TEENAGERS’ BEHAVIOURAL PROBLEMS PERSIST INTO MIDDLE AGE
Academic motivation and behavioural problems at age 16 are strongly echoed in
people’s behaviour at age 41, such as their likelihood of being involved in drug abuse,
smoking and criminal activity, their physical and mental health, their political
participation and whether they have low self-confidence and a poor attitude to work.
These are the findings of research by Christoph Weiss, presented at the Royal
Economic Society’s 2011 annual conference. His study analyses data on every adult in
the UK born between 3 and 9 March 1958 – the National Child Development Study
(NCDS). The NCDS measures academic motivation based on five questions that each
person was asked at age 16 about their feelings towards school. Behavioural problems
are measured based on questions to each teenager’s parents and teachers.
Even when controlling for school results and other factors, the study finds that people
with higher academic motivation and lower behavioural problems at age 16 are less
likely to report ‘problematic’ behaviour at 41. For example, academic motivation and
behavioural problems at age 16 have a large effect on smoking status, consumption of
illegal drugs or the chances of reacting violently at age 41. They also affect whether
people considers themselves to be good at problem-solving or using numbers.
The report then examines the role of family environment in shaping these adolescent
traits. It finds that parental investment of time and money in their child’s education
matters a lot. But parental attitudes towards the school achievement of their children
and parental satisfaction with their education have much larger effects on motivation
and behaviour than measures of the family’s financial situation.
These results suggest that interventions should not only be targeted at improving
people’s cognitive skills at age 16 but also their personality traits. The author argues
that any programmes should also involve the parents, given their critical role in shaping
a child’s personality.
More…
Several studies in economics, psychology and sociology have established that
personality or non-cognitive traits – such as motivation, attentiveness, self-esteem,
perseverance or disruptiveness – are important determinants of educational and labour
market outcomes.1 Osborne points out, ‘there is an intuitive appeal that a good worker
is, in part, determined by personality traits.’
Some authors have also examined the impact of these traits at adolescent age on
social behaviour. For example, Heckman et al (2006) find that the same vectors of
adolescent cognitive and non-cognitive skills explain various adolescent risky social
behaviours, such as final educational attainment, teenage pregnancy or youth smoking.
Cunha et al (2010) show that skills beget skills. Segal (2008) finds that student
behaviour during adolescence is persistent. Adolescent attitudes and behaviours have
thus been shown to be associated with adolescent outcomes.
1 See Bowles et al (2001), Chamarro-Premuzic and Furnham (2003), Wolfe and Johnson (1995) and Farkas
(2003)
But do they matter for attitudes and behaviours 25 years later?
This paper examines the impact of academic motivation and behavioural problems at
age 16 on self-reported adult attitudes and behaviours at age 41, such as illegal drugs
consumption, smoking, physical and mental health, criminal activity, political
participation, self-confidence and opinions about the labour market.
The data is taken from the NCDS, a longitudinal dataset containing rich information
about a particular cohort of the British population: all children born between 3 and 9
March 1958.
The paper shows that academic motivation and behavioural problems are important
determinants of adult social outcomes. The measure of academic motivation is based
on five questions that asked of children at age 16 about their feelings towards school.
The study uses two different measures of behavioural problems at age 16, one based
on questions asked to the mother of the child and another based on questions asked to
the teacher. Even when controlling for educational attainment and personal
characteristics, individuals with higher academic motivation and lower behavioural
problems at age 16 have lower probabilities of reporting ‘problematic’ behaviour at age
41.
For example, academic motivation and behavioural problems at age 16 have a large
impact on smoking status, consumption of illegal drugs or the probability of often getting
into a violent rage at age 41. They also affect whether someone considers that he or
she is good at problem solving or at the use of numbers at age 41.
This leads to the next research question discussed in this paper: what are the factors
determining academic motivation and behavioural problems at age 16?
The research examines the role of family environment in shaping these adolescent
attitudes and behaviours and finds that parental investment matters a lot! But parental
investment does not necessarily mean more money.
Parental attitudes towards the school achievement of their children and parental
satisfaction with their education have much larger effects on academic motivation and
behavioural problems than measures of the financial situation of the family (for
example, free school meals for the child or financial hardship reported by the parents).
The results of this study indicate that interventions directed at adolescents should not
only be targeted at improving their cognitive skills. Cognitive abilities are of course very
important but personality traits matter as well. Cunha et al (2006) argue that noncognitive abilities or personality traits are more malleable at a later age than cognitive
abilities.
This should be taken into account when thinking about policy programmes that aim to
improve the life prospects of disadvantaged adolescents. The programmes should also
involve the parents. The results suggest that there are important economic returns to an
improvement in personality traits, even at adolescent age. By boosting their confidence
and motivation, some adolescents may become better citizens.
ENDS
‘Persistent attitudes and behaviours’ by Christoph Weiss, European University Institute
and University of Padua
Contact:
Christoph Weiss
christoph.weiss@eui.eu
Tel. +44 757 622 95 26 (From April 16 to April 20)
Tel. +39 049 827 40 48 / +39 348 988 31 94 (Before April 16 or after April 20)
References
Bowles, Samuel, Herbert Gintis and Melissa Osborne (2001). ‘The Determinants of
Earnings: A Behavioural Approach.’ Journal of Economic Literature, 39(4), 1137-1176.
Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas and Adrian Furnham (2003). ‘Personality Traits and
Academic Examination Performance.’ European Journal of Personality, 17, 237-250.
Cunha, Flavio, James J. Heckman, Lance Lochner and Dimitriy V. Masterov (2006).
‘Interpreting the Evidence on Life Cycle Skill Formation.’ In Handbook of the Economics
of Education. Edited by E. Hanushek and F. Welch. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 697812.
Cunha, Flavio, James J. Heckman and Susanne Schennach (2010). ‘Estimating the
Technology of Cognitive and Noncognitive Skill Formation.’ Econometrica, 78(3), 883931.
Farkas, George (2003). ‘Cognitive Skills and Noncognitive Traits and Behaviours in
Stratication Process.’ Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 541-562.
Heckman, James J., Jora Stixrud and Sergio Urzua (2006). ‘The Effects of Cognitive
and Noncognitive Abilities on Labour Market Outcomes and Social Behavior.’ Journal of
Labour Economics, 24(3), 411-482.
Osborne-Groves, Melissa (2005). ‘How important is your personality? Labour market
returns to personality for women in the U.S. and U.K.’ Journal of Economic Psychology,
26(6),
827-841.
Segal, Carmit (2008). ‘Classroom Behavior.’ Journal of Human Resources, 43(4), 783814.
Wolfe, Raymond N., and Scott D. Johnson (1995). ‘Personality as a Predictor of
College Performance.’ Educational and Psychological Measurement, 55(2), 177-85.