Cited by 264Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes

Can adolescents learn self-control? Delay of gratification in the development of control over risk taking

Open access
Romer, Daniel, Duckworth, Angela L., Sznitman, Sharon, Park, Sunhee·2010·Prevention Science

Abstract

Recent findings from developmental neuroscience suggest that the adolescent brain is too immature to exert control over impulsive drives, such as sensation seeking, that increase during adolescence. Using a discounting of delayed reward paradigm, this research examines the ability to delay gratification as a potential source of control over risk-taking tendencies that increase during adolescence. In addition, it explores the role of experience resulting from risk taking as well as future time perspective as contributors to the development of this ability. In a nationally representative sample (n = 900) of young people aged 14-22, a structural equation analysis shows that risk taking as assessed by use of three popular drugs (tobacco, marijuana, and alcohol) is inversely related to the ability to delay gratification. The relation is robust across gender, age, and different levels of sensation seeking. In addition, high sensation seekers exhibit dramatic age-related increase in delay of gratification, lending support to the hypothesis that engaging in risky behavior provides experience that leads to greater patience for long-term rewards. The findings support the conclusion that a complete understanding of the development of self-control must consider individual differences not easily explained by universal trends in brain maturation.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11121-010-0171-8

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Romer, D., Duckworth, A. L., Sznitman, S., & Park, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Kyung Hee University (KR)
Venue
Prevention Science
Published
2010-03-21
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
319-330
ISSN
  • 1389-4986 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6695
OpenAlex
W2085507837
Cited by
264
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 26 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 14
FWCI
9.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Prevention Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (K01AG033182)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Keywords
self-control, delay of gratification, risk-taking, adolescence, sensation seeking, impulsivity, brain maturation, drug use, tobacco use, cannabis use, alcohol consumption, future time perspective, developmental neuroscience, individual differences
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adolescent Behavior, Adult, Humans, Internal-External Control, Risk-Taking, Self Efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review