavior ◽  
Army Soldiers

Abstract Introduction In military service members, high risk-taking behavior (RTB; e.g., looking to start a fight, reckless driving) leads to injury, judicial reprimand, and removal from military service. Consequently, reducing RTB has become a priority of the United States (U.S.) Army, and identifying modifiable antecedents of RTB has become critical. In non-military populations, in-lab studies have shown sleep restriction/deprivation leads to risky decision-making. We assessed whether sleep duration/quality and RTB are related in U.S. Army soldiers in operationally-relevant settings. Methods Sleep and RTB questionnaire data were collected in 4 unique samples: U.S. Army soldiers from an Armored Brigade Combat Team, Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) Cadets, Special Operations infantrymen, and elite mountain warfare instructors. We aggregated data to conduct a mega-analysis, which is a combined analysis of original raw data. We assessed whether RTB (assessed with an in-house measure of soldier-specific RTB) was correlated with nightly sleep hours (n=2175), Insomnia Severity Index (n=1076), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scores (n=503). Next, using a linear regression, we assessed whether sleep duration was a predictor of RTB while controlling for relevant demographic factors (age, gender, marital status, combat experience, years of education, rank, years of service; n=1198). Results Higher RTB was correlated with lower sleep duration (r=-.23,p<.001), more insomnia symptoms (r=.29,p<.001), and poorer sleep quality (r=.20,p<.001). In the full model, lower age (B=-.02,p=.03) and higher combat experience (B=.05,p=.006) predicted higher RTB. Sleep duration remained a significant (and the strongest) predictor of RTB (B=-.18,p<.001). Conclusion Military leaders should work to build in more sleep opportunities and remove environmental sleep disruptors during training and deployment operations. Leaders should also monitor soldier behavior after military operations that require sleep loss in order to reduce RTB, and, consequently, increase the readiness of the force. Support This work was supported by the Military Operational Medicine Research Program (MOMRP). The opinions and assertions contained herein are the private views of the authors and are not to be construed as official or as reflecting the views of the US Army or of the US Department of Defense. This abstract has been approved for public release with unlimited distribution.

Family Structure and Adolescent Risk-Taking Behavior: A Comparison of Mexican, Cuban, and Puerto Rican Americans

1992 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1197-1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan S. Sokol-Katz ◽  
Patricia M. Ulbrich
Keyword(s):  
Family Structure ◽  
Puerto Rican ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Risk Taking Behavior

A Functional Analytic Framework for Understanding Adolescent Risk-Taking Behavior

2011 ◽  
pp. 177-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura MacPherson ◽  
Jessica M. Richards ◽  
Anahi Collado ◽  
Carl W. Lejuez
Keyword(s):  
Risk Taking ◽  
Analytic Framework ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Risk Taking Behavior

When is it Ethical to Inform Administrators about Student Risk-Taking Behaviors? Perceptions of School Counselors

2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 2156759X1201500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Moyer ◽  
Jeremy R. Sullivan ◽  
David Growcock
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
School Counselors ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
School Administrators ◽  
The United States ◽  
Student Risk ◽  
Risk Taking Behaviors ◽  
Perceptions Of School

School counselors from across the United States responded to a survey asking when they should break confidentiality and report student risk-taking behaviors to school administrators. Generally, counselors believed it to be more ethical to break confidentiality when the behaviors were directly observed (as opposed to reported by students) and when the behaviors occurred on school grounds during school hours. Results also suggest counselors were more willing to break confidentiality when their school had a written policy guiding their actions. All behaviors showed some variance among respondents, suggesting a lack of agreement regarding when it is appropriate to break confidentiality and report risk-taking behaviors to administrators. This article discusses implications and suggestions for school counselors.

scholarly journals Modernizing Conceptions of Valuation and Cognitive-Control Deployment in Adolescent Risk Taking

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy T. Do ◽  
Paul B. Sharp ◽  
Eva H. Telzer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Control System ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Computational Model ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Expected Value ◽  
Risky Decision Making ◽  
Risky Decision ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Risk Taking Behavior

Heightened risk taking in adolescence has long been attributed to valuation systems overwhelming the deployment of cognitive control. However, this explanation of why adolescents engage in risk taking is insufficient given increasing evidence that risk-taking behavior can be strategic and involve elevated cognitive control. We argue that applying the expected-value-of-control computational model to adolescent risk taking can clarify under what conditions control is elevated or diminished during risky decision-making. Through this lens, we review research examining when adolescent risk taking might be due to—rather than a failure of—effective cognitive control and suggest compelling ways to test such hypotheses. This effort can resolve when risk taking arises from an immaturity of the control system itself, as opposed to arising from differences in what adolescents value relative to adults. It can also identify promising avenues for channeling cognitive control toward adaptive outcomes in adolescence.

scholarly journals Low interest rates and executive risk-taking incentives: Evidence from the United States

2020 ◽  
pp. 234094442092771
Author(s):  
Paula Castro ◽  
Maria T Tascon ◽  
Francisco J Castaño ◽  
Borja Amor-Tapia
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Interest Rates ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
The United States ◽  
Jel Classification ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Monetary Policies ◽  
Stock Return Volatility ◽  
Low Interest Rates ◽  
Institutional Shareholders

This article contributes to the literature by indicating how certain monetary policies impact the compensation incentives of US managers to adopt riskier business policies. Specifically, based on the agency problems between shareholders and managers and between shareholders and creditors, a research framework is developed to identify the influence of low interest rates on managers’ risk-taking incentives proxied by the sensitivity of executive compensation to stock return volatility (Vega). We examine 1,293 firms in the United States between 2000 and 2016, and the results indicate that low interest rates increase the managers’ short-term risk-taking incentives and that those incentives contribute to the risk effectively taken by the firm. Our results are robust to the use of alternative monetary proxies and to the presence of passive versus active institutional shareholders. JEL CLASSIFICATION E41; E43; E51; M12; M52

A Simplified Measure of Investor Risk Aversion

2020 ◽  
pp. 026010792092451
Author(s):  
John Grable ◽  
Eun Jin Kwak ◽  
Martha Fulk ◽  
Aditi Routh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Relative Risk ◽  
Risk Aversion ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Measurement Techniques ◽  
Revealed Preference ◽  
The United States ◽  
Relative Risk Aversion ◽  
Measures Of Risk ◽  
Constant Relative Risk Aversion

This article introduces a simplified measure of investor risk aversion. The singleitem question combines elements from revealed preference and propensity measurement techniques in a way that matches traditional constant relative risk-aversion estimation procedures. Based on survey data from 500 investors living in the United States, scores from the proposed measure were found to correlate with other measures of risk aversion, as well as with indicators of risk-taking. A validity test showed that answers to the proposed measure were statistically associated with equity and cash ownership holdings in respondent portfolios. The simplicity and intuitive nature of the proposed measure and the alignment of question response categories to estimates of constant relative risk aversion make this a potentially valuable addition to the toolkit of researchers, financial educators, investors and those who provide advice to investors. JEL: C83, D10, D11, D14, D19, D81

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document