Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26774291›Full record

ReviewDevelopmental cognitive neuroscience2016

The dual systems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation.

Elizabeth P Shulman, Ashley R Smith, Karol Silva, Grace Icenogle, Natasha Duell, Jason Chein, Laurence Steinberg

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Developmental cognitive neuroscience, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 379 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
379citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
49.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

379 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 822 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Least Equal When Most Teachable: The Biodevelopmental Learning Opportunities and Outcomes Model of Gender Differences in Sexuality.Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Neural response to reward uncertainty in adolescents with mood and anxiety symptoms.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

319 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Elizabeth P ShulmanBrock University, Psychology Department, 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way, St. Catharines, ON L2S 3A1, Canada. Electronic address: eshulman@brocku.ca.
Ashley R SmithTemple University, Department of Psychology, 1701 N. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA. Electronic address: tuc69946@temple.edu.
Karol SilvaTemple University, Department of Psychology, 1701 N. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA. Electronic address: karol.silva@temple.edu.
Grace IcenogleTemple University, Department of Psychology, 1701 N. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA. Electronic address: grace.icenogle@temple.edu.
Natasha DuellTemple University, Department of Psychology, 1701 N. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA. Electronic address: ntduell@temple.edu.
Jason CheinTemple University, Department of Psychology, 1701 N. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA. Electronic address: jchein@temple.edu.
Laurence SteinbergTemple University, Department of Psychology, 1701 N. 13th Street, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA; King Abdulaziz University, Abdullah Sulayman, Jeddah 22254, Saudi Arabia. Electronic address: lds@temple.edu.
Temple University · USBrock University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to the dual systems perspective, risk taking peaks during adolescence because activation of an early-maturing socioemotional-incentive processing system amplifies adolescents' affinity for exciting, pleasurable, and novel activities at a time when a still immature cognitive control system is not yet strong enough to consistently restrain potentially hazardous impulses. We review evidence from both the psychological and neuroimaging literatures that has emerged since 2008, when this perspective was originally articulated. Although there are occasional exceptions to the general trends, studies show that, as predicted, psychological and neural manifestations of reward sensitivity increase between childhood and adolescence, peak sometime during the late teen years, and decline thereafter, whereas psychological and neural reflections of better cognitive control increase gradually and linearly throughout adolescence and into the early 20s. While some forms of real-world risky behavior peak at a later age than predicted, this likely reflects differential opportunities for risk-taking in late adolescence and young adulthood, rather than neurobiological differences that make this age group more reckless. Although it is admittedly an oversimplification, as a heuristic device, the dual systems model provides a far more accurate account of adolescent risk taking than prior models that have attributed adolescent recklessness to cognitive deficiencies.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalRewardRisk-TakingAdolescentAdolescent BehaviorBrainCognitionFemaleHumansSelf-ControlYoung AdultAdolescentsCognitive controlDual systemsReward sensitivityRisk takingSensation-seeking

Identifiers

PMID26774291
PMCPMC6990093
OpenAlexW2218776046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.