Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31404858›Full record

ReviewDevelopmental cognitive neuroscience2019

Mind the gap: A review and recommendations for statistically evaluating Dual Systems models of adolescent risk behavior.

Samuel N Meisel, Whitney D Fosco, Larry W Hawk, Craig R Colder

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Developmental cognitive neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Links between socioeconomic position and cognitive and behavioral regulation in adolescence: The role of pubertal development.Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Samuel N MeiselUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New York, United States. Electronic address: snmeisel@buffalo.edu.
Whitney D FoscoCenter for Children and Families, Florida International University, United States.
Larry W HawkUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New York, United States.
Craig R ColderUniversity at Buffalo, The State University of New York, United States.

Funding

Problem behavior, peers, and motivational aspects of temperament in substance useR01DA019631 · NIDA · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI COLDER, CRAIG R · 2006 to 2017
$5.8M
An Examination of the Joint Effects of Adolescent Social Goals and Parenting Styles on Underage DrinkingF31AA025521 · NIAAA · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI MEISEL, SAMUEL NOAH · 2017 to 2018
$55k
NIAAA NIH HHS F31 AA025521NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA019631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to Dual Systems models (Casey et al., 2008; Luna and Wright, 2016; Steinberg, 2008), a rapidly-developing socioemotional system and gradually-developing cognitive control system characterize adolescent brain development. The imbalance hypothesis forwarded by Dual Systems models posits that the magnitude of the imbalance between these two developing systems should predict the propensity for engaging in a variety of risk behaviors. The current integrative review argues that the excitement generated by the imbalance hypothesis and its implications for explaining adolescent risk behaviors has not been meet with equal efforts to rigorously test this hypothesis. The goal of the current review is to help guide the field to consider appropriate and rigorous methods of testing the imbalance hypothesis. First, we review the analytic approaches that have been used to test the imbalance hypothesis and outline statistical and conceptual limitations of these approaches. Next, we discuss the utility of two longitudinal analytic approaches (Latent Difference Scores and Growth Mixture Modeling) for testing the imbalance hypothesis. We utilize data from a large community adolescent sample to illustrate each approach and argue that Latent Difference Scores and Growth Mixture Modeling approaches enhance the specificity and precision with which the imbalance hypothesis is evaluated.

Indexed as

Risk-TakingAdolescentAdolescent BehaviorBrainFemaleHumansMaleSelf-ControlDual systems modelsGrowth mixture modelingImbalance hypothesisLatent difference scoresSelf-RegulationSensation seeking

Identifiers

PMID31404858
PMCPMC6969358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.