1

Zachery Westdyke
EDUC 425
Spring 2015
Typical Adolescent Development and Some Important Risk Factors
If there is anything consistent about adolescent development, it would be found in the
variability between individuals. Amongst this variability, however, there are behaviors that
would be seen as typical and behaviors that would qualify as atypical. Typical social and
emotional development is not always what one would expect; behaviors that parents and teachers
often try to suppress are sometimes the same behaviors that are deemed normal in regards to
developing adolescents. Of course, what is considered normal development will always vary
between individuals given certain circumstances. However, what is typical social and emotional
developmental behavior can be generalized based on several categories, including but not limited
to: gender, race/ethnicity, social class, and family relationships. Seeing as I have noticed the
most influence of gender and family relationships on the students at my internship, this paper
will focus on typical developmental behaviors in these two areas in particular.
Gender differences are perhaps most salient in westernized countries when studied in a
school setting. Gender is a very important characteristic to consider when thinking about what
types of behaviors are typical or atypical of an adolescent. In westernized countries, there are
very specific roles and expectations assigned to us the moment our biological sex is determined.
Many of us have a deeply engrained construct of how a girl is supposed to behave and how a boy
is supposed to behave, and these thoughts, whether consciously or not, typically become the
thoughts of developing boys and girls (Arnett, 2007, p. 133). While these stereotypes and gender

difference vary widely among different cultures, this discussion will temporarily focus on
westernized nations and traditional cultures.
During adolescent development, Arnett (2007) first looks at the differences between the
transition from girlhood to womanhood and boyhood to manhood. One major difference
between these two transitions, is that for boys manhood is something that has to be achieved, to
a much greater extent than girls have to achieve womanhood (Arnett, 2007, pp. 135-138). For
women in traditional cultures, womanhood is often reached at the time of puberty a naturally
occurring, biological phenomena. For men, this achievement is much less clear. David
Gilmore (1990) summarizes the criteria for this transition into three abilities: an adolescent boy
must demonstrate three capacities before he can be considered a man: provide, protect, and
procreate (Arnett, 2007, p. 138). This observation alone leads to many damaging stereotypes
and assumptions about both men and women that reinforce the patriarchal society many
industrialized countries are currently in.
There are three important implications for each of Gilmores (1990) words in regards to
development. First, a man being able to provide implies that he must provide for someone else.
In traditional societies, this someone else is often a woman or a family, in some ways suggesting
that the people the man is providing for are incapable of providing for themselves. Second, and
somewhat related to the latter, men being able to protect also implies that who he is protecting is
incapable of protecting themselves. In regards to the man, it means he must be strong
weakness is a characteristic of femininity. Third, not only must a boy be able to procreate, he
must want and desire it in order to reach manhood. This, of course, is a dangerous assumption
about the sexual behaviors of young men. While often damaging, these three characteristics of

entering into manhood are important when thinking about typical developmental behaviors of
adolescent men.
First, typical male adolescent behaviors are generally regarded as more aggressive than
behaviors seen in women. In Real Boys Voices, Pollack (2001) examines some of the
aforementioned stereotypes (aggression in particular) and how they manifest themselves in the
minds of young men. He sees the main issue in male adolescence as being aggressive behavior
and the way other young men challenge behavior that does not fall into this category. Nonaggressive behavior is often challenged by peers with insults as Arnett (2007) explains: During
adolescence, boys are expected by their peers to be verbally aggressive, directing half-joking
insults at other boys on a regular basis. Often these insults involve manhood itself; adolescent
boys commonly use insults such as wimp, weenie, pussy, and faggot, calling the
manhood of other boys into question (p. 147). Thus, it is not atypical to see adolescent men
engaging in aggressive behavior, often as a means to uphold the image of being strong being
able to protect.
This damaging, stereotypical behavior is not limited to men, however. Adolescent
women are also held to very specific standards. Though different, they are often just as socially
and emotionally damaging in developing adolescence. The message young women receive is
focused on their appearance; it is essentially the opposite of what young men are socialized to
believe. To clarify, young men learn to be strong and aggressive, while young women learn to be
the recipients of this strong and aggressive behavior docile and submissive. Especially during
adolescence, young women learn that their appearances are the most important quality about
them, and often the best thing they have to offer. This is reinforced through the media and peers
(Arnett, 2007, p. 143). John Hill and Mary Ellen Lynch (1983) find this time during womens

adolescence to be especially critical in reinforcing these gendered stereotypes. This idea has
been labeled the gender intensification hypothesis, and is more specifically the idea that
psychological and behavioral differences between males and females become more pronounced
in adolescence because of intensified socialization pressures to conform to culturally prescribed
gender roles (Arnett, 2007, p. 143).
For young women, these gender roles typically involve spending more time than boys on
their appearance and beauty upkeep. Normal and acceptable behaviors and the extent to
which they are reinforced changes throughout adolescence, but remain relatively stable
throughout childhood. Girls (in most westernized nations) are socialized into a culture that
explicitly states what is and is not acceptable feminine behavior. This includes beautification
behaviors, an emphasis on pleasing others, and during the teenage years, the paradox of both
sexual innocence and experience. Given these strict standards for young women, it is not
atypical to see a strong emphasis on appearance and behaviors that serve to maintain a specific
body image. In regards to the interaction between developing boys and girls, it is typical for
children in early childhood to restrict their play to same-sex relationships. This gender-restricted
play generally holds true throughout adolescence, but tends to loosen up during middle
childhood and beyond (Arnett, 2007, p. 145).
As noted near the beginning of this paper, the differing developmental behaviors between
boys and girls are perhaps most salient when studied in a school setting. This should come as
little surprise to most, given that most adolescents spend a majority of their time in school.
Temporarily ignoring cultural and ethnic differences, it is typical for girls to outperform boys in
an academic setting. There are many possible explanations for this, but they can loosely be
broken into three important categories of influence: peers, teachers, and parents. Perhaps the

most important influence on the differing behaviors in school between boys and girls is the
influence of peers. Often even more so than parents, peers guide the way other adolescents act in
a social and academic setting (Arnett, 2007, p. 333). For boys, this typically involves a generally
apathetic attitude toward school. In regards to academic engagement among both boys and girls,
Steinberg (1996) found that nearly one third of the students in the study stated that they rarely
tried hard in school. Thus, it isnt entirely atypical for adolescents to exhibit apathetic behavior
in a school setting.
This generalization, however, is much more complicated given several other factors. Of
these factors, peers play a large role in predicting the behavior of a given students. Arnett (2007)
is vigilant in making the distinction between peers and friends when discussing this subject. He
explains that, typically, adolescents in schools with lower average levels of school achievement
tend to have better academic self-concepts and higher expectations for academic attainment than
adolescents surrounded by high-achieving classmates (pp. 333-4). The opposite tends to be true
when substituting the term friends with peers. Regardless of the image presented to their
peers and friends, most students do, in fact, wish to be seen as hard-working, academicallymotivated students in the eyes of their teachers. This dichotomy represents the strong influence
of peers on self-image and self-preservation.
With this in mind, it is then relatively normal for adolescents to exhibit apathetic behavior
in school: to occasionally cheat on a homework assignment, or to be less engaged in the
classroom. Thus, it is developmentally normal for some adolescents to sleep in class, or to put
on a front of not caring about school (generally speaking, most of them do actually care) (Arnett,
2007). The extent to which an adolescent engages in these behaviors is what tells us if it is a

serious problem. Of course, there will be much variability based on the school climate, the
students friends and peers, and the students parent(s).
Taking this thought further, there are several trends that are typically seen as students
progress through their primary and secondary education. Changes in behavior are common
during all transitioning periods (elementary to middle school, middle to high school, etc.), but
one of the most common and consistently seen changes occurs during middle school. For some,
this signals the beginning of a process of disengaging from school. Declines in self-esteem are
also common (Taylor et al., 2013, pp. 24-25). For most students this disengagement is only
temporary; however, depending on internal and external factors, it sometimes continues or
worsens throughout high school.
Another common trend among adolescents is an increase in risk-taking behavior. This
includes things like alcohol use, cigarette use, and drug use. Lee (2000) found that 70% of high
school students have tried cigarette smoking, and 81% have tried alcohol. Males are more likely
than girls to engage in both of these behaviors. The development of risk-taking behaviors is
normal to an extent, but there are several ways in which it can become a cause for concern. Two
important signs that serve as indicators of when risk-taking behavior becomes a serious issue are
an early age of onset and the severity of the behavior. In general, experimenting with risky
behaviors is normal; it is when the concerning behavior becomes a characteristic of the
adolescent that it can be seen as atypical (Taylor et al., 2013).
So if these are some characteristics of typical emotional and social development in
adolescents, what kind of factors put children at a greater risk for exhibiting atypical behaviors?
This is a question that has been widely debated, and has an answer similar to the nature versus
nurture debate: there are a multitude of factors, both biological and social, and it is likely that the

two interact. From a psychosocial perspective, parenting styles, peer influences, socioeconomic
status and geographical location, and life experiences are among some important factors that can
lead a youth to engage in atypical developmental behaviors (Taylor et al., 2013)
The influence of an adolescents family relationships (specifically parent relationships) is
sometimes underestimated when thinking about a childs experiences in school. It is easy to
attribute an adolescents willingness to engage in risk-taking behaviors to the influence of their
peers (and often this is the case). However, differing parenting styles and behaviors are often the
most influential factors in adolescent developmental behaviors and can often be attributed to
certain developmental outcomes (Arnett, 2007). Basically, adolescents with parents who use or
abuse drugs or alcohol are much more likely to develop addictions themselves, regardless of
their peers behaviors. Not surprisingly, however, peer behavior can also increase the odds of
risk-taking behaviors (Taylor et al., 2013, p. 31). But there are also less obvious ways that
parents can be important factors in negative adolescent developmental behaviors. Parents who
are disengaged with their children and show little interest in what their children are doing also
increase the chances of normal, risk-taking behavior becoming problem behavior. Additionally,
adolescents with at least one positive, adult mentor are much less likely to experience
developmental problems. (Taylor et al., 2013, p. 30).
Another important risk factor is the community in which an adolescent lives.
Adolescents growing up in poorer communities and communities with high rates of crime are
much more likely to engage in developmental behaviors that would not be considered normal or
that would lead to emotional and social problems. This is mostly because adolescents in these
types of communities are being exposed to atypical developmental behaviors at a much higher
rate than those growing up in wealthier, safer neighborhoods. Committing a crime, though, is

not necessarily developmentally atypical for a teenager. Young people commit these acts
impulsively and, if handled in a way that discourages them from this type of behavior and puts
them back on the right track, most cease all forms of this type of behavior by adulthood (Taylor
et al., 2013, p. 32). Again, the most obvious difference between this type of dangerous behavior
being normal and being a problem is the severity of the behavior and whether or not it continues
as the adolescent develops.
Indeed, this seems to consistently be one of the most universal characteristics of
differentiating between normal and atypical emotional and psychological development. It is
normal for adolescents to engage in risk-taking behaviors, to be disengaged with school work,
and to break rules. However, when this behavior endangers themselves or others, or continues
into adulthood, it then becomes a reason for concern. There are many factors, both protective
and risk, that can contribute to the likelihood of these problems developing in adolescence. In
general, one incident of behavior that is atypical given the normal psychosocial development of
an adolescent at a given age is not enough to qualify that individual as in need of help. When the
problem behavior becomes normal for a child is when an intervention is becomes necessary.
Additionally, though often difficult, many problems can be corrected through certain
interventions and changes.

References
Arnett, J. J. (2007) Adolescence and emerging adulthood: A cultural approach. 3rd ed. Upper
Saddle River: Pearson Education.
Gilmore, D. (1990) Manhood in the making: Cultural concepts of masculinity. New Haven: Yale
University Press.
Hill, J. & Lynch, M. (1983). The intensification of gender-related role expectations during early
adolescence. In J. Brooks-Gunn & A. Petersen (Eds.), Female puberty. New York:
Plenum.
Lee, K. (2000). What you need to know about todays teenage girls. In Closing the Gap: A
Newsletter of the Office of Minority Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, pp. 6-7.
Steinberg, L. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents
need to do. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Taylor, S. J., Barker, L. A., Heavey, L., & McHale, S. (2013). The typical developmental
trajectory of social and executive functions in late adolescence and early adulthood.
Developmental Psychology, 49, 7, 1253-65.