Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorIcenogle, Graceen
dc.contributor.authorSteinberg, Laurenceen
dc.contributor.authorDuell, Natashaen
dc.contributor.authorChein, Jasonen
dc.contributor.authorChang, Leien
dc.contributor.authorChaudhary, Nanditaen
dc.contributor.authorDi Giunta, Lauraen
dc.contributor.authorDodge, Kenneth A.en
dc.contributor.authorFanti, Kostas A.en
dc.contributor.authorLansford, Jennifer E.en
dc.contributor.authorOburu, Paulen
dc.contributor.authorPastorelli, Concettaen
dc.contributor.authorSkinner, Ann T.en
dc.contributor.authorSorbring, Emmaen
dc.contributor.authorTapanya, Sombaten
dc.contributor.authorUribe Tirado, Liliana M.en
dc.contributor.authorAlampay, Liane P.en
dc.contributor.authorAl-Hassan, Suha M.en
dc.contributor.authorTakash, Hanan M. S.en
dc.contributor.authorBacchini, Darioen
dc.creatorIcenogle, Graceen
dc.creatorSteinberg, Laurenceen
dc.creatorDuell, Natashaen
dc.creatorChein, Jasonen
dc.creatorChang, Leien
dc.creatorChaudhary, Nanditaen
dc.creatorDi Giunta, Lauraen
dc.creatorDodge, Kenneth A.en
dc.creatorFanti, Kostas A.en
dc.creatorLansford, Jennifer E.en
dc.creatorOburu, Paulen
dc.creatorPastorelli, Concettaen
dc.creatorSkinner, Ann T.en
dc.creatorSorbring, Emmaen
dc.creatorTapanya, Sombaten
dc.creatorUribe Tirado, Liliana M.en
dc.creatorAlampay, Liane P.en
dc.creatorAl-Hassan, Suha M.en
dc.creatorTakash, Hanan M. S.en
dc.creatorBacchini, Darioen
dc.description.abstractAll 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.en
dc.sourceLaw and Human Behavioren
dc.titleAdolescents’ cognitive capacity reaches adult levels prior to their psychosocial maturity: Evidence for a “maturity gap” in a multinational, cross-sectional sample.en
dc.description.endingpage85Σχολή Κοινωνικών Επιστημών και Επιστημών Αγωγής / Faculty of Social Sciences and EducationΤμήμα Ψυχολογίας / Department of Psychology
dc.source.abbreviationLaw and Human Behavioren
dc.contributor.orcidFanti, Kostas A. [0000-0002-3484-7483]

Files in this item


There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record