Adolescents' cognitive capacity reaches adult levels prior to their psychosocial maturity: Evidence for a "maturity gap" in a multinational, cross-sectional sample.
Adolescent
Adolescent Behavior
/ psychology
Adolescent Development
/ physiology
Adult
Age Distribution
Child
China
Cognition
/ physiology
Colombia
Cross-Sectional Studies
Cyprus
Decision Making
Female
Humans
India
Italy
Jordan
Kenya
Longitudinal Studies
Male
Minors
/ legislation & jurisprudence
Philippines
Psychology, Adolescent
Regression Analysis
Supreme Court Decisions
Surveys and Questionnaires
Sweden
Thailand
United States
Young Adult
Journal
Law and human behavior
ISSN: 1573-661X
Titre abrégé: Law Hum Behav
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7801255
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2019
02 2019
Historique:
entrez:
15
2
2019
pubmed:
15
2
2019
medline:
23
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
All countries distinguish between minors and adults for various legal purposes. Recent U.S. Supreme Court cases concerning the legal status of juveniles have consulted psychological science to decide where to draw these boundaries. However, little is known about the robustness of the relevant research, because it has been conducted largely in the U.S. and other Western countries. To the extent that lawmakers look to research to guide their decisions, it is important to know how generalizable the scientific conclusions are. The present study examines 2 psychological phenomena relevant to legal questions about adolescent maturity: cognitive capacity, which undergirds logical thinking, and psychosocial maturity, which comprises individuals' ability to restrain themselves in the face of emotional, exciting, or risky stimuli. Age patterns of these constructs were assessed in 5,227 individuals (50.7% female), ages 10-30 (M = 17.05, SD = 5.91) from 11 countries. Importantly, whereas cognitive capacity reached adult levels around age 16, psychosocial maturity reached adult levels beyond age 18, creating a "maturity gap" between cognitive and psychosocial development. Juveniles may be capable of deliberative decision making by age 16, but even young adults may demonstrate "immature" decision making in arousing situations. We argue it is therefore reasonable to have different age boundaries for different legal purposes: 1 for matters in which cognitive capacity predominates, and a later 1 for matters in which psychosocial maturity plays a substantial role. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Identifiants
pubmed: 30762417
pii: 2019-08477-003
doi: 10.1037/lhb0000315
pmc: PMC6551607
mid: NIHMS1025357
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
69-85Subventions
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R01 HD054805
Pays : United States
Organisme : FIC NIH HHS
ID : R03 TW008141
Pays : United States
Références
Am Psychol. 2000 May;55(5):469-80
pubmed: 10842426
Child Dev. 2004 Sep-Oct;75(5):1357-72
pubmed: 15369519
Am Psychol. 2009 Oct;64(7):583-94
pubmed: 19824745
Inj Prev. 1999 Jun;5(2):133-5
pubmed: 10385834
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Nov 09;16(1):76
pubmed: 26553304
Dev Sci. 2018 Mar;21(2):
pubmed: 28150391
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006 Aug;14(3):318-28
pubmed: 16893275
Emotion. 2018 Feb;18(1):138-152
pubmed: 28414476
Law Hum Behav. 2016 Dec;40(6):611-625
pubmed: 27348715
Annu Rev Psychol. 2015 Jan 3;66:295-319
pubmed: 25089362
Psychol Sci. 2016 Apr;27(4):549-62
pubmed: 26911914
J Exp Child Psychol. 2016 Sep;149:6-22
pubmed: 26592766
J Pers Assess. 2007 Oct;89(2):188-96
pubmed: 17764395
J Exp Child Psychol. 2011 Mar;108(3):621-37
pubmed: 21044790
Child Dev. 1982 Dec;53(6):1589-98
pubmed: 7172783
Child Dev. 2009 Jan-Feb;80(1):28-44
pubmed: 19236391
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2002 Jun;2(2):109-20
pubmed: 12455679
Child Dev. 2018 May;89(3):e261-e277
pubmed: 28586087
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 May;35(3):709-30
pubmed: 19379045
J Exp Child Psychol. 2016 Jul;147:39-52
pubmed: 26985577
Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64:135-68
pubmed: 23020641
Child Neuropsychol. 2013;19(6):630-8
pubmed: 23075095
Child Dev. 2017 Sep;88(5):1598-1614
pubmed: 28869665
Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2014 Oct;23(5):319-325
pubmed: 26855479
Dev Sci. 2011 Mar;14(2):F1-10
pubmed: 21499511
Emotion. 2011 Dec;11(6):1346-1357
pubmed: 21910543
Dev Psychol. 2007 Nov;43(6):1531-1543
pubmed: 18020830
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 1982 Jun 25;298(1089):199-209
pubmed: 6125971
Behav Sci Law. 2007;25(1):1-19
pubmed: 17285585
Dev Sci. 2004 Sep;7(4):443-55
pubmed: 15484593
Front Psychol. 2014 Sep 12;5:978
pubmed: 25309470
Am Psychol. 2009 Oct;64(7):595-600; discussion 601-4
pubmed: 19824746
Dev Psychopathol. 2013 Feb;25(1):223-39
pubmed: 22824055
Prev Sci. 2010 Sep;11(3):319-30
pubmed: 20306298
Law Hum Behav. 2014 Apr;38(2):181-93
pubmed: 24127891
Dev Psychol. 2010 Jan;46(1):193-207
pubmed: 20053017
Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:591-616
pubmed: 18154504
Dev Psychol. 2011 May;47(3):739-46
pubmed: 21534657
Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(11):2017-36
pubmed: 16527316
Law Hum Behav. 2003 Aug;27(4):333-63
pubmed: 12916225
Child Dev Perspect. 2010 Apr 1;4(1):19-24
pubmed: 21423824
Dev Sci. 2013 Mar;16(2):198-208
pubmed: 23432830
Dev Psychol. 2008 Nov;44(6):1764-78
pubmed: 18999337