Prevention Science

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 319–330 | Cite as

Can Adolescents Learn Self-control? Delay of Gratification in the Development of Control over Risk Taking

  • Daniel RomerEmail author
  • Angela L. Duckworth
  • Sharon Sznitman
  • Sunhee Park


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.


Adolescence Sensation seeking Delay of gratification Delay discounting Future time perspective Risk taking Substance use 


  1. Ainslie, G. (1975). Specious reward: A behavioral theory of impulsiveness and impulse control. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 463–496.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Allison, P. D. (2001). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bembenutty, H. F., & Karabenick, S. A. (2004). Inherent association between academic delay of gratification, future time perspective, and self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentler, P. M. (2004). EQS 6 structural equation manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Botvin, G. J., Griffin, K. W., & Nichols, T. D. (2006). Preventing youth violence and delinquency through a universal school-based prevention approach. Prevention Science, 7, 403–408.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyd, J. N., Keough, K. A., & Zimbardo, P. G. (1999). Who’s smoking, drinking, and using drugs? Time perspective as a predictor of substance use. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 21, 149–164.Google Scholar
  7. Casey, B. J., Getz, S., & Galvan, A. (2008). The adolescent brain. Developmental Review, 28, 62–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chambers, R. A., Potenza, M. N., & Taylor, J. R. (2003). Developmental neurocircuitry of motivation in adolescence: A critical period of addiction vulnerability. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 1041–1052.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Donohew, L., Hoyle, R. H., Lorch, E. P., Palmgreen, P., & Stephenson, M. T. (2002). Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 401–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2005). Self-discipline outdoes IQ in predicting academic performance of adolescents. Psychological Science, 16, 939–944.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Evans, G. W., & Rosenbaum, J. (2008). Self-regulation and the income-achievement gap. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23, 504–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fong, G. T., & Hall, P. A. (2003). Time perspective: A potentially important construct for decreasing health risk behaviors among adolescents. In D. Romer (Ed.), Reducing adolescent risk: Toward an integrated approach (pp. 106–112). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Green, L., & Myerson, J. (2004). A discounting framework for choice with delayed and probabilistic rewards. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 769–792.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Green, L., Fry, A. F., & Myerson, J. (1994). Discounting of delayed rewards: A life-span comparison. Psychological Science, 5, 33–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Green, L., Myerson, J., Lichtman, D., Rosen, S., & Fry, A. (2008). Temporal discounting in choice between delayed rewards: The role of age and income. Psychology and Aging, 11, 79–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hinton, J. M., Jameson, T. L., & Whitney, P. (2003). Impulsive decision-making and working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 298–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76–99). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Jentsch, D., & Taylor, J. R. (1999). Impulsivity resulting from frontostriatal dysfunction in drug abuse: Implications for the control of behavior by rewardrelated stimuli. Psychopharmacology, 146, 373–390.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Johnson, M. W., & Bickel, W. (2002). Within-subject comparison of real and hypothetical money rewards in delay discounting. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 77, 129–146.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2008). Monitoring the future national survey results on drug use, 1975–2007: Vol. 1. Secondary school students (NIH Publication N. 08-64-18A). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.Google Scholar
  21. Joireman, J., Sprott, D. E., & Spangenberg, E. R. (2005). Fiscal responsibility and the consideration of future consequences. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 1159–1168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaplan, D. (2000). Structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Klingberg, T., Fernell, E., Olesen, P., Johnson, M., Gustafsson, P., Dahlstrom, K., et al. (2005). Computerized training of working memory in children with ADHD—A randomized controlled trial. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 44, 177–186.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lewin, K. (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods. American Journal of Sociology, 44, 868–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCartt, A. T., Shabanova, V. I., & Leaf, W. A. (2003). Driving experience, crashes and traffic citations of teenage beginning drivers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 35, 311–320.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Mischel, W., Peake, P. K., & Shoda, Y. (1988). The nature of adolescent competencies predicted by preschool delay of gratification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 687–696.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M. L. (1989). Delay of gratification in children. Science, 244, 933–938.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Morrissey, M. A., Grabowski, D. C., Dee, T. S., & Campbell, C. (2006). The strength of graduated drivers license programs and fatalities among teens and passengers. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 38, 135–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nelson, C. A., Bloom, F. E., Cameron, J. L., Amaral, D., Dahl, R. E., & Pine, D. (2002). An integrative, multidisciplinary approach to the study of brain-behavior relations in the context of typical and atypical development. Development and Psychopathology, 14, 499–520.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Nurmi, J. (1991). How do adolescents see the future? A review of the development of future orientation and planning. Developmental Review, 11, 1–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Panksepp, J. (1998). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Pattij, T., & Vanderschuren, L. J. M. J. (2008). The neuropharmacology of impulsive behavior. Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, 29, 192–199.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Rachlin, H. (2000). The science of self-control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Raine, A., Reynolds, C., Venables, P. H., & Mednick, S. A. (2002). Stimulation seeking and intelligence: A prospective longitudinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 663–674.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Raykov, T. (1997). Estimation of composite reliability for congeneric measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reynolds, B. (2004). Do high rates of cigarette consumption increase delay discounting? A cross-sectional comparison of adolescent smokers and young-adult smokers and nonsmokers. Behavioural Processes, 67, 545–549.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Reynolds, B. (2006). A review of delay-discounting research with humans: Relations to drug use and gambling. Behavioural Pharmacology, 17, 651–667.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Reynolds, B., & Schiffbauer, R. (2005). Delay of gratification and delay discounting: A unifying feedback model of delay-related impulsive behavior. Psychological Record, 55, 439–460.Google Scholar
  40. Reynolds, B., Penfold, R. B., & Patak, M. (2008). Dimensions of impulsive behavior in adolescents: Laboratory behavioral assessments. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 16, 124–131.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Riggs, N. R., Greenberg, M. T., Kusche, C. A., & Pentz, M. A. (2006). The meditational role of neurogcognition in the behavioral outcomes of a social-emotional prevention program in elementary school students: Effects of the PATHS curriculum. Prevention Science, 7, 91–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Roberti, J. W. (2004). A review of behavioral and biological correlates of sensation seeking. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 256–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Romer, D., & Hennessy, M. (2007). A biosocial-affect model of adolescent sensation seeking: The role of affect evaluation and peer-group influence in adolescent drug use. Prevention Science, 8, 89–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Rueda, M. R., Rothbart, M. K., McCandliss, B. D., Saccamanno, L., & Posner, M. I. (2005). Training, maturation, and genetic influences on the development of executive attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 14931–14936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye, & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Schultz, W. (2002). Getting formal with dopamine and reward. Neuron, 36, 241–263.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Shamosh, N. A., DeYoung, C. G., Green, A. E., Reis, D. L., Johnson, M. R., Conway, A. R. A., et al. (2008). Individual differences in delay discounting: Relation to intelligence, working memory, and anterior prefrontal cortex. Psychological Science, 19, 904–911.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Shedler, J., & Block, J. (1990). Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist, 45, 612–630.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Smith, G. T., Fischer, S., Cyders, M. A., Annus, A. M., Spillane, N. S., & McCarthy, D. M. (2007). On the validity and utility of discriminating among impulsivity-like traits. Assessment, 14, 155–170.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Spanagel, R., & Weiss, F. (1999). The dopamine hypothesis of reward: Past and current status. Trends in Neuroscience, 22, 521–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Spear, L. P. (2000). Neurobehavioral changes in adolescence. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 111–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spear, L. P. (2007). The developing brain and adolescent-typical behavior patterns: An evolutionary approach. In D. Romer & E. Walker (Eds.), Adolescent psychopathology and the developing brain: Integrating brain and prevention science (pp. 9–30). New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Steinberg, L. (2008). A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk taking. Developmental Review, 28, 78–106.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Steinberg, L., Graham, S., O’Brien, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., & Banich, M. (2009). Age differences in future orientation and delay discounting. Child Development, 80, 28–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies (2008). Results from the 2007 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings (NSDUH Series H-34, DHHS Publication No. SMA 08-4343). Rockville, MD.Google Scholar
  56. Turner, M. G., & Piquero, A. R. (2002). The stability of self-control. Journal of Criminal Justice, 30, 457–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2001). Estimates of the population of the United States, by age, sex, and race: 1990 to 1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.Google Scholar
  58. Verdejo-Garcia, A., Lawrence, A. J., & Clark, L. (2008). Impulsivity as a vulnerability marker for substance-use disorders: Review of findings from high-risk research, problem gamblers, and genetic association studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 32, 777–810.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Wallace, J. M., Bachman, J. G., O’Malley, P. M., Schulenberg, J. E., Cooper, S. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2003). Gender and ethnic differences in smoking, drinking, and illicit drug use among American 8th, 10th and 12th grand students, 1976–2000. Addiction, 98, 225–234.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Whiteside, S. P., & Lynam, D. R. (2001). The five factor model and impulsivity: Using a structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 669–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (2006). Are juvenile offenders extreme future discounters? Psychological Science, 17(11), 989–994.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Winfree, L. T., Taylor, T. J., He, N., & Esbensen, F.-A. (2006). Self-control and variability over time: Multivariate results using a 5-year multisite panel of youths. Crime & Delinquency, 52, 253–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zald, D. H., Cowan, R. L., Riccardi, P., Baldwin, R. M., Ansari, M. S., Li, R., et al. (2008). Midbrain dopamine receptor availability is inversely associated with novelty-seeking traits in humans. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 14372–14378.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1271–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zuckerman, M. (1994). Biobehavioral expressions and biosocial bases of sensation seeking. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Romer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Angela L. Duckworth
    • 2
  • Sharon Sznitman
    • 1
  • Sunhee Park
    • 3
  1. 1.Annenberg Public Policy CenterUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.College of Nursing ScienceKyunghee UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations