predictors of positive development in emerging adulthood
Post on 15-Jul-2016
214 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
EMPIRICAL RESEARCH
Predictors of Positive Development in Emerging Adulthood
Meredith O’Connor • Ann Sanson • Mary T. Hawkins •
Primrose Letcher • John W. Toumbourou • Diana Smart •
Suzanne Vassallo • Craig A. Olsson
Received: 3 February 2010 / Accepted: 22 September 2010 / Published online: 9 October 2010
� Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010
Abstract This article responds to recent calls for a focus
on successful development in young people and examina-
tion of its developmental precursors, in order to identify
potentially modifiable targets for interventions. The current
study examined child and adolescent precursors of positive
functioning in emerging adulthood, including individual
characteristics, relationship factors, and connections to the
community, using a multidimensional positive develop-
ment measure at 19–20 years. The sample consisted of 511
males and 647 females who were participants in the
Australian Temperament Project, a population based lon-
gitudinal study that has followed young people’s psycho-
social adjustment from infancy to early adulthood. Higher
levels of positive development in emerging adulthood were
associated with stronger family and peer relationships,
better adjustment to the school setting, higher family
socioeconomic status, and better emotional control. Some
significant gender differences were observed, with emo-
tional control, family relationships, and community orien-
tation all being stronger predictors of males’ than of
females’ positive development. The findings provide pos-
sible targets for child and adolescent interventions to pro-
mote positive development in early adulthood.
Keywords Positive development � Emerging adulthood �Longitudinal analysis � Community engagement � Gender
Introduction
Understanding the characteristics of healthy psychosocial
growth is a fundamental task for the science of human
development, and is a particularly salient issue during the
transition to adulthood. Emerging adulthood extends from
the late teens to the early twenties and is defined by exten-
sive variability and role exploration, without clear norma-
tive expectations (Arnett 2000). It has been described as a
window of opportunity for positive change in life course
trajectories (Masten et al. 2006), as well as a period in which
the incidence of risk behaviors and mental health problems
is relatively high (Kessler and Walters 1998; National
Health and Medical Research Council 2001). The capacity
of young people to successfully take up adult roles as they
transition to adulthood is of great social and economic
M. O’Connor (&) � A. Sanson � M. T. Hawkins � P. Letcher
Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne,
Royal Children’s Hospital, Flemington Road, Parkville,
VIC 3052, Australia
e-mail: mo@unimelb.edu.au
A. Sanson
e-mail: annvs@unimelb.edu.au
M. T. Hawkins
e-mail: hawkinsm@unimelb.edu.au
P. Letcher
e-mail: pletcher@unimelb.edu.au
J. W. Toumbourou
School of Psychology, Deakin University, Deakin, Australia
e-mail: john.toumbourou@deakin.edu.au
D. Smart � S. Vassallo
Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne, Australia
e-mail: diana.smart@aifs.gov.au
S. Vassallo
e-mail: suzanne.vassallo@aifs.gov.au
C. A. Olsson
Psychological Sciences & Department of Paediatrics, Murdoch
Children’s Research Institute, Royal Children’s Hospital
and the University of Melbourne, Flemington Rd,
Parkville 3052, VIC, Australia
e-mail: craig.olsson@rch.org.au
123
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
DOI 10.1007/s10964-010-9593-7
importance to individuals, communities, and societies. Yet, as
noted by Masten et al. (2004), ‘‘intervening to foster the condi-
tions for positive change during the transition to adulthood
requires a more solid base of knowledge than presently
exists’’ (Masten et al. 2004, p. 1092). It is therefore
important to identify the antecedent factors that promote
successful development during this transition period, and
which may provide targets for intervention (Tanner 2006).
While positive development is acknowledged to be a
multidimensional construct, few studies have examined
factors that contribute to overall positive development
during this period. Furthermore, most studies have exam-
ined the contributions of only a small number of predictors.
Gender differences in predictors of positive development
have been largely unexamined, and although most studies
have been longitudinal, they are typically short-term with
few waves of data. There is an important need for further
research on the developmental antecedents of positive
development during the transition to adulthood; in partic-
ular, research based in established longitudinal studies of
social and emotional development spanning childhood
through young adulthood.
Defining Positive Development
Positive development has been conceptualized in many
different ways by different theorists and researchers, but
the term generally refers to functional aspects of human
behavior (such as ‘‘assets’’ or ‘‘strengths’’) and successful
developmental outcomes (such as being in employment).
There are few examples of multidimensional models of
positive development in the literature. Our group has
recently proposed a multidimensional model using data
collected from a population based longitudinal study
(Hawkins et al. 2009), which incorporates perspectives
from developmental psychopathology (Cicchetti 1984;
Masten and Curtis 2000), life course and life span psy-
chology (Lerner 2006), and social capital theory (Whitley
and McKenzie 2005). The model identifies five important
domains of positive psychosocial development at
19–20 years (see the ‘‘Methods’’ section for further details
on model development). The first domain, social compe-
tence, underpins successful social relationships, helping
individuals to meet everyday functional demands, partici-
pate socially, and be responsible for themselves and others
(Gresham et al. 2001). The second domain, life satisfac-
tion, reflects a sense of contentment and feelings of con-
gruency between wants or needs and accomplishments or
resources (Keyes and Waterman 2003), and can be taken as
a measure of quality of life (Huebner 2004; Park 2004).
The third and fourth domains, trust and tolerance of others
and trust in authorities and institutions, are important
aspects of social capital that reflect an individual’s
attachment to the community and society and their capacity
to work harmoniously with people from different back-
grounds and cultures (Putnam 1995). The fifth domain,
civic engagement, refers to the willingness of an individual
to take up the role of being a citizen, and is central to
political socialization and a successful democratic society
(Flanagan and Sherrod 1998; Winter 2000). Our multidi-
mensional model provides a robust measure of positive
development during emerging adulthood.
Investigating Predictors of Positive Development
Across Domains
Most studies investigating antecedents of positive devel-
opment have examined only a limited number of predictors.
Yet, the multidimensional nature of positive development
most likely reflects multiple influences from multiple
domains across the life course. Hence, thorough assessment
of the developmental origin of positive development in early
adulthood will require systematic multivariate modeling of
child and adolescent exposures across multiple domains
(individual, relational, and community). In what follows we
review what is known of the predictors of positive young
adult development.
Individual Characteristics
Personal and academic characteristics, such as gender,
temperament, emotional self-control and academic ability,
are likely to make significant contributions to positive
adaptation over the transition to adulthood. For example,
looking at the role of temperament and personality, longi-
tudinal data from the Australian Temperament Project
suggests that dimensions of temperament, including reac-
tivity and persistence, are reliable predictors of social
competence at 19–20 years (Smart and Sanson 2003).
Similarly, Shiner (2000) drew on data from Project Com-
petence—a US sample of 205 children recruited from two
elementary schools in lower to middle-class neighbor-
hoods—and found that personality traits at 8–12 years,
including academic conscientiousness, agreeableness, and
surgent engagement (higher extraversion, expressiveness,
and attention), were predictive of adaptive functioning
(defined as academic achievement, rule-abiding behavior,
and peer social competence) both concurrently and 10 years
later. Hence, dimensions of temperament and personality
are likely to be relevant to later positive adaptation.
The ability to self-regulate behaviors and emotions has
also been found to predict positive development. Drawing
on data from a small US longitudinal sample (N = 185),
Shoda et al. (1990) found that preschoolers’ (mean age
4 years) ability to delay gratification was related to their
Scholastic Aptitude Test scores, taken to be an indicator of
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874 861
123
positive development, 14 years later (mean age 18 years).
This finding suggests that the ability to regulate emotional
states in childhood continues to have implications for
positive adaptation well beyond this period.
Masten et al. (1995), utilizing data from Project Com-
petence, identified academic achievement during childhood
(ages 8–12 years) as a powerful precursor of a construct
labeled ‘‘competence’’ in early adulthood, which included
competence in the academic, social, behavioral, romantic,
and employment domains. Furthermore, using the same
sample, Obradovic and Masten (2007) found that adoles-
cent academic competence and social competence were
unique predictors of citizenship in emerging adulthood.
Citizenship was operationalized as involvement in activi-
ties such as voting in elections, upholding the responsi-
bilities of citizenship, and contributing to society at large.
Academic competence therefore appears to be related to
both multidimensional positive development and core
dimensions of this construct.
Gender may also influence emergent positive develop-
mental pathways in young people. For example, Phelps
et al. (2007) examined trajectories of positive youth
development over grades 5–7 and found that girls were
more likely to be in the high or medium trajectories. There
is also some evidence that gender may moderate the rela-
tionship between positive development and assets or
resources that contribute to positive development (Benson
et al. 2006). For example, Huebner and Betts (2002) have
shown that, for female youth, attachment with parents and
peers was more strongly associated with positive devel-
opmental outcomes (low delinquency and higher academic
achievement) whereas, for males, involvement bonds
(operationalised as time spent in school and non-school
based activities) were more protective. This is consistent
with a large body of research suggesting that the quality of
close relationships are particularly relevant to females’
psychological wellbeing (Cyranowski et al. 2000).
Relational Factors
Social relationships, particularly those with parents and
peers, are also likely to play an influential role in predicting
positive development through young adulthood. Studies
drawing on life course theories emphasize the importance of
interactions between the individual and their social context,
highlighting the relevance of strong relationships with others
for successful development. These studies look particularly
at well-being as an indicator of positive development and
reveal young peoples’ relationships with their parents and
peers as important contributors to their later well-being.
Schulenberg et al.’s (2004) examination of trajectories of
well-being (as measured by self-esteem, self-efficacy, and
social support) using data from a large US cohort-sequential
longitudinal study found that peer relationships play an
important role in the maintenance of well-being, with peer
involvement predicting a ‘‘steady-high’’ versus ‘‘decreas-
ing’’ trajectory of well-being. Using path analysis with
longitudinal data from a large national study of Dutch young
people, van Wel et al. (2002) found that the parental bond
was important for well-being in emerging adulthood and was
at least as important as peer and romantic connections. Thus,
there is also evidence that relational factors during adoles-
cence may promote successful adaptation in young people.
Community-Level Factors
The importance of the broader social context, including
perceptions of connectedness with the community, con-
tinue to be emphasized in life span, developmental psy-
chopathology and social capital frameworks. For example,
Scales et al. (2006) have shown that, after controlling for
initial academic levels, students who were higher in con-
nection to the community (a factor that included partici-
pation in youth programs, religious involvement, service to
others, creative activities, and reading for pleasure) in early
adolescence were more likely to have positive academic
outcomes 3 years later. Scales et al. (2006) also found that
adherence to the social norms of responsibility (including
school bonding) was predictive of better academic out-
comes. Using well-being as an outcome, McGraw et al.
(2008) drew on an Australian school based sample and
found that school connectedness was moderately associated
with well-being during the final year of high school (mean
age 17 years), and continued to predict well-being 1 year
after leaving high school. Community-level factors have
received relatively little empirical attention, yet these
studies suggest that this domain may also play a key role in
facilitating positive adaptation.
Distal and Proximal Influences on Positive
Development
In examining antecedents of positive development, both
earlier and later experiences in these domains need to be
considered. Early experiences neither ensure future positive
functioning or inoculate against problems in later adaptation
(Curtis and Cicchetti 2003). While early experiences may be
critical, their influences on later functioning are likely to be
mediated by later experiences (Schulenberg et al. 2004).
Hence, the influence of early antecedents of adaptation may
be mediated by later measures of these factors. This is
particularly clear when positive adaptation is viewed as a
function of strong person–context interactions (Larson
2000), that can shift over time according to changes in the
individual, the context, and their interaction (Cicchetti and
Rogosch 2002; Sameroff 2000; Schulenberg et al. 2004).
862 J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
123
The Current Study
The purpose of the current study is to conduct a compre-
hensive examination of the developmental origins of a
multidimensional model of positive development in
emerging adulthood (Hawkins et al. 2009). Specifically, we
aim to estimate the unique contribution of individual,
social or relational, and community level factors to the
prediction of positive development in controlled multi-
variate models. Data are drawn from the Australian Tem-
perament Project (ATP), a large scale longitudinal
community based study, which has followed the develop-
ment of a cohort of Australian children from infancy to
young adulthood. The ATP has collected a wealth of data
across 14 waves from multiple informants, including par-
ents, teachers, and the children themselves.
Based on a broad lifespan/ecological developmental
approach and findings of previous research, we sought to
test three general hypotheses. Firstly, we hypothesized
that positive development in emerging adulthood would
be best explained by multiple influences from individual,
interpersonal, and community domains. Secondly, we
hypothesized that the influence of child and early ado-
lescent predictors on positive development would be lar-
gely mediated by later measures of these factors. Finally,
we expected that the relative importance of predictors of
positive development would differ for males and females.
Expected relationships are illustrated in a hypothesized
model shown in Fig. 1. In developing this model, we were
mindful that a number of predictors were likely to be
interrelated. For example, self control and the temperament
dimension of persistence both have a relatively strong
influence on school adjustment (Bramlett et al. 2000;
Miech et al. 2001). The temperament dimension of nega-
tive reactivity is also related to emotional control (Fox and
Calkins 2003), and to the quality of attachments with
others (Cassidy 1994). Similarly, relationships with peers
and parents also share a relatively strong association with
one another (Raja et al. 1992). Hence, the hypothesized
model incorporates both relationships of antecedents to
positive development, and interrelations between the
antecedent constructs.
Positivedevelopment
SES
Self control
Schooladjustment
Relationship withpeers
Relationship withparents
Late childhood Early adolescence Mid/late adolescence Emerging adulthood
Emotional control
Schooladjustment
Relationship withpeers
Relationship withParents
Emotional control
Schooladjustment
Relationship withpeers
Relationship withparents
Communityorientation
Reactivity
Persistence PersistencePersistence
Reactivity Reactivity
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Fig. 1 Hypothesized model presenting relationships between child, early adolescent, and mid/late adolescent factors and positive development
in emerging adulthood
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874 863
123
Method
Participants and Procedure
Participants were young people enrolled in the ATP, a
longitudinal study following the psychosocial development
of a community sample from infancy to adulthood. A
representative sample of 2,443 infants was recruited
through selected Maternal and Child Health Centres across
both urban and rural areas in the State of Victoria,
Australia, during a specified 2 week period in 1983.
Fourteen waves of data have been collected over the past
27 years from parents (with an average response rate of
83%), primary school teachers (average response rate
73%), maternal and child health nurses (in infancy only;
response rate 100%), and from the age of 11 onwards, the
young people themselves (with an average response rate of
83%). The study has used a mail survey methodology in
which questionnaires were mailed to participants [for fur-
ther information, see Prior et al. (2000)].
Participants in the current study were the 1,158 partici-
pants (647 females and 511 males) who completed the
thirteenth survey at age 19–20 years, and thus had data on
positive development in emerging adulthood. This sample
represented 77% of the young people who were still enrolled
in the ATP at 19–20 years (Wave 13). Questionnaire
booklets were mailed to participants, together with reply-
paid, addressed envelopes in which to return them. One
round of postal reminders was undertaken and was followed
by a second mail-out of questionnaires to non-respondents.
Finally, a round of telephone reminders was undertaken.
Approximately two-thirds of the cohort were still enrol-
led in the study at Wave 13. Attrition has been slightly
higher in families experiencing socio-economic disadvan-
tage or among families with parents not born in Australia.
However, there are no substantial differences between the
retained and non-retained sub-groups on child characteris-
tics assessed in infancy, such as temperament style or behav-
ior problems (Ruschena et al. 2005). Hence, although
attrition has led to a slight under-representation of young
people from families living in socio-economically disadvan-
taged circumstances, the study continues to include children
with a wide range of capacities and characteristics, and
attrition is unlikely to be a significant influence on the results.
Materials
The measure used to assess positive development in
emerging adulthood was developed by Hawkins et al.
(2009) using AMOS 7.0 SEM confirmatory factor analysis
(SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL; Arbuckle and Wothke 2006). This
construct incorporates the five domains of social compe-
tence, life satisfaction, trust and tolerance of others, trust in
authorities and organizations and civic action and
engagement, all assessed by self report at 19–20 years.
Rates of missing data were very low (average of 0.7%), and
were estimated using the Expectation–Maximization (EM)
algorithm. All first order constructs loaded meaningfully on
the second order latent positive development construct
(from .30 to .68), and all second-order loadings were
gender invariant. The second order construct accounted for
nearly half of the variance in the five-first order constructs
and the model provided a good fit for the data
(RMSEA = .05, CFI = .94). Using model-based imputa-
tion in AMOS on the final positive development model, a
latent factor score was computed and used as the positive
development outcome measure. The components of this
score are described below.
Social Competence
Social competence was assessed with three subscales
derived from Smart and Sanson (2003), including empathy
(5 items, a = .78, e.g., ‘‘I show my concern for others when
they experience difficulties’’), responsibility (4 items,
a = .72, e.g., ‘‘I can be relied on to do things right’’), and
self control (3 items, a = .60, e.g., ‘‘I can assert my opinion
without arguing or fighting’’). Items were rated on a five-
point Likert scale ranging from ‘‘never’’ to ‘‘always’’.
Life Satisfaction
Life satisfaction was measured by two subscales adapted
from the National Survey of Families and Households
(Sweet and Bumpass 2002), including (1) satisfaction with
achievement and life directions (3 items, a = .83, e.g.,
‘‘How satisfied are you with what you are accomplish-
ing?’’), and (2) satisfaction with personal and social life (5
items, a = .75, e.g., ‘‘How satisfied are you with your
social life?’’). Items were rated on a four point scale from
‘‘very satisfied’’ to ‘‘not at all satisfied’’.
Trust and Tolerance of Others
Trust and tolerance of others was measured using 3 single
items derived from Stone and Hughes (2002) relating to
trust in people in the neighborhood, trust in Australians,
and tolerance of different ethnic groups (e.g., ‘‘Most people
in your neighborhood can be trusted’’). Ratings were made
on a five point scale from ‘‘disagree completely’’ to ‘‘agree
completely’’ (a = .55).
Trust in Authorities and Organizations
Trust in authorities and organizations was measured by
three scales, two derived from Flanagan and Longmire
864 J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
123
(1995) measuring trust in authorities, and one from Stone
and Hughes (2002) measuring trust in organizations. The
scales comprised (a) confidence in police (5 items, a = .83,
e.g., ‘‘How much confidence do you have in the police to
treat everyone fairly’’ rated on a 4 point scale from ‘‘a great
deal’’ to ‘‘none at all’’), (b) confidence in the courts (5
items, a = .87, e.g., ‘‘How much confidence do you have
in the ability of the courts to impose fair sentences’’ rated
on the same scale), and (c) trust in organizations (8 items,
a = .83), reflecting confidence that various organizations/
institutions can be relied on to act in a fair or reasonable
manner (e.g., government, the media), using a four point
scale from ‘‘not at all confident’’ to ‘‘very confident’’.
Civic action and Engagement
Civic action and engagement was measured by three scales
derived from Stone (2001) and Stone and Hughes (2002)
tapping (a) participation in community activities over the
past year (10 items, a = .58, e.g., ‘‘In the past 12 months
how often have you attended a public meeting’’ rated from
‘‘not at all’’ to ‘‘5 times or more’’), (b) participation in
groups (9 items, a = .65, e.g., ‘‘sporting, recreation, or
hobby groups’’ rated as ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ to participation in
the last year), and (c) donations to groups (9 items,
a = .60, e.g., ‘‘church groups’’ rated as ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ to
donations made in the past year).
Predictor Variables
A wealth of data on potential predictors of positive
development was available across the 13 waves of data
collected from infancy to 19–20 years. To simplify anal-
yses and reduce multicollinearity, the data were divided
into three age categories: childhood (4–8 months to
11–12 years, waves 1–8), early adolescence (12–13 and
13–14 years, waves 9 and 10), and mid/late adolescence
(15–16 and 17–18 years, waves 11 and 12). Where iden-
tical measures were available at adjacent time points within
an age category, previous literature was used to guide the
selection of the most salient time point. If the literature did
not provide a means of differentiating between time points,
variable selection was based on the psychometric proper-
ties of the measures, including their internal reliability
(Osborne and Waters 2002). Where data was available
from multiple informants, parent and teacher reports were
used in preference to self-reports to reduce the effects of
shared method variance (Podsakoff et al. 2003). Measures
are summarized in Table 1. Further details are available
from the authors upon request or can be viewed at
www.aifs.gov.au/atp. See Prior et al. (2000) for an
overview.
Data Analysis
The path analysis in the current study was performed using
AMOS 16.0.1 software (Arbuckle 2007). Model estima-
tions were based on a covariance matrix and used maxi-
mum likelihood estimates, which work well with large
sample sizes (Tabachnick and Fidell 2001). The model
was identified and the estimation process converged. All
parameter estimates were within the range of permissible
values. The model diagram shows standardized parameter
estimates, b, which represent the effect of a given predictor
variable on the dependant variable after accounting for the
remaining relationships in the model.
A number of fit statistics were examined (Schermelleh-
Engel et al. 2003). We used chi-square as an indicator of fit
problems. Significant values suggest that the sample cor-
relation matrix and the model correlated matrix are sig-
nificantly different. However, chi-square is known to be
affected by large sample size (Schermelleh-Engel et al.
2003). We also examined the Adjusted Goodness of Fit
Index (AGFI), which is the GFI adjusted for the degrees of
freedom. AGFI values greater than .80 are taken to reflect
acceptable fit (Hair et al. 1998; Schermelleh-Engel et al.
2003). The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
(RMSEA) is based on the non-centrality parameter, and
takes particular account of the error of approximation
(Zubrick and Lawrence 2006), with values below .08 taken
to indicate a good fit in this study (Brown and Cudeck
1993; Hair et al. 1998). The normed fit index (NFI) com-
pares the v2 of the model to the v2 value of the indepen-
dence model, with values greater than .95 indicating a good
fit (Tabachnick and Fidell 2001). The chi-square difference
test is a popular means of comparing model fit that was
used to examine whether changes in chi-square were sta-
tistically significant (Byrne 2001). These fit measures were
used in the current study to provide a comprehensive
evaluation of the goodness of fit of the model, and to
examine differences in model fit across male and female
participants.
Results
Descriptive statistics and inter-correlations between vari-
ables are included in Table 2. SES was included in the
model to control for its effects, as socioeconomic effects
have been identified in previous literature as potential
confounds (e.g., Obradovic and Masten 2007). Missing
data in the predictor variables averaged 8.8% and was
handled using the Expectation–Maximization (EM) Algo-
rithm method (Raghunathan 2004).
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874 865
123
Table 1 Summary of child, early adolescent and mid/late adolescent predictor measures used in the analyses
Domain Instrument Source Age
(years)
Internal
reliability
Example item Scale
Late childhood
Temperament Negative Reactivity and Persistence
subscales of the School Age
Temperament Inventory
(McClowry 1995)
P 11–12 a = .91;
a = .91
‘Gets upset when he/she can’t find
something’ ‘returns to
responsibilities (homework,
chores) after friends phone or
visit’
6-point scale from
‘almost never’ to
‘almost always’
Self control Self control subscale of the
Gresham and Elliot (1990) Social
Skills Rating System
P 11–12 a = .83 ‘Speaks in an appropriate tone of
voice at home’
3-point scale from
‘rarely or never’ to
‘very often’
Relationship
with
parents
Parents scale of the Self
Description Questionnaire
(Marsh et al. 1984)
C 11–12 a = .82 ‘My parents and I have fun
together’
5-point scale from
‘true’ to ‘false’
Relationship
with peers
Peer scale from the Self
Description Questionnaire
(Marsh et al. 1984)
C 11–12 a = .87 ‘I have lots of friends’ As above
School
adjustment
Academic Competence subscale of
the Gresham and Elliot’s (1990)
Social Skills Rating System
T 11–12 a = .94 Asks teachers to rate the student on
9 academic skills (e.g., ‘Reading
skills’)
5-point scale from
‘lowest 10%’ to
‘highest 10%’
SES Composite of both parents
occupational level and
educational levels (Broom et al.
1974; Brotherton et al. 1979).
P 11–12 a = .72 ‘Upper professional’ to
‘unemployed or
student’; ‘post
graduate degree’ to
‘primary schooling’
Early adolescence
Temperament As in late childhood P 12–13 a = .92;
a = .92
5-point Likert scale
from ‘almost never’
to ‘almost always’
Emotional
control
ATP devised scale C 13–14 a = .60 ‘Know how to relax when I feel
tense’
5-point Likert scale
from strongly
disagree to strongly
agree
Relationship
with
parents
Family attachment scale adapted
from the Inventory of Parent and
Peer Attachment (Armsden and
Greenberg 1987)
T 13–14 a = .85 ‘My parents respect my feelings’ 5-point scale from
always/almost always
true to almost never/
never
Relationship
with peers
ATP devised peer involvement
scale
P 13–14 a = .83 ‘Plays/talks with peers for long
periods’
3-point Likert scale
from rarely/never to
very often
School
adjustment
ATP devised scale P 13–14 a = 76 ‘Understanding the work in class’ 4-point Likert scale
from no problem to
big problem
Mid/late adolescence
Temperament As in early adolescence P 15–16 a = .84;
a = .79
Personality Extraversion, Agreeableness, and
Conscientiousness subscales of
the Five Factor Personality
Questionnaire (Lanthier and
Bates 1995)
P 15–16 a = .70;
a = .78;
a = .80
‘How talkative do you think he/she
is?’; ‘How bossy do you think he/
she is?’; ‘How organised do you
think he/she is?’
5-point scale from
‘hardly at all’ to
‘extremely’
Emotional
control
As in early adolescence C 15–16 a = .70
Relationship
with
parents
Mean of the Warmth, Trust, and
Alienation subscales of the
Inventory of Parent and Peer
Attachment (Armsden and
Greenberg 1987)
C 17–18 a = .83 ‘Senses when I’m upset about
something’; ‘Considers my point
of view when we discuss things’;
‘Doesn’t understand me’
4-point scale ranging
from ‘always/almost
always’ to ‘never/
almost never’
866 J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
123
Full Model
The hypothesized model (see Fig. 1) was estimated and
found to be a poor fit for the data (v2 = 3,297.61,
p = \.001; RMSEA = .11; AGFI = .74; NFI = .66).
Hence, we performed model-trimming, removing non-sig-
nificant paths one at a time starting from the smallest
loading path. Following this procedure, the personality
dimensions of extraversion, agreeableness, and conscien-
tiousness at mid/late adolescence, and reactivity and per-
sistence during both adolescent time points, as well as a
number of the paths and covariances hypothesized between
predictors, were removed from the model. This improved
model fit (Dv(63) = 702.4, p \ .001), although fit was still
judged to be relatively poor (v2 = 2,000.83, p = \.001;
RMSEA = .09; AGFI = .80; NFI = .75). Next, we per-
formed model building. The Modification Indices indicated
a number of changes to improve model fit that were judged
to be conceptually coherent. Specifically, three paths were
added (see discussion for conceptual explanation), includ-
ing paths: (1) from relationships with parents to emotional
control within the early adolescent and mid/late adolescent
periods, (2) from relationships with parents to relationships
with peers during mid/late adolescence, and (3) from per-
sistence in childhood to school adjustment in mid/late
adolescence. Following these modifications, the model was
substantially improved (Dv(70) = 1,366.13, p \ .001), and
was judged a good fit for the data (v2 = 634.71,
p = \.001; RMSEA = .07; AGFI = .91; NFI = .87). The
final model is presented in Fig. 2, and reveals that greater
positive development in emerging adulthood was related to
higher family SES, self control, school adjustment, rela-
tionships with parents and peers, and lower reactivity. The
model also demonstrates that the effects of persistence
were totally mediated by its relationship to school
adjustment. Overall, these factors accounted for 26% of the
variance in positive development.
Gender Invariance
We next examined the gender invariance of the final model
using Byrne’s (2001) method to test whether the relation-
ships between the predictors and positive development
were similar for young men and women. It should be noted
that the chi-square difference test is known to be overly
sensitive to small differences when sample size is large
(Schumacker and Lomax 2004).
Initially, the model was examined separately for each
group simultaneously providing the baseline chi-square
value of 765 (df = 216), against which subsequent tests for
invariance were compared. Model comparison showed
that the constraints did not hold for the two genders
(Dv(23) = 67, p \ .001). The quality of relationships with
parents over childhood and early adolescence showed
greater continuity for females (b = .44 for females,
b = .39 for males; Dv(1) = 8, p = .005). In contrast, the
relationships between a number of antecedents and positive
development were stronger for males than for females,
with relationships with parents (b = .21 males, b = .12
females; Dv(1) = 7, p = .01), emotional control (b = .29
males, b = .19 females; Dv(1) = 8, p = .01), and com-
munity orientation (b = .30 males, b = .20 females;
Dv(1) = 8, p = .01) at mid/late adolescence all showing
stronger associations with positive development for males.
Discussion
Healthy adaptation over the transition to adulthood has a
range of implications for young peoples’ life course
Table 1 continued
Domain Instrument Source Age
(years)
Internal
reliability
Example item Scale
Relationship
with peers
Mean of the Communication, Trust,
and Alienation subscales of the
Inventory of Parent and Peer
Attachment (Armsden and
Greenberg 1987)
C 17–18 a = .62 ‘My friends accept me as I am’;
‘My friends sense when I’m upset
about something’; ‘My friends
don’t understand what I’m going
through these days’
4-point scale from
‘always/almost
always’ to ‘never/
almost never’
School
adjustment
ATP devised scale P 15–16 a = .84 ‘Managing school rules and
routines’
3-point scale from ‘no
problem’ to ‘a big
problem’
Community
orientation
ATP devised scale C 17–18 a = .61 Asked participants to rate the
likelihood of their involvement in
different activities in the future,
such as ‘Work to improve
conditions in your local
community’
4-point scale ranging
from ‘not likely’ to
‘extremely likely’
P parent informant, C child/teenager informant, T teacher informant
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874 867
123
Table 2 Intercorrelations between variables and descriptive statistics
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1. Positive development 1 .16** .25** -.22** .27** .17** .21** .11** .26** -.23** .20** .26**
Childhood predictors
2. SES .16** 1 .09** -.11** .16** .15** -.01 .01 .08** -.14** .05 .09**
3. Persistence .25** .09** 1 -.42** .41** .42** .24** .21** .73** -.36** .19** .44**
4. Reactivity -.22** -.11** -.42** 1 -.73** -.15** -.24** -.18** -.33** .72** -.19** -.25**
5. Self control .27** .16** .41** -.73** 1 .20** .28** .20** .36** -.58** .24** .28**
6. School adjustment .17** .15** .42** -.15** .20** 1 .06 .08** .35** -.13** .10** .35**
7. Relationship with peers .21** -.01 .24** -.24** .28** .06 1 .42** .19** -.22** .24** .20**
8. Relationship with parents .11** .01 .21** -.18** .20** .08** .42** 1 .17** -.15** .21** .13**
Early adolescent predictors
9. Persistence .26** .08** .76** -.33** .36** .35** .19** .17** 1 -.43** .19** .54**
10. Reactivity -.23** -.14** -.36** .72** -.58** -.13** -.22** -.15** -.43** 1 -.21** -.28**
11. Emotional control .20** .05 .19** -.19** .24** .10** .24** .21** .19** -.21** 1 .18**
12. School adjustment .26** .09** .44** -.25** .28** .35** .20** .13** .54** -.28** .18** 1
13. Relationship with peers .15** .09** .20** -.16** .20** .09** .16** .31** .17** -.16** .12** .09**
14. Relationship with parents .23** .04 .24** -.20** .27** .11** .43** .26** .25** -.23** .43** .25**
Mid/late adolescent predictors
15. Extraversion .12** -.06* .16** -.08** .08** .07* .10** .21** .05 -.01 .06* .00
16. Agreeableness .20** .05 .26** -.44** .43** .08* .18** .09** .29** -.46** .09** .28**
17. Conscientiousness .23** .02 .50** -.23** .25** .21** .14** .12** .55** -.23** .14** .38**
18. Persistence .20** .10** .45** -.22** .27** .27** .09** .12** .44** -.21** .11** .36**
19. Reactivity -.20** -.09** -.22** .53** -.44** -.08** -.08** -.04 -.23** .57** -.11** -.20**
20. Emotional control .32** .03 .13** -.20** .21** .07* .18** .18** .11** -.24** .34** .13**
21. School adjustment .29** .06* .44** -.24** .28** .36** .18** .13** .48** -.25** .18** .65**
22. Relationship with peers .28** -.05 .20** -.14** .14** .05 .25** .23** .12** -.10** .20** .09**
23. Relationship with parents .29** -.02 .18** -.09** .15** .04 .29** .23** .14** -.11** .19** .09**
24. Community orientation .31** .07* .07* -.04 .06* .09** -.02 -.03 .09** -.03 .06* .06*
Mean .00 4.08 2.37 2.95 12.71 35.33 1.55 1.87 2.31 2.90 3.48 1.42
Standard deviation .75 1.40 .73 .70 3.53 6.30 .50 .65 .70 .69 .58 .48
Min -3.22 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.08 1.40 -4.00
Max 2.65 8.00 5.00 4.92 20.00 45.00 4.25 4.88 4.91 5.00 5.00 1.00
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
1. Positive development .15** .23** .12** .20** .23** .20** -.20** .32** .29** .28** .29** .31**
Childhood predictors
2. SES .09** .04 -.06* .05 .02 .10** -.09** .03 .06* -.05 -.02 .07*
3. Persistence .20** .24** .16** .26** .50** .45** -.22** .13** .44** .20** .18** .07*
4. Reactivity -.16** -.20** -.08** -.44** -.23** -.22** .53** -.20** -.24** -.14** -.09** -.04
5. Self control .20** .27** .08** .43** .25** .27** -.44** .21** .28** .14** .15** .06*
6. School adjustment .09** .11** .07* .08* .21** .27** -.08** .07* .36** .05 .04 .09**
7. Relationship with peers .16** .43** .10** .18** .14** .09** -.08** .18** .18** .25** .29** -.02
8. Relationship with parents .31** .26** .21** .09** .12** .12** -.04 .18** .13** .23** .23** -.03
Early adolescent predictors
9. Persistence .17** .25** .05 .29** .55** .44** -.23** .11** .48** .12** .14** .09**
10. Reactivity -.16** -.23** -.01 -.46** -.23** -.21** .57** -.24** -.25** -.10** -.11** -.03
11. Emotional control .12** .43** .06* .09** .14** .11** -.11** .34** .18** .20** .19** .06*
12. School adjustment .09** .25** .00 .28** .38** .36** -.20** .13** .65** .09** .09** .06*
13. Relationship with peers 1 .14** .33** .04 .08** .08** -.09** .11** .07* .18** .11** .01
14. Relationship with parents .14** 1 .07* .29** .23** .18** -.17** .33** .23** .22** .46** .04
868 J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
123
trajectories. Identifying the factors that facilitate healthy
adaptation during this time remains an important challenge
for developmental science. Due in large part to a paucity
of multidimensional models of positive development in
emerging adulthood, few studies has examined this issue.
Hence, the current study examined the longitudinal ante-
cedents of a multidimensional index of positive deve-
lopment in emerging adulthood, including individual,
relational, and community level predictors from childhood
to late adolescence. Higher positive development in
emerging adulthood was predicted by higher socioeco-
nomic status, having better control of emotions, better
adjustment to the school setting, having stronger relation-
ships with parents and peers, and greater community
engagement. There were some indications of gender dif-
ferences in the strength of predictors of positive
.26
Positivedevelopment
SES
Self control
Schooladjustment
Relationship withpeers
Relationship withparents
Late childhood Early adolescence Mid/late adolescence Emerging adulthood
Emotional control
Schooladjustment
Relationship withpeers
Relationship withParents
Emotional control
Schooladjustment
Relationship withpeers
Relationship withparents
Communityorientation
Reactivity
Persistence
.41
.15
.19 .56
.30.36
.42
.13
.19
.19
.16
.27
.14.30
.19
.13
.46
.40.19
.12
.35
-.73
-.38
.29
-.08
-.10
-.10
.31
Fig. 2 Final model of the relationships between child, early adolescent, and mid/late adolescent factors and positive development in emerging
adulthood
Table 2 continued
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Mid/late adolescent predictors
15. Extraversion .33** .07* 1 -.07* .12** .06* .03 .14** .07* .18** .19** .03
16. Agreeableness .04 .29** -.07* 1 .40** .28** -.53** .23** .33** .10** .19** -.01
17. Conscientiousness .08** .23** .12** .40** 1 .52** -.24** .10** .49** .12** .21** .06*
18. Persistence .08** .18** .06* .28** .52** 1 -.35** .15** .41** .11** .19** .08**
19. Reactivity -.09** -.17** .03 -.53** -.24** -.35** 1 -.24** -.23** -.03 -.15** -.02
20. Emotional control .11** .33** .14** .23** .097** .15** -.24** 1 .17** .24** .25** .03
21. School adjustment .07* .23** .07* .33** .492** .41** -.23** .17** 1 .09** .14** .04
22. Relationship with peers .18** .22** .18** .10** .116** .11** -.03 .24** .09** 1 .31** .06*
23. Relationship with parents .11** .46** .19** .19** .212** .19** -.15** .25** .14** .31** 1 .11**
24. Community orientation .01 .04 .03 -.01 .059* .08** -.02 .03 .04 .06* .11** 1
Mean 1.56 3.96 3.33 3.46 3.45 2.41 2.85 3.76 1.43 3.05 3.09 1.91
Standard deviation .36 .69 .61 .65 .67 .63 .849 .61 .48 .37 .48 .59
Min .13 1.13 1.17 1.00 1.17 1.00 1.00 1.60 .00 1.67 1.13 1.00
Max 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.50 5.00 5.70 3.80 3.75 4.00 4.00
* p \ .01; ** p \ .01
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874 869
123
development for males and females. These findings indi-
cate a number of potential domains that may foster positive
development during this transition period.
Self regulatory characteristics across childhood and
adolescence predicted later positive development, reveal-
ing the importance of self control and control over emo-
tions, particularly for young men. Others have also
observed the relationship between self regulation and
positive development (e.g., Shoda et al. 1990). Shonkoff
and Phillips (2000) have described the development of the
ability to self regulate as ‘‘a cornerstone of early childhood
development that cuts across all domains of behavior’’
(p. 26). For example, emotional control is essential for the
development of social competence. The ability to self
regulate allows the unfolding of appropriate social behav-
ior (Eisenberg et al. 1995), is related to the ability to focus
on the needs of others, and is an important determinant of
prosocial behavior (Fabes et al. 1993, 1994). Self control in
late childhood predicted pathways to both emotional con-
trol and school adjustment and in this way represented an
early influence on positive development.
At the relational level, strong relationships with parents
and peers also significantly predicted positive develop-
ment. This is consistent with previous research such as
Schulenberg et al.’s (2004) finding that peer relationships
play an important role in the maintenance of well-being,
and Van Wel et al.’s (2002) finding that strong relation-
ships with parents continue to have implications for posi-
tive functioning in emerging adulthood. Attachment theory
(Bowlby 1971) suggests that positive relationships with
parents and peers may facilitate the development of young
peoples’ identity and trust in others, making it possible for
them to explore their environment and adapt well to change
(Sroufe et al. 1999). Strong relationships with parents may
also facilitate positive development through their contri-
bution to the development of emotional control (Cassidy
1994), with the relationship between these two antecedent
domains also observed in the current study. Somewhat
surprisingly, the association between relationships with
parents in mid/late adolescence and positive development
in emerging adulthood was stronger for males than
females. One possible explanation for this finding is that
the quality of relationships with parents was more stable
over time for females, and hence changes to the quality of
relationships with parents in mid/late adolescence may be
particularly relevant to young men’s healthy development.
Adjustment to the school setting was also related to later
positive development. Academic skills may be particularly
important for healthy development in the context of a
knowledge economy, where important outcomes, such as
employment, require increasing levels of competency
(Lewis et al. 2009). Feelings of connectedness to teachers
and to the school as an institution may also facilitate
wellbeing (Griffiths et al. 2009), a proposition supported by
a strong body of empirical evidence, such as McGraw
et al.’s (2008) recent Australian study. According to con-
trol theory, young people who feel connected to school are
also more likely to adopt prosocial norms about appropriate
behaviour, which can help them to avoid risky behaviours
like substance misuse (Maddox and Prinz 2003). Hence,
adjustment to the school setting may facilitate positive
development through a number of avenues.
Results also indicate the importance of community
engagement during mid to late adolescence for positive
development in emerging adulthood. This supports theo-
retical propositions that adolescents need to develop an
understanding of their roles and connections to the broader
society for healthy psychosocial development and identity
formation (e.g., Erikson 1965). Civic mindedness has
also been theorized to reflect an individual’s developing
capacity for empathy and responsibility (e.g., Maslow
1972), which are important elements of social competence,
a dimension of our positive development model. The
results further suggest that an orientation towards the
community may have particular relevance for males’
healthy development, perhaps as a result of their generally
lower levels of this aspect of connectedness.
Family socioeconomic status in late childhood emerged
as a significant predictor of positive development in
emerging adulthood. This finding is consistent with previ-
ous research suggesting that children who live in poorly
resourced environments experience substantial develop-
mental deficits (Korenman et al. 1995). It is also consistent
with a previous study of the ATP sample at 15–16 years,
which found that family socioeconomic status played a
significant role in the development of civic engagement, a
dimension of positive development in emerging adulthood
(Smart et al. 2000). Children growing up in higher socio-
economic status families are likely to have a greater
capacity to take advantage of neighborhood resources such
as social cohesion (Benson et al. 1998), and opportunities
for relationships and activities that support their needs
(Kagitcibasi 2007; Lerner and Overton 2008). Parents’
ability to invest in their children’s development and par-
ents’ emotional wellbeing may also mediate the effects of
socioeconomic status on children’s capacity to develop
successfully (Yeung et al. 2002). Parents’ ability to act as
successful role models might also account for observed
socioeconomic effects (Smart et al. 2000).
Findings also reveal that the impact of earlier experi-
ences appeared to be mediated by later experiences, sup-
porting Schulenberg et al.’s (2004) proposition of the
salience of proximal influences. There was one exception,
however, with the temperament dimension of reactivity in
late childhood demonstrating direct effects with positive
development that were not mediated by later measures of
870 J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
123
reactivity. It is possible that negative reactivity at
11–12 years, which coincides with significant pubertal
changes, may represent a particularly salient risk factor for
poor outcomes such as depression (Cyranowski et al.
2000).
Whereas Shiner (2000) observed a relationship between
a number of personality traits and later positive function-
ing, personality traits did not emerge as significant pre-
dictors in the current study. This divergence in findings is
likely to reflect the current study’s use of a comprehensive
multivariate model, which allowed the unique contribu-
tions of predictors to positive development to be examined.
Temperament is typically seen as the ‘‘core’’ of aspects of
developing personality, including affective, activational,
and attentional dimensions (Sanson et al. 2002). Person-
ality encompasses a broader range of factors, including
thought content, skills, habits, values, beliefs, and social
cognitions (Shiner and Caspi 2003). Personality traits may
not make a significant unique contribution to positive
development after underlying temperament dimensions are
taken into account.
Certain limitations of the present research merit con-
sideration. Given the large scale and breadth of this study,
it cannot reveal the mechanisms through which the vari-
ables identified as important for positive development exert
their influence. Rather, the current article provides a basis
for further research to explore these relationships in greater
depth. Negative aspects of development such as indicators
of psychopathology were not included as predictors in the
present study because the relationship between positive and
negative developmental outcomes, and the way that they
should be conceptualized in a single model, remains con-
troversial (Silbereisen and Lerner 2007). Since the rela-
tionship between negative indicators and positive
development is of both theoretical and empirical interest,
further research is needed to examine how best to con-
ceptualize negative outcomes in a model of positive
development and its antecedents. It may also be of interest
in future research to separately examine predictors of the
five facets of positive development that make up our model
of positive development, to examine whether common
attributes and experiences underlie each of them.
Nevertheless, the current study provided a rare oppor-
tunity to examine the contributions of individual, rela-
tionship and community factors from infancy to late
adolescence to positive development in emerging adult-
hood. It employed an empirically tested, multi-dimensional
construct of positive development in emerging adulthood,
rather than a single facet of this construct as in most pre-
vious research. The multi-wave longitudinal data
set allowed this question to be investigated over a 20 year
period of time using data from multiple informants,
including parents, primary school teachers, and the
children/adolescents themselves, reducing the effects of
shared method variance. The study also provided indica-
tions of gender differences in predictors of positive
development that have not previously been described. By
utilizing multivariate analyses, the study was able to pro-
vide an indication of the relative contributions of the many
previously identified predictors of positive development or
its dimensions.
The findings have a number of implications for policy
and future research. Interventions that promote strong
family and peer relationships, the ability to self regulate,
and that facilitate school adjustment, are likely to benefit
young people’s positive development. The results also
suggest the need for early, multifaceted interventions to
reduce the effects of socioeconomic disadvantage on
positive development (Kagitcibasi 2007; Kagitcibasi et al.
2001), although further research is needed to provide
insight into the mechanisms through which socio-economic
status exerts its effects.
We examined predictors of a multi-component index of
positive development in emerging adulthood that includes
a wide set of predictors from infancy to late adolescence
spanning individual, relational and broader community
characteristics. This study demonstrates that there are a
number of domains of influence that contribute to positive
development, reflecting a wide range of both individual and
contextual factors. These findings suggest a number of
potential avenues for intervention to promote positive
development in emerging adulthood.
Acknowledgments The ATP study is led and managed by the
Australian Institute of Family Studies, and further information is
available from the ATP website (www.aifs.gov.au/atp). Funding for
this analysis was supported through grants from the Australian
Research Council. Professor Toumbourou is supported by a Victorian
Health Promotion Foundation Senior Research Fellowship. We wish
to acknowledge the work of Professors Margot Prior and Frank
Oberklaid, along with other collaborators who have contributed to the
Australian Temperament Project. We would also like to sincerely
thank the participating families for their loyal support of the study.
References
Arbuckle, J. (2007). Amos 16.0 user’s guide. USA: Amos Develop-
ment Corporation.
Arbuckle, J., & Wothke, W. (2006). Amos 7.0 user’s guide. Chicago:
SPSS Inc.
Armsden, G., & Greenberg, M. (1987). The inventory of parent and
peer attachment: Individual differences and their relationship to
psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal of Youth andAdolescence, 16, 427–454.
Arnett, J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from
the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist,55(5), 469–480.
Benson, P., Leffert, N., Scales, P., & Blyth, D. (1998). Beyond the
‘‘villiage’’ rhetoric: Creating healthy communities for children
and adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 2(3), 138–159.
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874 871
123
Benson, P., Scales, P., Hamilton, S., & Sesma, A. (2006). Positive
youth development: Theory, research, and applications. In
W. Damon (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (6th ed., Vol.
1, pp. 894–941). New York: Wiley.
Bowlby, J. (1971). Attachment and loss: Attachment (Vol. 1).
Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.
Bramlett, R., Scott, P., & Rowell, K. (2000). A comparison of
temperament and social skills in predicting academic performance
in first graders. Special Services in the Schools, 16((1 & 2)),
147–158.
Broom, L., Jones, F., & Zubrzycki, J. (1974). Opportunity andattainment in Australia. Canberra: ANU Press.
Brotherton, P., Kotler, T., & Hammond, S. (1979). Development of an
Australian index of social class. Australian Psychologist, 14,
77–83.
Brown, B., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model
fit. In K. Bollen & J. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equationmodels. New York: Sage.
Byrne, B. M. (2001). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basicconcepts, applications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Law-
rence Erlbaum Associates.
Cassidy, J. (1994). Emotion Regulation: Influences of Attachment
Relationships. Monographs of the Society for Research in ChildDevelopment, 59(2/3), 228–249.
Cicchetti, D. (1984). The emergence of developmental psychopathol-
ogy. Child Development, 55, 1–7.
Cicchetti, D., & Rogosch, F. (2002). A developmental psychopathol-
ogy perspective on adolescence. Journal of Consulting andClinical Psychology, 70, 6–20.
Curtis, W., & Cicchetti, D. (2003). Moving research on resilience into
the 21st century: Theoretical and methodological considerations
in examining the biological contributors to resilience. Develop-ment and Psychopathology, 15, 773–810.
Cyranowski, J. M., Frank, E., Young, E., & Shear, K. (2000).
Adolescent onset of the gender difference in lifetime rates of
major depression. Archives of General Psychiatry, 57, 21–27.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R., Murphy, B., Maszk, P., Smith, M., &
Karbon, M. (1995). The role of emotionality and regulation in
children’s social functioning: A longitudinal study. ChildDevelopment, 66, 1360–1384.
Erikson, E. (1965). Childhood and society Harmondsworth. UK:
Penguin.
Fabes, R., Eisenberg, N., & Eisenbud, L. (1993). Behavioral and
physiological correlates of children’s reactions to others in
distress. Developmental Psychology, 29, 655–663.
Fabes, R., Eisenberg, N., Karbon, M., Bernzweig, J., Speer, A., &
Carlo, G. (1994). Socialization of children’s vicarious emotional
responding and prosocial behavior: Relations with mothers’
perceptions of children’s emotional reactivity. DevelopmentalPsychology, 30, 44–55.
Flanagan, T. J., & Longmire, D. R. (1995). National opinion survey ofcrime and justice. Huntsville, TX: Sam Houston State Univer-
sity, Criminal Justice Centre.
Flanagan, C. A., & Sherrod, L. R. (1998). Youth political develop-
ment: An introduction. Journal of Social Issues, 54, 447–456.
Fox, N., & Calkins, S. (2003). The development of self-control of
emotion: Intrinsic and extrinsic influences. Motivation andEmotion, 27(1), 7–26.
Gresham, F., & Elliot, S. (1990). Manual for the social skills ratingsystem. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Gresham, F. M., Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2001). Interpreting
outcomes of social skills training for students with high-
incidence disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67(3), 331–344.
Griffiths, A., Sharkey, J., & Furlong, M. (2009). Student engagement
and positive school adaptation. In R. Gilman, E. Huebner, &
M. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in schools(pp. 197–212). New York: Routledge.
Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998).
Multivariate data analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice-Hall International.
Hawkins, M., Letcher, P., Sanson, A., Smart, D., & Toumbourou, J.
(2009). Positive development in emerging adulthood. AustralianJournal of Psychology, 61(2), 89–99.
Huebner, E. (2004). Research on assessment of life satisfaction of
children and adolescents. Social Indicators Research, 66, 3–33.
Huebner, E., & Betts, S. (2002). Exploring the utility of social control
theory for youth development: Issues of attachment, involve-
ment, and gender. Youth and Society, 34, 123–145.
Kagitcibasi, C. (2007). Building resources in the context of
socioeconomic disadvantage: Lessons from research for social
policies. In R. Silbereisen & R. Lerner (Eds.), Approaches topositive youth development. Cornwall: Sage.
Kagitcibasi, C., Sunar, D., & Bekman, S. (2001). Long-term effects of
early intervention: Turkish low-income mothers and children.
Applied Developmental Psychology, 22, 333–361.
Kessler, R., & Walters, E. (1998). Epidemiology of DSM-III-R major
depression and minor depression among adolescents and young
adults in the National Comorbidity Survey. Depression andAnxiety, 7(1), 3–14.
Keyes, C., & Waterman, M. (2003). Dimensions of well-being and
mental health in adulthood. In M. Bornstein, L. Davidson,
C. Keyes, & K. Moore (Eds.), Well-being. Positive developmentacross the life course (pp. 477–497). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Korenman, S., Miller, J., & Sjaastad, J. (1995). Long-term poverty
and child development in the United States: Results from the
NLSY. Children and Youth Services Review, 17, 127–155.
Lanthier, R. P., & Bates, J. E. (1995). Infancy era predictors of the bigfive personality dimensions in adolescence. Paper presented at
the 1995 meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association,
Chicago.
Larson, R. (2000). Toward a psychology of positive youth develop-
ment. American Psychologist, 55(1), 173–183.
Lerner, R. (2006). Developmental science, developmental systems,
and contemporary theories of human development. In R. Lerner
& W. Damon (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (6th ed.):Vol 1, Theoretical models of human development (Vol. 1,
pp. 1–17). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Lerner, R., & Overton, W. (2008). Exemplifying the integrations of
the relational developmental system: Synthesizing theory,
research and application to promote positive development and
social justice. Journal of Adolescent Research, 23(3), 245–255.
Lewis, R., White, J., & Chandler, W. (2009). Education: Revolution
or resilience. In S. Cork (Ed.), Brighter prospects: Enhancing theresilence of Australia. Canberra: Australia21.
Maddox, S., & Prinz, R. (2003). School bonding in children and
adolescents: Conceptualization, assessment, and associated vari-
ables. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 6(1), 31–49.
Marsh, H. W., Barnes, J., Cairns, L., & Tidman, M. (1984). Self
description questionnaire: Age and sex effects in the structure
and level of self-concept for pre-adolescent children. Journal ofEducational Psychology, 76, 940–956.
Maslow, A. H. (1972). Abraham Maslow: A memorial volume.
Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole.
Masten, A., Burt, K., Roisman, G., Obradovic, J., Long, J., &
Tellegen, A. (2004). Resources and resilience in the transition to
adulthood: Continuity and change. Development and Psychopa-thology, 16, 1071–1094.
Masten, A., Coatsworth, J., Neemann, J., Gest, S., Tellegen, A., &
Garmezy, N. (1995). The structure and coherence of competence
872 J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
123
from childhood through adolescence. Child Development, 66(6),
1635–1659.
Masten, A., & Curtis, W. (2000). Integrating competence and
psychopathology: Pathways toward a comprehensive science of
adaptation in development. Development and Psychopathology,12, 529–550.
Masten, A., Obradovic, J., & Burt, K. (2006). Resilience in emerging
adulthood: Developmental perspectives on continuity and trans-
formation. In J. Arnett & J. Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults inAmerica: Coming of age in the 21st century (pp. 173–190).
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
McClowry, S. (1995). The development of the school-age tempera-
ment inventory. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 41, 271–285.
McGraw, K., Moore, S., Fuller, A., & Bates, G. (2008). Family, peer
and school connectedness in final year secondary school
students. Australian Psychologist, 43(1), 27–37.
Miech, R., Essex, M., & Goldsmith, H. (2001). Socioeconomic status
and the adjustment to school: The role of self-regulation during
early childhood. Sociology of Education, 74, 102–120.
National Health and Medical Research Council. (2001). Australianalcohol guidelines: health risks and benefits. Canberra, Austra-
lia: National Health and Medical Research Council.
Obradovic, J., & Masten, A. (2007). Developmental antecedents of
young adult civic engagement. Applied Developmental Science,11, 2–19.
Osborne, J., & Waters, E. (2002). Four assumptions of multiple
regression that researchers should always test. Practical Assess-ment, Research & Evaluation, 8(2).
Park, N. (2004). Character strengths and positive youth development.
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.Special Issue: Positive Development: Realizing the Potential ofYouth, 591, 40–54.
Phelps, E., Balsano, A., Fay, K., Peltz, J., Zimmerman, S., Lerner, R.,
et al. (2007). Nuances in early adolescent developmental
trajectories of positive and problematic/risk behaviors: Findings
from the 4-H study of positive youth development. Child andAdolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 16, 473–496.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Podsakoff, N., & Lee, J. (2003).
Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review
of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Prior, M., Sanson, A., Smart, D., & Oberklaid, F. (2000). Pathwaysfrom infancy to adolescence: Australian Temperament Project1983–2000. Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Institute of Family
Studies.
Putnam, R. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance
of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics,December, 664–683.
Raghunathan, T. (2004). What do we do with missing data? Some
options for analysis of incomplete data. Annual Review of PublicHealth, 25, 99–117.
Raja, S., McGee, R., & Stanton, W. (1992). Perceived attachments to
parents and peers and psychological well-being in adolescence.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21(4), 471–485.
Ruschena, E., Prior, M., Sanson, A., & Smart, D. (2005). A
longitudinal study of adolescent adjustment following family
transitions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46,
353–363.
Sameroff, A. (2000). Developmental systems and psychopathology.
Development and Psychopathology, 12, 297–312.
Sanson, A., Hemphill, S., & Smart, D. (2002). Temperament and
social development. In P. K. Smith & C. H. Hart (Eds.),
Handbook of childhood social development (pp. 97–116).
London: Blackwell.
Scales, P., Benson, P., Roehlkepartain, E., Sesma, J., & van Dulmen,
M. (2006). The role of developmental assets in predicting
academic achievement: A longitudinal study. Journal of Ado-lescence, 29(5), 691–708.
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Muller, H. (2003).
Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of
significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methodsof Psychological Research Online, 8(2), 23–74.
Schulenberg, J., Bryant, A., & O’Malley, P. (2004a). Taking hold of
some kind of life: How developmental tasks relate to trajectories
of well-being during the transition to adulthood. Developmentand Psychopathology, 16, 1119–1140.
Schulenberg, J., Sameroff, A., & Cicchetti, D. (2004b). The transition
to adulthood as a critical juncture in the course of psychopa-
thology and mental health. Development and Psychopathology,16(4), 799–806.
Schumacker, R., & Lomax, R. (2004). A beginner’s guide tostructural equation modeling (2nd ed. ed.). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Shiner, R. (2000). Linking childhood personality with adaptation:
Evidence for continuity and change across time into late adoles-
cence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 310–325.
Shiner, R., & Caspi, A. (2003). Personality differences in childhood
and adolescence: Measurement, development and consequences.
Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 2–32.
Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., & Peake, P. (1990). Predicting adolescent
cognitive and self-regulatory competencies from preschool delay
of gratification: Identifying diagnostic conditions. Developmen-tal Psychology, 26(6), 978–986.
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). From neurons toneighborhoods: The science of early childhood development.Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press.
Silbereisen, R., & Lerner, R. (2007). Approaches to positive youth
development: A view of the issues. In R. Silbereisen & R. Lerner
(Eds.), Approaches to positive youth development (pp. 3–30).
UK: Sage.
Smart, D., & Sanson, A. (2003). Social competence in young
adulthood, its nature and antecedents. Family Matters, 64, 4–9.
Smart, D., Sanson, A., Da Silva, L., & Toumbourou, J. (2000). The
development of civic mindedness in Australian adolescents.
Family Matters, 57, 4–9.
Sroufe, L., Carlson, E., Levy, A., & Egeland, B. (1999). Implications
of attachment theory for developmental psychopathology.
Development and Psychopathology, 11, 1–13.
Stone, W. (2001). Measuring social capital: Towards a theoreticallyinformed measurement framework for researching social capitalin family and community life (Working Paper No. 24).
Melbourne, Victoria: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Stone, W., & Hughes, J. (2002). Social capital: Empirical meaningand measurement validity (Working Paper No. 27). Melbourne,
Victoria: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Sweet, J. A., & Bumpass, L. L. (2002). The National Survey ofFamilies and Households—Waves 1, 2, and 3: Data descriptionand documentation. Madison, WI: Center for Demography and
Ecology, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariatestatistics (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Tanner, J. (2006). Recentering during emerging adulthood: A critical
turning point in life span human development. In J. Arnett &
J. Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age inthe 21st century (pp. 21–55). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
van Wel, F., ter Bogt, T., & Raaijmakers, Q. (2002). Changes in the
parental bond and the well-being of adolescents and young
adults. Adolescence, 37, 317–333.
Whitley, R., & McKenzie, K. (2005). Social capital and psychiatry:
Review of the literature. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 13,
71–84.
J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874 873
123
Winter, I. (2000). Towards a theorised understanding of family lifeand social capital (Working Paper No. 21). Melbourne, Victoria:
Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Yeung, W., Linver, M., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2002). How money
matters for young children’s development: Parental investment
and family processes. Child Development, 73(6), 1861–1879.
Zubrick, S., & Lawrence, D. (2006). Testing the reliability of ameasure of Aboriginal children’s mental health. Canberra:
Australian Bureau of Statistics.
Author Biographies
Meredith O’Connor is based at the Department of Paediatrics and
Melbourne Graduate School of Education at The University of
Melbourne. Her areas of interest include the transition to adulthood,
and the interrelationships between well-being, mental illness, and
education.
Ann Sanson is a Professor in Paediatrics at the University of
Melbourne and the Network Coordinator for the Australian Research
Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY). She is a developmental
psychologist whose main research interests revolve around the
interplay of intrinsic child characteristics and family and contextual
factors in the development of good and poor psychosocial adjustment.
Mary Hawkins is a Research Officer working in the Department of
Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, located in the Royal
Children’s Hospital. Mary has a background in psychology and has a
particular interest in the development and validation of outcome
measures for use in research.
Primrose Letcher is a research analyst in the Department of
Paediatrics at The University of Melbourne, based in the Royal
Children’s Hospital. Her areas of interest are adolescent mental health
and well being.
John Winston Toumbourou is Professor and Chair in Health
Psychology at Deakin University and a Senior Research Fellow
within the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute at the Centre for
Adolescent Health. John is a founding member and the current Chair
of the College of Health Psychologists within the Australian
Psychological Society. John’s interests include evaluation, drug
abuse prevention and treatment, and the role of community, family
and peer groups in adolescent health promotion.
Diana Smart is a Senior Research Fellow at the Australian Institute
of Family Studies and works primarily on the Australian Tempera-
ment Project and Growing Up in Australia: The Longitudinal Study of
Australian Children. She joined the Growing Up in Australia study in
2007 after a long association with the Australian Temperament
Project as the Project Manager. Her research interests include child
and youth adjustment, developmental transitions and pathways, and
the fostering of social competence and social responsibility.
Suzanne Vassallo is a Research Fellow at the Australian Institute of
Family Studies and the Project Manager of the study. Suzanne
interests include parenting, family relationships, and child
development.
Craig A. Olsson is based at the Centre for Adolescent Health. His
work addresses the many and varied processes in child and adolescent
psychological development—from genes, to individuals, to families,
to school environments, communities and cultures.
874 J Youth Adolescence (2011) 40:860–874
123
top related