Unit 2: youth development and society: relationship with family members, peers

and friends, romantic relationships, intergenerational relations; youth culture,

gender, media, values

The United Nations, for statistical purposes, defines ‘youth’, as those persons between
the ages of 15 and 24 years, however, YOUTH is best understood as a period of
transition from the dependence of childhood to adulthood’s independence. This period
of transition is characterized by various developmental processes,​that ​prepares a
young person to meet the challenges of adolescence and adulthood and achieve his or
her full potential. Youth development is promoted through activities and experiences
that help youth develop social, ethical, emotional, physical, and cognitive
competencies.

YOUTH DEVELOPMENT

The term ​youth development ​is used in at least three different ways, referring to a
natural ​process o​ f development, ​principles​, and ​practices​. All three are important, and
they are logically related.

1. A natural process​. Youth development has traditionally and is still most

widely used to mean a natural process: the growing capacity of a young person
to understand and act on the environment. In this usage, it is identical to child
or adolescent development. ​Optimal development in youth enables individuals
to lead a healthy, satisfying, and productive life, as youth and later as adults,
because they gain the competence to earn a living, to engage in civic activities.
Both heredity and environment influence the natural unfolding.

2. Principles.​ In the 1990s, the term ​youth development c​ ame to be applied to a

set of principles, a philosophy or approach emphasizing active support for the
growing capacity of young people by individuals, organizations, and
institutions, especially at the community level. The youth development
approach is rooted in a ​commitment to enabling all young people to thrive​.
This simple statement combines two principles: universality or ​inclusiveness
(all youth​) and a positive orientation building on ​strengths (thriving​). Thus
youth development came to be related to the principles that the youth needs to
strive and gave rise to concept of positive youth development.

3. ​Practices​. The third use of the term youth development is to describe a range of
practices in programs, organizations, and initiatives. ​Development takes place
in families, neighborhoods, youth organizations, faith- based organizations,
schools, and a multitude of other places, including cyberspace. Although the
specific practices that adults use to create and sustain such opportunities differ
across settings, the principles are consistent. Thus according to this view,
factors like culture, family, school, friends, neighborhood, etc has a huge role
in the outcomes of youth development.

Therefore, ​the years from 15 to 24 are a critical stage for young people; they build on
the experiences of childhood and generate the foundations for adulthood. During this
period, each young person has a number of key tasks to undertake. How well each of
these is mastered affects the degree of success each of them will experience in their
adult life. While these key tasks are common to all young people, there is tremendous
diversity in young people’s individual characteristics and backgrounds, such as
gender, culture, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, family, etc. The interaction
of these characteristics has a significant effect on the Development process, life
experience and outcomes of the youth.

Youth Developmental Models

1) Erikson’s Psychosocial Theory.

Erikson gave a psychosocial theory of lifespan development in which he emphasised

on eight stages of development that unfold as we go through life. At each stage, a
unique developmental task confronts individuals with a crisis that must be resolved.
According to Erikson, this crisis is not a catastrophe but a turning point marked by
both increased vulnerability and enhanced potential. Seeing it in context of youth
development, there are two stages that an individual has to deal with:

● During the adolescent years, individuals face finding out who they are, what they
are all about, and where they are going in life. This is Erikson’s fifth
developmental stage, ​identity versus identity confusion ​. If adolescents explore
roles in a healthy manner and arrive at a positive path to follow in life, then they
achieve a positive identity; if not, then identity confusion reigns.
● Intimacy versus isolation ​is Erikson’s sixth developmental stage, which
individuals experience during the early adulthood years (20s and 30s). At this
time, individuals face he developmental task of forming intimate relationships. If
young adults form healthy friendships and an intimate relationship with another,
intimacy will be achieved; if not, isolation will result.

Marcia’s identity status theory:

2) Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory ​(Bronfenbrenner, 1986, 2004; Bronfenbrenner

& Morris, 1998, 2006) holds that development reflects the influence of several
environmental systems. The theory identifies five environmental systems:
microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem.

● The ​microsystem ​is the setting in which the individual lives. These contexts
include the person’s family, peers, school, and neighborhood. It is in the
microsystem that the most direct interactions with social agents take place—with
parents, peers, and teachers, for example. The individual is not a passive recipient
of experiences in these settings, but someone who helps to construct the settings.
● The ​mesosystem i​ nvolves relations between microsystems or connections
between contexts. Examples are the relation of family experiences to school
experiences, school experiences to religious experiences, and family experiences
to peer experiences. For example, children whose parents have rejected them may
have difficulty developing positive relations with teachers.
● The ​exosystem ​consists of links between a social setting in which the individual
does not have an active role and the individual’s immediate context. For example,
a husband’s or child’s experience at home may be influenced by a mother’s
 experiences at work. The mother might receive a promotion that requires more
travel, which might increase conflict with the husband and change patterns of
interaction with the child.
● The ​macrosystem i​ nvolves the culture in which individuals live. Culture refers to
the behavior patterns, beliefs, and all other products of a group of people that are
passed on from generation to generation.
● The ​chronosystem c​ onsists of the patterning of environmental events and
transitions over the life course, as well as sociohistorical circumstances. For
example, divorce is one transition.

Bronfenbrenner (2004; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006) subsequently added

biological influences to his theory, describing it as a bio-ecological theory.
Nonetheless, it is still dominated by ecological, environmental contexts (Ceci, 2000).

Youth Development and Society

Youth Development is influenced by society. This may include relationship with

family member, peers and friends; Romantic relationships and inter-generational
relations; and Youth culture (Gender, media and values).

A) YOUTH RELATIONSHIP WITH FAMILY, PEERS AND FRIENDS

Answer to question “impact of family on the students themselves”: ​Parenting

(teaching by example), family type, value instillation sanskaar, both positive and negative,
customs of keeping together and care, feeling bounded as i am youngest (so birth
order/single child), non expression of anger, not taken, seriously.

Families are everywhere and are one of the most, if not the most, important contexts
for youth development. But the nature of adolescents’ family experience varies
enormously. ​Some youth grow up in close knit, hierarchically organized, extended
families that provide a web of connections and reinforce a traditional way of life.
Others come of age in nuclear or single-parent families, with whom they may spend
little time – or have close, intimate relationships. For ​Example, In the Arab world,
families continue to be ​quite authoritarian and patriarchal​; adolescents are taught
strict codes of conduct and family loyalty ​whereas in the ​West, parent-child
relationships are less hierarchical than in the past, and the ​diminished authority of
parents may contribute to the relatively high rates of ​deviant behavior that
characterize several European and North American societies. Such variability occurs
both between and within societies.

A trend noted by most of our authors is that the ​types of families adolescents
experience are changing​. Across nations, we see the expansion of family forms
during the last half of the 20th century, including more divorced families,
single-parent families, remarried families, and, in some settings, more gay and lesbian
families. Trends evident in most regions also include greater family mobility,
migration to urban areas, family members working in distant cities or countries,
smaller families, fewer extended-family households,and increases in mothers’
employment (Larson et al. 2002). ​These many changes alter the capacity of families
to provide resources to adolescents and the types of resources they provide​. Within
this enormous diversity, a common theme is that ​families are facing new challenge​s
and adapting in new ways. In some cases, ​adolescents are being deprived of
resources that were of great value in the past – such as the ready advice and
support of a grandmother and the stability and security of a rural village. But ​they
also are gaining access to new family resources, like more-open relationships
with parents ​and the indirect benefits that come with mothers’ employment.

These developments in family relationships have lead to great deal of research as to

how different families affect youth and youth development. ​Evidence from the US
and the UK suggests that, ​statistically, ​growing up in a single-parent family or a
step family is associated with greater risk to well-being ​such as greater risk of
dropping out of school, of leaving home early, of poorer health, and of low skills​.
These risks are persistent even when the substantial effect of generally
higher ​poverty​ levels in single-parent and step families have been taken into account.
However, it is not the family structure that matters to children but the quality of the
relationship. Interaction such as conversation are very important for children. The
World Health organisation’s (WHO) ​Health Behaviour in School-Aged
Children​ (HSBC) survey (2009) has such data available. According to it, y​oung
people who report ease of communication with their parents are also more likely to
report a range of positive health outcomes, such as higher self-rated health, higher life
satisfaction and fewer physical and psychological complaints. The accumulation of
support from parents, siblings and peers leads to an even stronger predictor of positive
health: the higher the number of sources of support, the more likely it is that the
children will experience positive health.

Another study on the patterns and precursors of adolescent antisocial behaviour

(Smart et al., 2003) suggests that interventions aimed at improving relationships
between at-risk young people and their parents and providing parents with parenting
skills would be highly worthwhile, particularly in the early adolescent years, for a
number of problem behaviours in adolescence, such as substance abuse, truancy,
anger and stealing, can have their roots in family interrelational difficulties
(Bamberg, Findley, & Toumbourou, 2006). The quality of marital relationships
continues to be associated with the parent-child relationship. Those who are warm and
accepting ten to have children who are more socially competent (Updegraff et al,
2004). But hostile sibling relationships and coercive, irritable, inconsistent, or absent
parenting (step parenting or foster parenting) during childhood and early adolescence
has a strong role in transforming noncompliance of early childhood to anti social
behavior and associating with deviant peers in young age. (Collins et al, 2000).
Although the vast majority of children in step families do not show serious behavior
problems and are resilient in coping with family reorganization, antisocial behaviors
are higher in older teens with divorced and remarried parents than in nondivorced
parents. (Kim, Hetherington, & Reiss, 1999)

It is interesting to note that in this stage a fundamental change that needs to occur in
the adolescent years is a shift from a parent-child relationship to a more adult-adult
relationship which may often be trouble for the parents if they are not ready to let go
of the control or are dealing with their own problems and cannot provide enough
support and advice to the young. Toumbourou and Gregg (2001), in their review of
research relevant to family-based adolescent health promotion, identify three skills
that help facilitate adolescent-parent attachment: communication that avoids blaming
or criticism, the exploration of mutual needs and adoption of constructive problem
solving techniques. This is because adaptability, flexibility, mutual respect and
decreasing levels of control are all characteristics of the emerging adult-adult
relationship that young people identify as important (Noller et al., 2001).

A lot of research has also gone into single parents and the effect on youth. ​ There can
be various amounts of effects on the youth or child when there is only one parent.
Some of the challenges these youth face may include economic and financial support,
education, structured/organized play, and guidance or influence from the parent.
Youth with single-parents have a harder time with financial aid, as the parent is only
bringing in one income, compared to two incomes in a two-parent home. It is known
that mothers run most single-parent households with the absence of the father. In
these cases there usually a low income. When it comes to education, the father’s
financial support is important because the mother does not need to work as much. It is
said by Marnie Kunz (2014) that the lack of financial support from fathers, causes
mothers to work more. This has an affect on the child because they receive less
attention and guidance when it comes to school work/homework. There can be
emotional effects on single-parent households including both the child and the parent.
Having a lower income can create lower self-esteem, increased anger and frustration,
and an increased risk of violent behavior. Other emotional factors that may impact the
child is feeling of loneliness, and not being able to have that connection and social
aspect with other youth. Having both parents can have a positive impact on guidance
and influence throughout the development. ​Single-parent households can lack some
of the guidance or influence from a parent especially the fatherly figure. (Vojnovic,
2014). There are however, positive effects in single-parent households. As Kunz
(2014) mentioned that youth can exhibit certain skills such as increased responsibility,
independence/dependence. They are asked to help out a lot more around the house
providing that responsibility and independence factor. The youth are also more
connected with the parent and form close relationships, as they are dependent on one
another throughout the child’s development. Kunz (2014) also mentions that children
form single-parent households will form stronger bonds with other family members,
and including family friends as they are often there to help raise them.

Family and adolescents

DEVELOPMENTAL TASKS:

1. Achieving new and more mature relations with age-mates of both sexes
2. Achieving a masculine or feminine social role
3. Accepting one's physique and using the body effectively
4. Achieving emotional independence from parents and other adults
5. Preparing for an economic career
6. Equipping self with skills needed for productive occupation
7. Acquiring a set of values and an ethical system as a guide to behavior; developing
an ideology
8. Desiring and achieving socially responsible behavior
 ▪ Peer influence (peer pressure)

▪ Maladjustment wrt peers

▪ Severance with parents (parenting style and involvement)

▪ Less dependence on family

▪ Emotional separation

Middle adolescence is characterized by increasing detachment from family. Teens

gradually become less dependent on family. Emotional separation from parents
occurs.

As peers become more central, striving for autonomy and self-reliance increases, and
conflict may occur as the young person tests out the boundaries (Noller & Patton,
1990). Stone and Church (1968, p. 447, cited in Noller, Feeney, & Petersen, 2001)
suggest that "readiness for adulthood comes about two years later than the adolescent
claims and about two years before the parent will admit."

Idealised internal representations of parents are gradually renounced. This means that
parents are not the "heroes" of childhood anymore​; they gradually become
recognised as being fallible human beings with strengths and weaknesses.
De-idealisation of parents preferably occurs within the context of a secure but more
equal relationship, one that is encouraging of exploration of the external world (Allan,
McElhaney, Land, Kuperminc, Moore, O'Beirne-Kelly, & Kilmer, 2003).

This ongoing importance of family connectedness is reflected in the literature on

resilience. A sense of belonging and connectedness to family, and feeling loved and
respected in the family, is a protective factor for a number of risk behaviours,
including suicidal behaviour, substance abuse and violence (Fuller, McGraw, &
Goodyear, 1999). Caring and connectedness surpass a range of demographic
characteristics, such as single versus two parent families, as protective factors against
risky behaviours (Rayner & Montague, 2000).

While a ​secure home base and a warm, connected relationship with parents is ideal​,
and is experienced by the majority of adolescents (Moore, Guzman, Hair, Lippman, &
Garrett, 2004), the families in which these conditions are not met will be more
vulnerable.

It seems possible, however, that ​parents also perform a critical function as a

"secure base"​ from which to explore peer relationships and different roles and
identities. ​The secure base allows a child to explore this external world and return to
safety if the need arises (Noller et al., 2001). Many adolescents identify and value the
importance of maintaining positive, respectful and loving relationships with parents, a
closeness which can override the effects of poor peer relationships (Noller & Patton,
1990).

However, s​everal risk factors exist within the family​, including family ​conflict and
violence, harsh or inconsistent parenting, long-term parental unemployment and
poor monitoring and supervision of children​ (Fuller et al., 1999; Commonwealth
Department of Health and Aged Care, 2000).

This results in ​problem behaviours, increasing the levels of conflict between

parents and adolescents and in certain cases, precipitating or indicating the
breakdown of the adolescent-parent relationship​.

In terms of extreme breakdown, in which youth ​homelessness ​occurs, young people

indicate that conflict, violence, ​neglect and abuse​, ​parental substance abuse
problems​, and ​poor supervision and communication​ are amongst the reasons for
leaving home (Hyde, 2005).

Some of these factors may not be amenable to change, particularly if the young
person is at any risk of abuse or violence. It is worthwhile, however, considering
some of the factors that can be modified to strengthen family-adolescent bonds.

Family and early adults

It’s a period of ​building and rebuilding one’s life​.

The developmental tasks of youth include:

i) achieving autonomy and making one’s self independent,

ii) establishing one’s personal identity, preferences, and philosophies,

iii) becoming more emotional stable,

iv) setting up one’s career and getting education in that direction,

v) developing intimate, long-term relationships (including marriage and

starting a family)

vi) setting up a home and managing a household

vii) becoming a parent, making marital adjustments and rearing children

viii) becoming active in community life and taking civic responsibility

Levinson’s stages are presented below (Levinson, 1978). He suggests that period of
transition last about 5 years and periods of “settling down” last about 7 years. The
ages presented below are based on life in the middle class about 30 years ago. Think
about how these ages and transitions might be different today.

Early adult transition (17-22): Leaving home, leaving family; making first choices
about career and education

Entering the adult world (22-28): ​Committing to an occupation, defining goals,

finding intimate relationships

Age 30 transition (28-33): ​Reevaluating those choices and perhaps making

modifications or changing one’s attitude toward love and work

Settling down (33 to 40): ​Reinvesting in work and family commitments; becoming
involved in the community
Midlife transition (40-45): ​Reevaluating previous commitments; making dramatic
changes ​if necessary; giving expression to previously ignored talents or aspirations;
feeling more of a sense of urgency about life and its meaning

Entering middle adulthood (45-50): ​Committing to new choices made and placing
one’s energies into these commitments
Initial/Earlier decisions made WITHOUT MUCH EXPERIENCE are made with one
goal in mind-to be seen as an adult, and may be ​driven more by the expectations of
others​.

For example​, imagine someone who chose a career path based on other’s advice but
now find that the job is not what was expected. The age 30 transition may involve
recommitting to the same job, not because it’s stimulating, but because it pays
well. Settling down may involve settling down with a new set of expectations for that
job. As the adult gains status, he or she may be freer to make more independent
choices. And sometimes these are very different from those previously made. The
midlife transition differs from the age 30 transition in that the person is more aware of
how much time has gone by and how much time is left. This brings a sense of urgency
and impatience about making changes. The future focus of early adulthood gives way
to an emphasis on the present in midlife. (We will explore this in our next
lesson.) Overall, Levinson calls our attention to the dynamic nature of adulthood.

With ​greater cognitive development (including POST FORMAL THOUGHT AND

DIALECTICAL THINKING) means a ​better understanding of available choices
and decision making​. ​Conflicts over personal choice​ also characterises this stage.

Ambivalent Relationships with Parents in Young Adulthood​ (K.L. Fingerman et

al.) Although young adults and their parents generally report that their relationships
are strong in young adulthood, conflicts and negative feelings do not dissipate
altogether. Rather, relationships in early adulthood may be characterized by
ambivalence or a mixture of positive and negative sentiments.

Start with TOLERANCE. If you are in "the sandwich generation," positioned between having older
parents and adult children, you can understand how your children sometimes still struggle to get
along with you by how you sometimes still struggle to get along with your parents.

Adjusting to REVERSAL can be challenging as well. When our children are young,
our task is to get them to fit into our lives, to learn what we think is important, and to
fulfil our agenda for what needs to happen. When they become adults, however, to a
significant degree our roles reverse. ​Now our task as parents is to fit more into their
lives, to understand what they believe is important in their lives, and to respect their
agenda for what needs to happen in their lives​.

Loss of traditional influence can be hard for some parents. When they still domineer
adult children who still consent to submit to this dominance, not daring to displease or
challenge parental authority, it often takes bold acts of independence, sometimes
waiting until the young person's thirties, to break this dependency.

Then the adult child stubbornly embraces a new life path, adopts a new lifestyle, or
selects a new life partner that parents disapprove. And when they question, criticize,
or oppose this decision, the young person finally stands up for herself with a defiant
statement of independence: "It's my life and I will live it as I please!"

The last reversal of the adult child/parent relationship plays out during the parents'
older age when responsibility is dramatically shifted, ​when dependency is reversed.
At the beginning of ​childhood​, the old care-take and take charge of the young; but at
the end of parental lives, the young care-take and take charge of their old.

Finally, ​there is DEMOTION for parents to get used to.​ When your ​adult child
becomes established in the world​, preoccupation with managing this separate life
can take precedence over involvement in the lives of parents.

When the ​adult child marries​, you become less important than this new partner. And
when adult child and partner become parents, you become less important than this
new child. Less important doesn't mean less loved, only less of a priority.

Then there can be the demotion from devoted to dutiful attention, when the weekly
phone calls or occasional visits or remembering special occasions from an
independent adult child sometimes feel more obligatory than heartfelt. But as one
mother put it: "If dutiful is the best I can get, then I'll take it. Lesser caring is caring
none-the-less."
Parental Support of Young Adults

In addition to ​love, affection, and contact​, parents also often remain a source of
tangible and nontangible support ​for young adults in the twenty-fi rst century.
Children were a source of labor and economic gain in agrarian societies but have
become ​a target of parental investment of labor and material resources in the
twenty-first century.

Relationships between parents and young adults are distinct from other ties.
According to the ​developmental stake hypothesis, parents have a unique
investment in their children as their legacy​ (Giarrusso, Silterstein, Gans &
Bengtson, 2005 ) .

Parents ​may invest in their grown children during the transition to adulthood if
they foresee support as instrumental to the child’s future success,​ even in the
absence of present crisis. Indeed, our prior research on adults aged 18–40 found that
parents provided more support to offspring they deemed high-achieving as well as
offspring in need (Fingerman, Miller et al., 2009 ) .

CONSEQUENCES OF PARENTAL SUPPORT:

Although ​classic family systems theories suggest​ that ​parents should not be overly
involved or “enmeshed” in their children’s lives, parental involvement is not
always indicative of family problems in adulthood​ (Fingerman & Bermann, 2000 )
. Rather, under some circumstances, ​parental involvement may be beneficial​, while
in others it may be detrimental. Moreover, parents and offspring themselves may view
the support as appropriate and valuable.

HELICOPTER PARENTING:

in 1990, child development researchers​Foster Cline​ and ​Jim Fay​ coined the term
"helicopter parent" to refer to a parent who hovers over a child in a way that runs
counter to the parent's responsibility to raise a child to independence.

The overall portrait of relationships between adults and their parents shows that an
image of a ​helicopter parent hovering and diminishing their young adults’ transition
may be a ​gross oversimplification​. Comparative data across cohorts suggest ​today’s
parents are more involved with young adult offspring than parents in the past,
but they are involved in ways that may foster (rather than hinder) a successful
transition into adulthood.
II)

Peer Relations and Friendships are equally important for w​ith increased age,
relationships outside the family become essential. Having friends can be considered
essential to young people’s health and development.

Peer networks are central to the ways in which young people’s social horizons are
opened up, exposing them to alternative views, values and expectations.

Friendship groups are also central to identity​, impact on behaviour, provide crucial
psychological support and represent a means through which people express their
personality (Pahl, 2000).
Yet young people’s friendship networks and patterns of sociability have changed
quite significantly as a result of a process of individualization and new frameworks
that shape youth transitions. In times of rapid social and economic change, peer
groups can help individuals understand and come to terms with new situations and
can offer a contemporary alternative to the out-dated, and perhaps irrelevant,
perspectives of the family. Where patterns of educational participation or labour
market experiences have changed significantly, for example, parents may have had
little exposure to the structures that their offspring will be forced to negotiate and, as
a result, may provide poor advice.
It is in peer groups that young people begin to come to terms with what Markus and
Nurius (1986) have described as their ‘possible selves’, anticipating future mobility
and lifestyles in modern social contexts.

In their ​Inventing Adulthoods ​study, Henderson and colleagues (2007) illustrate the
ways in which young people’s relationships with those outside the family, especially
boyfriends and girlfriends, can influence decisions about transitional pathways. They
also highlight the ways in which such relationships can both constrain or facilitate
mobility. Although somewhat dated, Willis’ (1977) study of working class males
provides insights into processes of anticipatory socialization within peer groups that
are central to understanding the reproduction of inequalities, while Walkerdine and
colleagues (2001) highlight similar processes within female peer groups.

In the context of mobility, Henderson and colleagues (2007) show how young
people may revise their peer networks as they make transitions, letting some
relationships ​wither and establishing new ones in line with their changing statuses.

While new technologies may facilitate communication within peer groups and
between lovers, Woodman (2010) has argued that changes in education and the labour
market can make it more difficult to create the space for regular, direct contact
between peers.
Increasing complexity of life:
For Woodman, the need to mix work and study and the unpredictability of
employment schedules in the flexible economy means that ​making time for friends
becomes increasingly difficult. As Woodman argues, ‘the individualised
timetables that have emerged with contemporary further education and
casualised shift-based work, and their combination, make finding ongoing
periods of shared time with the same group of people, at university or at work or
with existing friends from secondary school, more challenging​’ (2010: 135). It is
not simply that young people are increasingly busy managing complex lives, but
that their ‘timetables and rhythms are multiple and are not likely to closely
synchronise with those of others’ (2010: 155).

There is evidence that some young people, often ​struggling with the complexities of
modern life, are withdrawing from social life. While acute social withdrawal among
young people certainly exists in Western societies, it is a process that appears to be
most acute in developed parts of Asia such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong
Kong (regions that have witnessed an extremely rapid pace of change). In Japan
young people who completely withdraw from social life for extended periods of time
and have no contact with anyone outside of their family are referred to as ​hikikomori​:
some estimate that they number more than a million (Saito, 1998; Zielenziger, 2006),
although others regard this as an exaggeration and put the figure at closer to 200,000
(Inui, 2007). While the figures are disputed, it is generally agreed that numbers have
risen since the mid-1990s, ​corresponding to a period of rapid change in the Japanese
labour market and in transitions to employment​. Although interpretations vary,1 it has
been argued that ​in a rigid system that offers few second chances, it important for
young people to ‘get it right’ first time around: the pressures on young people who
fail, or who perceive themselves to be at risk of failure, are intense​. In Western
countries young people are often able to take time out to reflect and change direction,
while in some developed ​Asian countries no such flexibility exists​. The ​hikikomori
phenomenon highlights the ​extent to which patterns of sociability among young
people and their connections to peer networks can be profoundly affected by
processes of change in contemporary societies.
The term ​hikikomori ​is derived from the Japanese term for social withdrawal.
Academic definitions vary somewhat, but Saito, who is considered to be one of the
most authoritative practitioners, refers to ​hikikomori a​ s people who have spent six
months or more in an asocial state, being outside of education and employment and
having no intimate relationships with anyone outside of the immediate family (Saito,
1998). ​There has been a tendency to think of ​hikikomori ​as confined to their homes,
although some do go out on a regular basis. In fact while many spend most of their
time in bed or lying on the sofa, some will go outside late at night family, friends and
living arrangements or in the early hours of the morning when they expect not to
encounter ex-classmates or neighbours. Others will attempt to hide their condition
by leaving the house daily, as if going to school or work, but spending their time
aimlessly walking the streets or riding trains.
Another common misunderstanding is that while withdrawn in a conventional sense,
hikikomori ​engage in modern forms of communication involving extensive interaction
over the internet. Saito disputes this and argues that less than 10 per cent spend large
amounts of time on the internet (Furlong, 2008).

The protraction of youth and young adulthood and its experiences within
a range of contexts opens the door for relationships with a variety of people and the
opportunity to experiment with a range of different people.
In practice, young people tend to develop relationships with people who share a
common socio-economic and ethnic background,​ who hold similar
values and beliefs and are educated to a similar level (Michael ​et al.​ , 1995).
This happens partly because the institutional contexts in which we meet
potential partners are stratified, but also because those who share characteristics
provide validation for personal values and beliefs and therefore
make us feel good about ourselves (Arnett, 2004). As Arnett puts it, ‘the
more similar your love partner is to you, the more likely you are to reaffirm
each other, and the less likely you are to have conflicts that spring from having
different views and preferences’ (2004: 79). So while new technologies
can open a window on new worlds, communications may be restricted in
ways that reinforce divisions and people may seek partners who share their
own outlook and priorities: Facebook friends, for example, tend to consist
of people already known in everyday life (West ​et al​., 2009), while internet dating
sites may be selected to make contact with people who share
interests (e.g. dating sites for professionals, for people of Asian origin or
for those who hold specific religious beliefs).

Peers become preferable as people to spend time with and receive comfort from
(Noller, Feeney, & Petersen, 2001). One view of this change of relationships is that
peer groups and friendships provide ​important "way stations" during the separation
process from parents​ (Goossens & Marcoen, 1999). It seems possible, however, that
parents also perform a critical function as a "secure base" from which to explore peer
relationships and different roles and identities. The secure base allows a child to
explore this external world and return to safety if the need arises (Noller et al., 2001).
Many adolescents identify and value the importance of maintaining positive,
respectful and loving relationships with parents, a closeness which can override the
effects of poor peer relationships (Noller & Patton, 1990).

Developing positive peer relationships and friendships is crucial in helping youth deal
with developmental tasks such as forming identity, developing social skills and
self-esteem, and establishing autonomy. ​The HBSC study (2009) shows that having
high-quality peer relationships serves as a protective factor, with positive effects on
adolescent health including fewer psychological complaints​. Adolescents who
participate in social networks are found to have better perceived health and sense of
well-being and take part in more healthy behaviours. Peers are therefore valuable
social contacts who contribute to young people’s health and well-being, but can also
be negative influences in relation to risk behaviours such as smoking and drinking:
this is a complex area.

By comparison to family, scholars around the world often take a more ambivalent
posture toward the role of peers in adolescents’ preparation for adulthood. ​Peers do
offer valuable resources: companionship, emotional support, and an arena in
which to try out and learn important social skills​.

But peers are also implicated in ​promoting consumerism, negative attitudes

toward school, and life-compromising behaviors such as drug use, violence, and
other delinquent activity. The ​societies ​may display dramatic variability in their
response to this ambivalence, from ​rigid restrictions to active promotion of
interactions with peers.

Rural India and the Arab states, in particular, exemplify a restrictive response.
According to Booth, opportunities for peer interaction (outside of kin relations) are
severely limited in the Arab world, especially for girls. If girls attend school, it is
usually in gender segregated institutions. ​In the same societies, opportunities for
interaction with the other sex or the development of romantic and sexual
relationships are constricted. The result is that peers make comparatively little
contribution to adolescent development (indeed, there is little research on them).

In other societies, however, peers figure prominently in adolescents’ daily lives.

Nsamenang, comments that “[t]he peer group is a ubiquitous institution in
sub-Saharan Africa.” Similar circumstances are noticeable among youth throughout
Europe and North America. In these contexts peers often subsume some
responsibilities otherwise assumed by parents. ​In extreme cases, peers become
surrogate families​. Street youth in Latin America rely upon networks of peers to help
negotiate survival in urban settings. A common observation across this spectrum of
societies is that the role of peers is expanding. In societies where peer interaction has
been limited, the authors report that adolescents are having more peer interaction
during school, going to and from school, and in shared leisure activities, with the
clearest trends in the middle class. Adolescents are sharing interests with friends and
relying more on friends for advice and support.

Establishing peer friendships is a critical developmental task for young people

and may have a long-term effect on their social adjustment​. Friends provide a
unique social context for the ​acquisition of essential social competencies​, afford
different kinds of social support and help young people face new situations and
stressful life experiences.

Adolescents’ general peer relations comprises of ​peer crowd affiliations and peer
victimization.

Adolescent Peer Crowds

Acceptance by peers is an important part of adolescent self-identity​ and has a
strong influence on psychological adjustment (Harter, 1997).

Many adolescents affiliate with a peer crowd.

Peer crowds are “reputation-based collectives of similarly stereotyped
individuals who may or may not spend much time together​”​ ​(Brown, 1990, p.
177).

Specifically, peer crowds include a high-status, image-oriented crowd (Populars or

Hot Shots); an athletically oriented crowd (Jocks or ​Athletes​); an academically
oriented crowd (​Brains​); a crowd that rebels against social norms (Alternatives or
Nonconformists​); a deviant, rule-breaking crowd (​Burnouts, Dirts, or Druggies​);
and a crowd of misfits who keep to themselves (​Loners or Nobodies​).​

BENEFITS OF PEER CROWD AFFILIATION:

1) social support,
2) friendship development,
3) facilitation of social interactions as key benefits of peer crowd affiliation
(Brown, Eicher, & Petrie, 1986).
4) STATUS and POWER is gained through it.
Moreover, because peer crowd affiliation may be “reputation based” (i.e., adolescents
are often labeled by their peers based on perceived characteristics), ​crowd affiliations
also reflect adolescents’ acceptance, as well as their power, within the larger peer
system​ (Brown, 1990).

Jocks and Populars represent high-status crowds, whereas Burnouts and Alternatives
typically reflect low-status crowds (La Greca, Prinstein, & Fetter, 2001; Prinstein &
La Greca, 1998).

High status groups is related to higher self esteem, low status groups is related to
loneliness and depression.

Peer crowds are distinct from adolescents’​ ​smaller peer networks (or cliques)
and close friendships (La Greca & Prinstein, 1999),​ ​most adolescents have one or
more close friends who affiliate with the same peer crowd (La Greca et al., 2001;
Urberg et al., 1995)

Peer Victimization

Peer victimization and aversive experiences with peers (e.g., exclusion, aggression)
focuses on negative aspects of the larger peer system.

Studies with adolescents have consistently linked ​peer victimization with internal
distress,​ including feelings of ​depression, social anxiety and loneliness​ (e.g., Crick
& Bigbee, 1998; Prinstein, Boergers, & Vernberg, 2001; Vernberg, 1990).

Although initial research focused on ​overt peer victimization​, such as physical

violence and threats​, finding that boys are most often the aggressors and the victims
(e.g., Nansel et al., 2001), recent research has expanded the focus to
include ​relational victimization​, such as rumor spreading, friendship withdrawal,
and social exclusion​ (Crick & Grotpeter, 1996; Prinstein etal., 2001; Vernberg,
Jacobs, & Hershberger, 1999).
Relational victimization is more common than overt victimization​ (Prinstein et al.,
2001)

Peer influence is a dominant psychosocial issue during adolescence, especially

during the early stages.

PEER PRESSURE:
The peer relations and friendships often culminate into an ​in-built need to be
accepted by the fellow members of the peer group. Conformity to peer groups plays a
prominent role in the lives of many young people, and ​peer pressure i​ s an important
mechanism for transmitting group norms and maintaining loyalties among group
members. ​Peer pressure​ (or ​social pressure​) is the ​direct​ influence on people by
peers, or an individual who ​gets encouraged to follow their peers by changing
their ​attitudes​, ​values​, or ​behaviors​ to ​conform​ to those of the influencing group
or individual. P​eer pressure varies in strength and direction that is, peer
pressure can be both positive and negative as well as strong or weak.
Positive Peer Pressure ​is ​w​hen one is pushed into something positive that the person
originally did not have the courage to do​, or, when the peer group of friends
convinces a person not to do something because it is bad or harmful. Such type of
peer pressure can helps in ​overcoming fear, providing motivation and confidence,
encouraging socialization ​and promoting positive development. On the other hand

Negative Peer Pressure ​involves being talked into something bad that a person did
not want to do. This can lead to getting in trouble with the law, causing low-self
esteem, and having adverse effects on health and wellbeing. This often involves being
pressurized to use drugs, alcohol, smoking, bullying, fighting.

M​ale adolescents who are late to mature and ​experience bullying from mature
peers. Similarly, females who are early maturers and have gone through significant
physical changes are concerned about their appearance. This often results in poor
self-esteem and lack of self confidence in them. ​Female adolescents can also
develop eating disorders​ as a consequence.

Studies of peer pressure have tended to focus on ​pressure to engage in deviant

behavior, and perhaps their findings are not valid for teens in other situations. A
study of over 3,600 ethnically diverse males and females from ages 14 to 18 found
that, contrary to previous findings, ​peer pressure steadily increased over this age
group, then ​declined after age 18​. The researchers concluded that although teens
begin to develop autonomy from p​ arents at around age 14, they need the next four
years to consolidate their own beliefs and learn to stand up to the influence of their
peers. During that time they depend on their peers for social life and are not ready to
challenge them (Steinberg and Monahan, 2007).

This changes the typical viewpoint ​of resistance to peer pressure​. The study also
found that ​girls were more likely than boys to stand up to peers and that teenage
girls are more autonomous than boys. In addition, African American teens reported
greater ​resistance to the influence of their peers than did teens from other ethnic
groups.

Best Friendships or close Friendships act as BUFFER

Close friendships NEEDED FOR the development of interpersonal ​intimacy,

empathy, and perspective-taking skills​, and a high-quality friendship might lessen
the harmful effects of low peer acceptance (Buhrmester, 1990; Sullivan, 1953).

Primary source of social support:

Close friendships may serve a ​protective mental health function​ associated

with positive self-esteem and better psychosocial adjustment (e.g., Buhrmester, 1990;
Compas, Slavin, Wagner, & Vannatta, 1986).

Negative features of close friendships are conflict, pressure, and

exclusion​ (Furman & Buhrmester, 1985) leads to problems with self-esteem and
college/school adjustment (Berndt & Keefe, 1995).
Similarly, ​negative interactions within best friendships​ may contribute to feelings
of ​social anxiety​, as conflict with or exclusion from a best friend may heighten
feelings of discomfort or distress around peers and raise concerns about negative peer
evaluations.

Friendships may increase youth's motivation to engage in physical activity ​and

promote greater physical activity in non-overweight and overweight youth (2008
study by Salvy et all)

Friendship is associated with positive development, promoting higher levels of

happiness, self-esteem and school adjustment. Young people with few friends
may ​lack opportunities to learn social skills​, face difficulties relating to others, have
low perceptions of self-worth and life satisfaction, and experience more frequent
depressed mood. ​Young people with few friends are also more likely to become
victims of bullying​. It has also been found that young people who participate in
activities youth clubs, have been found to have more positive perceptions of their
health and well-being and engage in more healthy behaviours.
However, in a study of 16–18 year-olds in post-secondary education, Brooks (2002)
showed that young people used a variety of strategies to maintain the stability of
friendship networks, even when they were aware of growing inequalities between
themselves and their peers: strategies included avoiding discussions about career
choices and pathways with certain friends and being very selective in which friends
they involved in decisions relating to the future.

Relationships with friends also fulfil a range of psychological needs.

Cotterell (2007), for example, identifies six key functions:

• providing a network to facilitate the enjoyment of shared activities;
• providing loyalty and availability;
• providing assistance in times of need;
• providing reassurance and sensitivity to feelings;
• providing confidence and self-validation;
• providing comfort sustaining optimism in challenging circumstances.

Cotterell recognizes that young people are part of a variety of social networks, from
tight, closely bound cliques to fluid clusters, and that not all of them meet each of the
needs he identifies. He is also aware of social class and ethnic differences in networks
and of differences between males and females. As Cotterell argues​, ‘females engage
in greater disclosure of their innermost thoughts and feelings than males’ (2007:
82).
On the other hand, ​boys, even when discussing relationships, tend to adopt a more
neutral stance. ​The relatively poor social and ethnic mix that characterizes many
peer networks, and especially close friendships within them, is partly explained by
opportunity structures and institutional constraints on patterns of social interaction.
Social-psychological factors also play an important part in that ‘reciprocal trust,
social support and social connectedness’ (Reynolds, 2007: 385) that are often
provided most effectively by those who share a similar social background.

Young Caribbeans living in Britain, for example, tend to have best friends who share
their ethnic background: in turn these ethnically homogeneous friendship networks
help them to negotiate ethnic identities and can ‘act as a protective buffer and support
mechanism in the face of social exclusion and racial discrimination’ (2007: 385).

Recent changes have been seen to create the conditions for broader and more
close-knit friendships, while others ​argue that the demands made on young
people’s schedules are so extensive and unpredictable that friendships suffer
(Woodman, 2010).

For Beck and Beck-Gernsheim (1995) the ​process of individualization strengthens

primary relationships which are regarded as an essential source of stability in an
uncertain world​.
New technologies make it much easier for young people to keep in regular
contact ​with each other, using mobile phones and social networking. Technology can
be regarded as a tool of liberation though which young people can keep in contact or
develop relationships with people disapproved of by their parents, circumventing
restrictions placed on face-to-face contact and reducing the chances of being
eavesdropped during calls to landlines (Henderson ​et al​., 2007).
As a downside, they can also extend the parental reach to beyond the domestic
sphere and lead to new forms of control through ​a phenomena referred to as
‘iParenting’ (Hofer and Moore, 2010), involving constant phone calls and text
messages.
Young people develop various strategies to prevent what they may regard as intrusive
communication and have clear views on what is appropriate. ​In a study of Facebook
‘friends’, for example, young people were clear that parents were unwelcome as
‘friends’and regarded parental access to public comments on the social
networking site as a breach of privacy (West ​et al​., 2009).

PEER AND FRIENDSHIPS IN EARLY ADULTHOOD

Intimate dyadic friendships become increasingly important during adolescence

(​Berndt, 1982​), and they remain so in early adulthood (​Reis, Lin, Bennett, & Nezlek,
1993​).

Latent growth modeling revealed that ​trajectories characterized by high levels of

childhood peer social preference/acceptance were ​related to trajectories characterized
by high levels of ​early adulthood friendship quality​. Early adolescent personality
characterized by ​extraversion and conscientiousness predicted higher friendship
quality at age 19, and conscientiousness predicted change in friendship quality
from age 19 to 23​ (Lansford et. al 2014)

Friendships are central to the lives of emerging adults​, especially those who are
single and not in a serious romantic relationship; and (e) f​ riends help people to
figure themselves out and influence their behavior, potentially for both good and
bad.
Friends can be a proxy family for young people, ​offering invaluable advice,
support, and companionship

Friends ​become less important once they’ve figured out the big questions of life and
“settle down” in marriage, parenthood, and careers.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

B) ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS

Romantic relationships ​are defined as mutually acknowledged ongoing voluntary

interactions, commonly marked by expressions of affection and perhaps current or
anticipated sexual behavior.
These are related to ​Romantic experiences ​which are defined as ​varied behavioral,
cognitive, and emotional phenomena with romantic content; may or may not include
direct experiences with a romantic partner. ​This category includes fantasies and
one-sided attractions (“crushes”), as well as interactions with potential romantic
partners and brief nonromantic sexual encounters (e.g., “hooking up,” or casual
involvement in activities usually thought to take place with romantic partners, from
“making out” to intercourse) (B. Brown et al. 1999, Furman & Collins 2008, Manning
et al. 2006).

While young people have been developing friendships since early childhood, in their
teenage years they often establish, or attempt to establish, more intimate relationships
with others. These may be heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual relationships, and
they may be fleeting, experimental or
long term. The widespread acceptance of teenage sexuality in Westernized
societies and the de-coupling of sex and marriage mean that experimentation is
common and multiple partnerships are the norm. As Henderson and
colleagues suggest, ‘relationships no longer follow a linear trajectory on a
continuum starting with being single, meeting someone significant, developing a
relationship, getting engaged and finally getting married and having
children’ (2007: 149). Commitment does not always suit young people, nor
is it necessarily expected, especially in the early stages of a relationship and
where future pathways are unclear.
Moreover, even within long-term committed relationships, a variety of arrangements
exist: from maintaining separate homes (referred to as living apart together –
sometimes referred to as LATs), to co-habitation and marriage.

With respect to relationships, ​Arnett (2004) argues that young people today expect to
have a number of lovers before settling down and that some hold the view that it is
necessary to experience several intimate relationships so as to learn what they want,
and what they don’t want, from a partnership.

With marriage delayed for most people until at least their late twenties, the late
teens and early twenties become a time for exploring their options​, falling in and
out of love with different people, and gaining
sexual experience. They clarify for themselves what kind of person they
would like to marry by having involvements with a variety of people
and learning what they don’t want in a relationship as well as what
they want most.
(Arnett, 2004: 73)

Romantic Relationships in adolescence

Romantic relationships emerge for the first time in adolescence​. ​Dating typically
begins around 14 to 15 years of age​, initially as an extension of involvement in
mixed-gender peer groups (Connolly, Craig, Goldberg, & Pepler, 1999; Feiring,
1996).

An accumulating body of research proves adolescent dating relationships are

NOT transitory and unimportant​ (Collins, 2003; Davila, Steinberg, Kachadourian,
Cobb, & Fincham, 2004).

Adolescent romantic relationships are similar to close friendships in that both

involve support, intimacy, and companionship (Laursen, 1996).

Distinctions also exist, as adolescents name ​passion, commitment, and sexual

intimacy as characteristics specific only to romantic relationships ​(Connolly et
al., 1999).

By late adolescence, adolescents report greater closeness with romantic partners

than with best friends, parents, and siblings (Laursen, 1996).

CONSEQUENCES OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ROMANTIC

RELATIONSHIPS:

Although little research has examined this issue, a positive, romantic relationship
during adolescence might provide an important source of support and contribute in
positive ways to adolescents’ mental health.

In contrast, negative experiences could contribute to internal distress. It is likely that

negative interactions with a romantic partner would be distressing
to adolescents and elicit feelings of depression or social anxiety.

High-quality, satisfying romantic relationships are linked to healthy

development during adolescence and can set the stage for successful
relationships into adulthood ​(Meier, A., & Allen, G. (2009) . However, troubled or
conflicted relationships are linked to negative psychological and physical
outcomes, including increased engagement in risky sexual behaviors and reduced
contraceptive use​ (Manning, W., Flanigan, C., Giordano, P., & Longmore, M. A.
2009; Manlove, J., Wildsmith, E., Welti, K., Scott, M. E., & Ikramullah, E.; 2012).

Once regarded as trivial, transitory, or merely artifacts of social dysfunction,

adolescent romantic relationships increasingly are regarded as potentially
significant relational factors in individual development and well-being (Collins
2003, Furman ​&Collins 2008, Furman & Shaffer 2003). Romantic relationships are
more common during adolescence than has usually been assumed. More than half of
U.S. adolescents report having had a special romantic relationship in the past 18
months (Carver et al. 2003).

Some statistics show that ​a​bout one in three 13-year-olds has had a romantic
relationship, and the number naturally increases with age​: By age 17, most youth
have had some experience with romantic relationships. Teens typically have more
than one such relationship over the course of their adolescence, most often four. Other
researches have shown that ​36% of 13-year-olds, 53% of 15-year-olds, and 70% of
17-year-olds report having had a “special” romantic relationship in the previous
18 months. By middle adolescence, most individuals have been involved in at
least one romantic relationship (Carver et al. 2003).

High school students commonly report more frequent interactions with romantic
partners than with parents, siblings, or friends ​(Laursen & Williams 1997). The
percentage of adolescents who report having a romantic relationship increases during
the teenage years (Carver et al. 2003).

Romantic relationships have much to teach adolescents about communication,

emotion, empathy, identity, and (for some couples) sex. While these lessons can
often provide a valuable ​foundation for long-term relationships in adulthood​, they
are also important ​contributors to growth, resilience, and happiness in the teen
years. In adolescence, having a girlfriend or boyfriend can boost one's confidence.
When relationships are characterized by intimacy and good communication, youth are
happier with themselves. Young people value the support, trust, and closeness they
experience in romantic relationships. ​In fact, teens have more conflicts with their
parents and peers than with romantic partners​, though conflict within romantic
relationships increases with age. Spending time together in activities that both
partners enjoy is very important to young couples. When this dimension of intimacy is
missing, relationships often come to an end.

Of course, ​relationships can have down sides too​. Entering the world of
relationships almost inevitably leads to the ​emotionally vulnerable experience of
breaking up. For youth who are more sensitive to rejection, breaking up can trigger a
dive into self-doubt and despair. Low-quality relationships that are characterized by a
lack of trust, constant conflict, and ​dating violence​ can also leave young people prey
to depression and anxiety.

Collins (2003) has delineated five features of romantic relationships that have
bearing on the significance of romantic relationships for individual functioning and
further development:
1) Romantic involvement or activity refers to whether or not a person dates, when
s/he began dating, the duration of the relationship, and the frequency and consistency
of dating and relationships.

2) Partner identity is concerned with the characteristics of the person with whom an
adolescent has a romantic experience (e.g., dating) relationship
3) Content ​refers to what the members of the dyad do and do not do together.

4) ​Relationship quality pertains to the relative degree of positive, supportive,

beneficent experiences as compared to the negative, potentially detrimental ones.

5) Cognitive and emotional processes include perceptions, attributions, and

representations of oneself, the partner, and the relationship, as well as the emotions
and moods elicited in romantic encounters and affective statements associated with
involvement in and the dissolution of relationships (e.g., depressive symptoms).

WHY DO ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS EXIST AND EVEN NECESSARY?

There are some ​theories which explain why romantic relationships in youth
especially teenagers are so prevalent and even necessary. Three main perspectives are:

● Biosocial perspectives. ​Biosocial perspectives emanate largely from

evolutionary psychology and research on neuroendocrine processes. A common
premise is that ​changes in social relationships that enhance reproductive
fitness should co-occur with attaining reproductive capability (Weisfeld
1999).. Research findings from studies of both human and nonhuman adolescents
suggest that reproductive maturation may be inhibited by physical closeness to
parents and accelerated by distance from them, which would minimize inbreeding
and thereby increase reproductive fitness. The timing of puberty is associated
with romantic and sexual behavior (e.g., Dornbusch et al. 1981, Ellis 2004).

● Ecological perspectives. ​Ecological perspectives emphasize the ​social and

cultural contexts that encourage or constrain close relationships and endow
them with meaning and significance​. In this view, events that occur in other
settings and relationships inevitably affect adolescent romantic relationships,
which in turn can impinge on those settings. Among the potentially influential
ecological features are historical, social, economic, political, geographical,
cultural, and institutional and community conditions and characteristics that
shape proximal experiences (Larson & Wilson 2004).

HOW HISTORY AND CULTURE HAS SHAPED ROMANTIC

RELATIONSHIPS? Laila-Majnu, Heer-Ranjha, Romeo-Juliet…

● Interpersonal perspectives. ​Interpersonal perspectives emphasize the nature and

processes of changes in adolescents’ social relationships and the contribution of
these changes to individual development. ​In interdependence models, joint
patterns of actions, cognitions, and emotions between two individuals are the
primary locus of interpersonal influences ​(Hinde 1997, Kelley et al. 2002,
Laursen & Bukowski 1997). During adolescence, interdependencies in family
relationships continue, though often in different forms than in earlier life, and
interdependencies with friends and romantic partners become more
apparent (Collins 2003). Research inspired by interdependence views typically
focuses on the aspects of couple interactions that may favor stability or change in
romantic relationships. A particularly influential interdependence view,
 attachment theory, holds that a history of sensitive, responsive interactions and
strong emotional bonds with caregivers in childhood facilitates adaptation to the
transitions of adolescence (Allen & Land 1999, Collins & Sroufe 1999).

These theories address different levels of analysis and, thus, are complementary rather
than mutually exclusive or incompatible. Despite the apparent relevance of biosocial,
ecological, and interdependence formulations, however, theories in this area have not
developed to the point of widespread influence over research in the area.

VARYING CONTEXTS OF ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS:

Romantic relationships occur in multiple contexts (PEERS, ONLINE

DATING/CHATROOMS/ EXTENDED FAMILY), representing varied levels of
analysis, and ​these contexts may shape and constrain the features of relationships​,
from the ​timing and forms of involvement to partner choice and permissible
activities (Seiffge-Krenke 2006). Contexts like friendships, relationships with parents
and even culture affect romatic relationships.

The assumption that the ​peer social system ​is the staging ground for romantic
relationships during adolescence pervades research on the topic. ​Having a large
number of other-gender friends and being liked by many of one’s peers in
adolescence is correlated with current and future dating patterns (Connolly et al.
2000, Kuttler & LaGreca 2004). ​General social competence with peers is
associated with romantic relationship activity in early and middle adolescence
(Furman et al. 2008).

Moreover, ​for early adolescents, having a boyfriend or girlfriend confers social

status and facilitates “fitting in.” ​The potential role of friendship in the development
of romantic relationships is both fundamental and multifaceted. ​Relationships with
friends function both as prototypes of interactions compatible with romantic
relationships and as testing grounds for experiencing and managing emotions in the
context of voluntary close relationships (Connolly et al. 2004).
Friends also serve as models and sources of social support for initiating and
pursuing romantic relationships and also for weathering periods of difficulty in
them, thus potentially contributing to variations in the qualities of later romantic
relationships (Connolly & Goldberg 1999). Cognitive representations of friendships
and the perceived qualities of interactions within them are associated significantly
with interactions in romantic relationships (Furman & Shomaker 2008, Furman et al.
2002).
Relatively little is known about the links between sexual minorities’ friendships
and romantic relationships​. Number of friends appears to be unrelated to romantic
relationship involvement, although those who have had more romantic relationships
report more worries about losing friends (Diamond & Lucas 2004).

Relationships with Parents also affect romantic relationships:

- Nurturant-involved parenting in adolescence is predictive of warmth, support,

and low hostility toward romantic partners in early adulthood.
 - The degree of flexible control, cohesion, and respect for privacy experienced
in families is related positively to intimacy in late-adolescent romantic
relationships, with especially strong links emerging for women.

- Parent-adolescent conflict resolution is also associated with later conflict

resolution with romantic partners (Conger et al. 2000, Cui & Conger 2008,
Donnellan et al. 2005, Feldman et al. 1998).

- In contrast, unskilled parenting and aversive family communications are

associated with later aggression toward romantic partners, and the degree of
negative emotionality in parent-adolescent dyads is correlated with negative
emotionality and poor quality interactions with romantic partners in early
adulthood (Conger et al. 2000, K. Kim et al. 2001). This association appears to
be mediated by negative affect and ineffective monitoring and discipline in
parent-adolescent relationships (Conger et al. 2000).

Interactions with parents in earlier periods of development also have been implicated
in the stability and quality of early-adult romantic relationships (Simpson et al. 2007).
Parent-child relationships appear to account for more variance in
romantic-relationship behavior than either sibling relationships or the models
provided by parents’ own marriages. Contrary to common speculation, the majority
of findings from studies that include assessment of sibling relationships have revealed
no significant associations with the features of interactions with romantic partners
(Conger et al. 2000). Similarly, ​parental conflict and marital disharmony appear
to affect the romantic relationships of offspring indirectly, through the
deleterious effects of marital stressors on nurturant, involved parenting (Conger
et al. 2000, Cui & Conger 2008). One avenue through which marital stress and
parental separation affect adolescents’ romantic lives is through increased risk
for early romantic involvement, which in turn is associated with poor individual
adjustment (Furman & Collins 2008). Not surprisingly, the characteristics of
relationships with parents and with peers become more extensively interrelated with
features of romantic relationships during late adolescence and early adulthood (Meeus
et al. 2007). Perhaps the growing importance of romantic relationships calls attention
to the commonalities across types of relationships. It is equally likely, however, that
the correlations among early adults’ relationships reflect their common associations
with parents and with peers prior to adolescence (Collins & Van Dulmen 2006,
Waters&Cummings 2000). The processes that account for these developmentally
significant relations among differing relationships are a promising area for further
study.

Culture ​and sexual orientation have an impact on the timing and number of
relationships. For example, ​Asian American teens tend to enter romantic
relationships later than other teens; generally speaking, ​dating in adolescence is
less accepted in Asian cultures. ​For many adolescents, community and cultural
norms determine the field of availability, or standards for who is acceptable as a
romantic target. Whether relationships conform to a culturally or socially prescribed
field of availability affects both the individual and the relationship in multiple ways
(e.g., Coates 1999). ​Cultural norms also affect the activities that are expected and
approved within dating relationships (Feldman et al. 1999, Seiffge- Krenke 2006,
Silbereisen & Schwarz 1998). For example, Asian American adolescents are less
likely to have had a romantic relationship in the past 18 months than are adolescents
in African American, Hispanic, Native American, and European American groups
(Carver et al. 2003). Latina early-adolescent girls described being more closely
supervised in contexts in which they interacted with males than African American
early-adolescent girls report. Both Latina and African American early-adolescent girls
kept their early boyfriends a secret from their family members, especially their
mothers. They explained that they kept these relationships secret because they feared
being forced to end the relationship (O’Sullivan & Meyer-Bahlburg 2003).

It is interesting to note that now, a common observation across this spectrum of

societies is that the ​role of peers​ is ​expanding adolescents’ involvement in romantic
relationships and in premarital sexual activity are increasing, especially as age of
marriage comes later.

Rising rates of ​premarital intercourse appear to be more common among youth

in higher social classes and urban areas​, where parents wield less authority or
cannot supervise youth as closely. DAD MUMMY HAIN NAHI GHAR PAR,
PARTY KARENGE JAM KE…

Santa Maria (Chapter 6) links increased rates of sexual activity among South Asian
youth to decreased parental supervision resulting from mothers’ employment and
young people’s migration to the city for employment. Under these circumstances,
peers emerge as a more powerful force in young people’s lives as they are the
preferred source of sexual information and the context for meeting sexual partners.

Where societal norms discourage sexual activity, it remains a furtive activity, often
engaged in without contraceptives. As a result, it ​is becoming a major source of the
proliferation or spread of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV
infection.

If we take examples of India we see similar reports. Bhugra, Mehra, Silva and
Bhatinde (2007) ​found that attitudes to sex and variant sexual practices remain
broadly traditional and conservative and there remains a remarkable gender
difference in the attitudes. Most young respondents were against premarital sex
but still indulged in it. Whereas, Hindin and Hindin, (2009) found that despite
restrictive social norms, there is increasing evidence that ​youth in India engage in
premarital romantic and sexual partnerships. However, information on how they
initiate and build these relationships is scarce, even though it is vital for addressing
the needs of young people.

Attitudes toward and behavior within romantic partnerships were examined using data
collected in 2004 from ​unmarried youth (583 males and 475 females, aged 15-19)
living in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods in ​Delhi, India​. Associations
between specific attitudes or behaviors and age, gender and sexual experience were
determined using Fishers exact tests​. Sixty-two percent of males and 53% of
females reported that someone of the opposite sex had expressed an interest in
them; 86% of males and 63% of females reported feeling good about it​. In
addition, ​67% of males and 47% of females reported that they liked someone
from the opposite sex. Compared with females, males were more likely to seek
information about the person they were interested in (76% vs. 61 %), and to
engage in heterosexual premarital sex (32% vs. 6%). Females were less likely
than males to report that it is okay to engage in premarital sex if the male and
female love one another (14% vs. 33%). For both males and females, television
and films were the most popular source of information on issues related to sexual
health.

Another interesting study is by ​Leena Abraham (2010) which has contributed to an

understanding of sexual culture among college youth in metropolitan India. She
studied the heterosexual peer networks and partnerships among ​low-income,
unmarried, college-going youth in an Indian metropolitan city MUMBAI.
Findings derive from a study conducted in Mumbai using focus group discussions,
in-depth interviews and a survey. ​Typologies of heterosexual peer networks
identified include platonic ' bhai-behen ' ('brothersister like'), romantic 'true
love', and transitory and sexual 'time pass' relationships. The three typologies
each reinforce dominant cultural norms of heterosexuality and, importantly, define the
boundaries of sexual behaviour for unmarried youth. The category bhai-behen is
important as a boundary marker distinguishing it from the tabooed true love and time
pass friendships. ​The boundaries of these friendships are fluid and boys use this
fluidity to their advantage as they engage in multiple relationships, while girls
mainly engage in single, true love relationships.

Research on romantic relationship development has historically assumed there is a

linear progression from short-term, shallow relationships to a single, committed
relationship in early adulthood. However, that progression may have been profoundly
altered by recent sociohistorical shifts.

C) INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS

MEANING: deal with ​the interaction between more than two generations​: b/w
parent-child, grand-parent-grand children; or any old person – young person.
The notion of a ​generation gap ​has been widely popularized since the 1970s,
implying ​misunderstanding, antagonism, and separation between youth and
adults​.
DIFFERENCES IN VALUES/ATTITUDE/PERCEPTIONS B/W generations
leads to I-G CONFLICTS.

MEANING OF GENERATION:
Mannheim’s view of generation as ‘​a common location in the social and historical
process’ (Mannheim 1952: 291)​ and group young people into ​homogenous
generations labelled ‘delinquents’, ‘Baby Boomers’, ‘Generation X’, ‘Generation Y’,
and so on.

COHORTS: ​The organization of schools into grades based on age means that
students of the same age spend a considerable amount of time together—and
influence each other greatly. In both academic and extracurricular activities, schools
form little worlds of their own. ​When people are raised in different time periods,
their ​values and perceptions of the world can be quite differen​t, and this can lead
to difficulties in understanding one another​. Because of this gap in understanding
between generations, it is important to find links between younger and older
generations.

one of the main ​limitations with much of the writing on youth and ​generation is the
tendency to ​highlight the apparent ‘distinctiveness’ of young people from older
generations around​, focusing on what is unique about them and what is different
between them and older generations ​rather than considering the interconnections
between the two.
‘I’ is not a singular but is instead a plurality ​with ‘I’​ ​and ‘we’ being inextricably
linked​. As such, youth cannot solely be about an ‘individual’ or a generation of
individuals that are ‘unique’. Instead, ​generations are historically and spatially
located and ​analysis of generations provides insight into changing group
identities, behavioural standards, changing relationships, interactions,
configurations, and power balances.
INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIP IS IMPORTANT FOR
BUILDING SOCIAL CAPITAL:

GENERATIONAL SOLIDARITY is also found in I-G relations.

Meaningful relationships based on mutual understanding between intergenerational

family members are indispensable ​for social integration and cohesion​. The 2002
Madrid International Plan of Action on Aging notes that ​solidarity among
generations is fundamental to an intergenerational society that values and
demonstrates ​EQUITY AND RECIPROCITY BETWEEN GENERATIONS​.

MUTUAL SHARING:
Intergenerational relations have typically centred on ​sharing knowledge, cultural
norms, traditions as well as reciprocal care, support and exchange of resources.

However, ​current socio-economic and demographic trends challenge

youth-parent-grandparents relationships. Although still common in parts of the
world, ​extended families with intergenerational support and reliance are rapidly
declining​, especially in urban areas. Families are becoming smaller, and ​young
people are postponing marriage, having fewer children and getting divorced in
greater numb​ers.

In rural settings, ​intergenerational patterns of socialization are often disrupted as

youth migrate to cities​, missing opportunities to benefit from the knowledge and
guidance of older family members. Often, ​Growing Digital Divide separates
generations as well.

According to Erik Erikson, one of the first psychologists to describe social

development across the lifespan, the final stage of emotional development is
experienced around the age of 60 and older. During this stage, people seek to find
meaning in their lives and make sense of the lives they have lived. Developing
connections with a younger generation can help older adults feel a greater sense
of fulfillment.​ (GENERATIVITY VERSUS STAGNATION)

Dunham (Dunham, 1998) summarizes ​Mannheim’s generational theory​ as follows:

1 ​intergenerational continuity​ results from ​socialization ​into societal ​values​ by

one’s parents;

2 when fresh contact occurs, those ​values are challenged​ by generational

experiences;

3 the development of a ​generational consciousness​ results from this process; and

4 ​generational units are formed​ which become a political force for social change.

To take an ​example​ to illustrate this process, today’s teenagers are growing up in a

world that is significantly different to that experienced by their parents’ generation.
They are expected to remain in education for longer periods and come to encounter a
labour market in which opportunities have become much less clear cut, and perhaps
more precarious. They no longer expect, and in some cases do not want, a job for life
or to see their lives clearly mapped out for them with defined markers to represent
life’s milestones. As they become aware that ​their parents’ experiences cannot be
used as a road map,​ they begin to re-think core values.

Elias 1980 thinks there ​are two, parallel, long-term processes occurring​.
1) In order for young people to ​acquire appropriate adult behaviours​,
interaction with adults both at home and at work is essential.
2) Second, however, compared to more primitive societies, contemporary
societies are marked by a ​growing separation between adults, children and
young people.​ In this context ​Elias identified eight particular problems for
young people:
- ​the prolonged separation of young people from adults;
- the indirect knowledge of the adult world
-​ ​the lack of communication between adults and children;
- the social life of children in the midst of an adult world with limited communication
between the two;
- the role of fantasy elements in the social and personal life of the young vis-à-vis the
reality of adult life;
- the social role of young people is ill-defined and ambiguous;
- striving for independence through earning money constitutes a new social
dependence (on work rather than parents);
-​ ​the prolonging of social childhood beyond biological maturity

INTRAGENERATIONAL DIFFERENCES:​ Social change does not lead to the

emergence of a new generation who adapt or rebel in uniform ways, because all
generations are internally divided, or stratified.​ Some groups of young people,
who may be thought of as a generational unit, may regard some of the circumstances
they inherit as threatening (climate change, for example); they might identify radical
solutions to the situations they face (direct action to prevent airport or road
development) and may identify closely with others who share their views (‘green’
political groups, for example).

Other segments of the same generation might hold different values and support
different causes (such as political groups who identify the primary threat to well-being
as linked to immigration policies) which may be in direct opposition to those held by
other groups of young people.
ADVANTAGES OF INTER-GENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS:

In fact, linking older adults with youth can provide advantages for both groups. For
example, such relationships can:

- Provide an opportunity for both to learn new skills;

- Give the young and the older adult a sense of purpose;
- Help children to understand AGING and later accept their own aging;
- Invigorate and energize older adults;
- Reduce the isolation of older adults;
-  Help keep family stories and history alive; etc

Findings of an Indian study by Verma and Satyanarayan (2015)

EMOTIONAL AND Instrumental support​ can be important at times of crisis,

change or aging. Indeed, the transition to adulthood may be a critical time in
restructuring relationships between parents and children with important implications
for the quality of those relationships over the increased number of years parents and
children can expect to share as adults, especially significant given changes in
longevity.
Further, patterns of intergenerational support established during this transition may
affect intergenerational giving and care later in the life course, including when parents
may have greater need for help.

Services and childcare:

Parents also provide ​hidden help​ through practical assistance such as home upkeep
and childcare. In the United States, parents from high and low income families supply
similar amounts of help in terms of time – approximately 3,866 hours, or roughly two
years of full-time labor to their children during the young adult years (Schoeni and
Ross, 2005: 415).
The transition to parenthood often garners parental help. ​Grandparents provide a
great deal of care to grandchildren as their adult children work, especially in
countries that lack strong state-supported childcare and have high maternal
employment​. In Britain and the United States, grandparents play a major role as
regular or intermittent childcare providers (Brannen et al. 2004; Casper 1996).
COHABITATION:
For the most part, co-residence during young adulthood can be viewed as a way in
which ​parents support their children through young adulthood, enabling them to
experiment, explore, or simply maintain lifestyles and consumption patterns that
they could not otherwise.

Although the dependence or semi-dependence of young adults who live with their
parents is quite visible, it would be ​a mistake to think they are stagnant and not
progressing toward adult independence​, or that those who do not live at home are
fully independent. Rather, young adults can and do make important transitions while
living at home, and many who live outside of the home also receive some assistance
from their parents, albeit in more invisible forms.

STRATEGIES TO STRENGTHENING I-G RELATIONSHIP:

It is important to build and strengthen these intergenerational relationships. Some

activities that can help in that are:
- Storytelling,
- Letter writing/pen pals,
- Learning skills (Many older adults have skills or talents that would be
interesting for the youth, like fish, bake, or even take care of animals),
- Reading to each other,
- Planning/preparing a meal,
- Talking about ethnic heritage (Share ethnic customs, discuss the meaning of a
name in native language, or relate special stories passed down about culture.),
etc.
YOUTH CULTURE: gender, media, values

Culture is the shared symbolic systems, and processes of maintaining and

transforming those systems.
M. Buchmann, in ​International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences​,
2001:

Youth​ culture refers to the cultural ​practice of members​ of this age group ​by which
they express their identities and demonstrate​ their sense of belonging to a particular
group of young people.

Conceptualization of Juvenile cultural expressions can be divided into three:

1) Early theorists advocated the idea that​ ​youth​ as a social group adheres to
common values, goals, and behaviors distinct from those of the adult world
(YOUTH AS HAVING HOMOGENOUS CULTURE)​.
2) These were succeeded by models that paid greater attention to the ​internal
differentiation of ​youth culture​ (YOUTH AS HAVING HETEROGENOUS
CULTURE: SUB-CULTURES)​.
3) Other prominent approaches ​linked the structure of inequality in modern society
to juvenile cultural expressions​, thus conceiving of them in terms of
class-specific youth cultures.
From the late twentieth century, the extension of the life stage ‘youth,’ the blurring of
age boundaries between youth and adulthood, and the ​proliferation​ of youth cultures,
due to ​structural and cultural changes in late modern society​, ​have raised the
issue of what constitutes authentic and autonomous cultural expressions of youth
(as opposed to the mainstream adult cultural practice).

Different cultural expressions owing to social changes, differing circumstances:

- young people as they engaged in ​delinquency​ and ​deviance​.
- ​ outh culture​ was enabled by social changes like the extension of public
Y
schooling and the growth of ​consumer culture​, and ​during the 1960s young
people would become powerful agents of political and cultural change​.
The upheavals of the 1960s proved to be a pivotal turning point that
transformed sociological approaches to ​youth culture​. Subsequent studies have
emphasized the symbolic acts of resistance perpetrated by an increasingly
diverse range of ​subcultures​.

Lorine A. Hughes, James F. ShortJr., in ​International Encyclopedia of the Social &

Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition)​, 2015

Youth Culture
Virtually all ​youth​ are heavily influenced by the development, rapid growth, and
diffusion of ​youth culture​. Peddled by ​media advertising​, and augmented by large
social and economic forces that fail to provide meaningful roles for young people but
cater to their distinctive fads, ​appetites​, and currency, ​youth culture​ and gang culture
together underlie the excesses of consumption and violence perpetrated by gangs.
Youth​ culture developed rapidly during the 1960s, especially in the United
States. ​Young people born during the baby boom following ​World War II​ shared in
the general level of ​affluence​ in the country, thereby creating a youth market with
great economic power. Moreover, the period of education ​prior​ to entering the ​labor
market​was extended; increasing numbers of women joined the ​workforce​, further
separating mothers from youth in the home and in the neighborhood; adults worked
increasingly in large organizations away from young people; and the mass media
greatly expanded and focused their attention on the youth market (see Coleman et al.,
1974: pp. 114–119). These changes accelerated as the century wore on, expanding
their influence throughout the world.

Field researchers document the pernicious ​seductions​ of media-advertised products

among less-affluent young people, leading often to thefts and assaults. Anderson
(1999) describes the “zero-sum quality” that pervades the “code of the streets,” in the
search for respect – often associated with trivial items, such as shoes and jackets –
among young African American men in the ​ghetto​. Sullivan identifies “mutually
valorizing cultural symbols” (clothing, drugs, alcohol, and recreational ​artifacts​ and
activities, including ​graffiti​ and tattoos) that cut across racial and ethnic boundaries,
often resulting in invidious comparison, confrontation, theft, and assault (Sullivan,
1989: pp. 248–249).
Adolescence is a period of especially intense ​identity formation​, intense relationships,
and shared feelings of friendship, acceptance, and respect. Conversely, feelings of
rejection and disrespect also are especially intense and often the basis for group and
subcultural formation. Observers of youth groups everywhere note that status
differences within and between them are extremely variable and highly refined. Status
criteria within a group, or between one group and another, may be based on race
or ​ethnicity​, relative economic affluence, ​skills​ in valued activities, public appearance,
school performance or, perhaps most importantly, lifestyle differences. These bases
of ​stratification​ typically also become criteria of inclusiveness and exclusiveness,
which in turn create opportunities for both friendship and rejection.

GANG CULTURE/STREET GANGS

Next to families, schools are perhaps the most important contexts for adolescent
friendship, achievement, and recognition. Because of this, school contexts (including
the journey to and from schools) are the settings for much adolescent behavior,
including gang activities. On occasion, they also have been the setting for the most
extreme forms of violence, including ​mass killings​ by students or others alienated
from their fellows or from mainstream institutions in general. Although the specific
causes of such extreme alienation are complex, it appears that schools have been
targeted precisely because of their importance in the lives of adolescents, as symbols
of rejection by both peers and an adult world that seems far removed from adolescent
concerns. The ready availability of guns at times transforms normal adolescent
turmoil and conflict into deadly confrontation (Moore et al., 2003).

More than ever before in history, young people, targeted for

commercial ​exploitation​ and isolated from mainstream adult roles and institutions,
confront ​economic conditions​ beyond their control. Not only are economic decline,
severe unemployment, and the unavailability of ‘good jobs’ associated with the
presence of street gangs, but with their transformation into ‘economic gangs’
(including drug gangs) and with ethnic, racial, and class-related identities and
antagonisms that lead to other types of ​collective violence​ (Hagedorn, 2008; Pitts,
2000). These same forces alter both intergang relationships and relationships between
gangs and their communities.

Youth culture​ is:

- the ​way ​adolescents​ live,
- their shared ​norms​, values, and practices
- it is ​a large ​body young people with standardized ways of thinking​, feeling,
and behaving.
- Youth culture different from the culture of older generations
- NOW REFERRED TO AS YOUTH LIFESTYLES

Elements of youth culture:

a) beliefs, behaviors, styles, and interests.
b) An emphasis on clothes, popular music, sports, vocabulary, and dating
The most obvious features of youth culture revolve around various
peer-group trademarks: preferred music​, ​dance styles, body art (i.e.,
tattooing and piercing), and idols; fashionable clothes and hairstyles; and
distinctive jargon and slang.
c) Distinctive characteristics from other age groups, giving them what many
believe is a ​distinct culture of their own​.
d) Within youth culture, there are many ​distinct and constantly changing ​youth
subcultures​.
e) YOUTH SUBCULTURES: These subcultures' norms, values, behaviors, and
styles vary widely, and ​may differ from the general youth culture​.
f) Understanding what adolescents think and do is fundamental to understanding
the relationship between structure and agency, social patterns and individual
action.

EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENT YOUTH CULTURES:

SEPARATE CULTURE EXISTS VIEWPOINT: Others argue that there are

definite elements of youth society that constitute culture, and that these elements
differ from those of their parents' culture.

A wide variety of labels have been used to describe post-war generations: terms such
as ‘boomers’, generation X, 13th generation, generation Y, millennials, and the
i-generation​, to name but a few.
‘Boomers’ is a term frequently applied to the generation born in the immediate
post-war ‘baby boom’: typically 1946 to 1964​. Essentially it is a demographic
descriptor, although commentators suggest that they share certain conditions and,
therefore, have an outlook that is partly shaped by their circumstances.
In the US, for example, this generation (or at least those born before 1959), were
eligible to be drafted to serve in the Vietnam War.

The boomers also grew up in a period characterized by ​relative economic affluence

with employment conditions being fairly stable.
The first youth culture​, the ​Baby boomers​, arrived after World War II (born
between ​1946 and 1964​). Many teens had free time, extra money, and unstructured
energy. Football teams, cheerleadrs, Elvis, rock 'n roll and jukeboxes, and television
appeared (Zoba, 1999).
POST WAR SUBSIDIES, AFFLUENCE, ACTIVE, PHYSICALLY FIT, REACHED
PEAK LEVELS OF INCOME, Criticised for consumerism,
First generation to grow up on television

Generation X ​(born between ​1964 and 1980​) came at a time of SHIFTING

SOCIETAL VALUES; dominated the college culture and work environment for the
past 25 years and is often called the ​“me" generation—one that mistrusts
authority, is indifferent yet pragmatic, and has had difficulty adapting to
technological change, HIP-HOP GENERATION,

Latchkey generation: REDUCED ADULT SUPERVISION, increased divorce

rates, increased maternal participation in workforce, without much availability
of childcare options in the society
Also called the M Tv generation, slackers, cynical and disaffected
Entrepreunial tendency

Taking a very US-centric approach, Howe and Strauss (2000) refer to this generation
as the 13th generation: the 13th generation since America gained independence.
Sometimes referred to as the ‘baby bust’ generation, they represent ​the demographic
downturn that began in the early 1960s​.

‘Generation X’ though, are not simply defined in terms of a demographic trend, but
they are characterized by a set of attitudes that are shaped by the era they ​grew up in
and through rebellion against the perceived passivity of the‘boomers’​. In contrast
to the affluent lifestyles enjoyed by the ‘boomers’, generation X experienced the
recession of the 1980s and 90s and came of age during the ascendancy of the ‘new
right’ in a period shaped by the leaders such as Ronald Reagan and Margaret
Thatcher. ​Harsh economic circumstances combined with the trimming of welfare
regimes can be seen as constituting the sort of trauma identified by Edmunds
and Turner (2002) as leading to the establishment of an ‘active’ generation. ​The
cohesion of ‘generation X’ therefore has its origins in the opposition to the ​perceived
complacency of the ‘boomers’ and becomes manifest in the development of
anti-establishment views among some ‘generational units’.

The generation born between the early 1980s and 2000 are frequently referred to as
‘generation Y’, as the ‘millennials’ or the ‘igeneration’. According toHowe and
Strauss (2000), the term‘generation Y’ was coined by the journal ​Advertising Age ​and
is a term strongly rejected by members of the generation who feel that it associates
them too closely with ‘generation X’. The term ‘millennials’ is preferred by members
of this generation.

The ‘millennials’ experienced a very different upbringing to that of the previous

generation and ​grew up in more affluent circumstances​. Whereas ​‘generation X’
experienced a laid-back, laissez-faire style of parenting, the millennials were
subject to far greater control and surveillance and enjoyed a level of affluence
unknown to the previous generation (Howe and Strauss, 2000).

In contrast to the rebellious and alienated nature of ‘generation X’, the millennials are
presented as optimistic, engaged and accepting of authority.
They ​are viewed as team players who place a premium on achievement both in
the classroom and in the world of work​. Hence the increased involvement in
education has not simply been achieved through the expansion of places, through
parental expectations or through a ‘tightening bond’ between qualifications and jobs;
the millennials are presented as conformists who value learning and are committed to
‘making something of themselves’.

In the context of employment, Trinca and Fox (2004) even suggested that the
millennials are so committed to achievement​ that they sometimes regard work as
‘better than sex’.
According to Howe and Strauss, the millennials ‘have a solid chance to become
America’s next great generation, as celebrated for their collective deeds a hundred
years from now as the generation of John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Joe DiMaggio,
and Jimmy Stewart is celebrated today’ (2000: 5).

The Millennials is the name given to the group born between the e​arly 1980s and
early 2000s and expected to extend to 2010. Demographics show this as the largest
cohort in American history: about 78 to 80 million and expected to grow to 100
million. Strauss and Howe, authors of ​Millennials Rising, a​ nd others (Alch, 2000;
Lovern, 2001) describe the following ​characteristics of the Millennial generation:
● They show signs of altruistic values, such as optimism, fairness, morality,
renewed spiritual awareness, and appreciating diversity (many are from
recent immigrant families).
● They exhibit a greater sense of social responsibility about community,
politics, and service to others (as' students, they have learned the value of
teamwork).
● They advocate strongly for improving the environment, poverty issues,
and global concerns.
● They demonstrate ambition, drive, and a strong work ethic (in school
and at work).
 ● They back away from unprotected sex and teen pregnancies and return to
more conservative marriage and family values.
● They take more time for themselves and want less structured lives than
during their earlier heavily scheduled childhoods.

The gen Z:
For  Generation  Z,  as  we  have  seen,  the  main  spur  to 
consumption  is  the  search  for  truth,  in  both  a  personal  and  a 
communal  form  (Exhibit  2).  This  generation  feels  comfortable 
not  having only one way to be itself. Its search for authenticity 
generates  greater  freedom  of  expression  and  greater 
openness to understanding different kinds of people.

CULTURE CONTINUOUS AND SAME, OR DO DIFFERENT YOUTH

CULTURES EXIST?

NO SEPARATE CULTURE VIEW​: There is a debate about whether or not

youth culture exists. Some researchers argue that ​youth's values and morals are
not distinct from those of their parents​, which means that youth culture is not a
separate culture. Just because people see the presence of what seems to be a youth
culture today does not mean that this phenomenon extends to all generations of young
people. Additionally​, peer influence varies greatly between contexts and by sex,
age, and social status, making a single "youth culture" difficult, if not
impossible, to define.

UNDERSTANDING YOUTH CULTURE

I) TERROR MANAGEMENT THEORY AS PROOF OF DISCTINCT YOUTH

CULTURE
Janssen et al. (1999) have used ​the ​terror management theory​ (TMT) to argue
for the existence of youth culture.​ TMT is a social psychological as well as
evolutionary concept that hypothesizes that ​culture originates from an attempt to
cope with the knowledge of mortality​.
Society does this by adopting a worldview and developing self-esteem.
Researchers test TMT by exposing people to reminders of their mortality. TMT is
supported if ​being reminded of death causes people to cling more strongly to their
worldview. Janssen et al. tested the following hypothesis: "If youth culture serves to
help adolescents deal with problems of vulnerability and finiteness, then reminders of
mortality should lead to increased allegiance to cultural practices and beliefs of the
youth." Their results supported their hypothesis and the results of previous studies,
suggesting that youth culture is, in fact, a culture.

KNOWLEDGE OF FINITENESS – MORTALITY- VULNERABILITY

COPING WITH IT
ADHEERING TO CULTURE AND BELIEFS AND VALUES

II) DISTINCT LANGUAGE AND VOCABULARY AS EVIDENCE FOR

SEPARATE YOUTH CULTURE:
Schwartz and Merten (1967) used the language of adolescents to argue for the
presence of youth culture as distinct from the rest of society. Schwartz argued that
high school students used their vocabulary to create meanings that are distinct to
adolescents. Specifically, the adolescent status terminology (the words that
adolescents use to describe hierarchical social statuses) contains qualities and
attributes that are not present in adult status judgments. According to Schwartz, this
reflects a difference in social structures and the way that adults and teens experience
social reality. This difference indicates cultural differences between adolescents and
adults, which supports the presence of a separate youth culture.

III) SCHOOLING AS A DETERMINER OF YOUTH CULTURE

The presence of youth culture is a relatively recent historical phenomenon. There
are several dominant ​theories about the emergence of youth culture in the 20th
century. These include theories about the historical, economic, and psychological
influences on the presence of youth culture. One historical theory credits the
emergence of youth culture to the beginning ​of ​compulsory schooling​. James
Coleman (1961) argues that age segregation is the root of a separate youth
culture.​ Before compulsory schooling, many children and adolescents were
homeschooled and interacted primarily with adults. In contrast, ​modern children
associate extensively with others their own age. These interactions allow
adolescents to develop shared experiences and meanings, which are the root of
youth culture.

IV) PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE ON YOUTH CULTURE (IDENITY

DEVELOPMENT):
Psychological theorists have noted the role of youth culture in identity
development.
- CULTURE AS a way to carve a distinct ​identity (different from senior
generations)
Youth culture may be a means of achieving identity during a time when one’s role
in life is not always clear. ​Erik Erikson​ theorized that the major psychological
conflict of adolescence is ​identity versus role confusion​. The goal of this stage of
life is to answer the question, "Who am I?" This can be difficult in many societies
in which adolescents are simultaneously expected to behave like children and take
on adult roles. Some psychologists have theorized that the formation of youth
culture is an attempt to adopt an identity that reconciles these two conflicting
expectations.
Fasick (1984) relates youth culture as a method of identity development to the
simultaneous elongation of childhood and need for independence that occurs in
adolescence. According to Fasick, adolescents face contradictory pulls from
society. On one hand, compulsory schooling keeps them socially and economically
dependent on their parents. On the other hand, young people need to achieve some
sort of independence in order to participate in the market economy of modern
society. ​As a ​means of coping with these contrasting aspects of adolescence​,
youth create independence through behavior—specifically, through the
leisure-oriented activities that are done with peers.
- SAILING IN THE SAME BOAT: Association with youth culture/
sub-cultures ​facilitate a consciousness of oneness​—a sympathetic
identification in which group members come to feel that ​their inner
experiences and emotional reactions are similar​.
- For autonomy: TAKING CONTROL AND CHARGE OF THEIR LIVES:
Adolescents also ​feel they lack control over many of the changes occurring
in their lives. One way they take back control is by ​assuming the distinctive
trademarks of the peer group​: They cannot control getting acne, but they do
have control over what music they listen to, what they wear and how they
adorn their bodies, and how they wear their hair.

V) LESIURE AND YOUTH CULTURE: IS SITTING IDLE ALL THAT

BAD?? (ANDY FURLONG, 2013)

The ways in which young people use their leisure time and spend their resources
has been a long-standing source of conflict between themselves, their families
and the state.

While parents and social commentators may have clear ideas of what constitutes
‘healthy’ and ‘constructive’ use of leisure (participating in youth groups, sport and
hobbies, etc.), young people frequently spend a large part of their free time ‘hanging
around’ with friends, watching TV, playing computerised games or hooked up to
social networking sites, SHOPPING OR CLUBBING.

The importance of leisure-time activities in the psychological, cognitive and physical

development of young people is recognized in all societies. ​Leisure-time activities
include games, sports, cultural events, entertainment and community service.
Appropriate leisure programmes for youth are elements of anymeasure aimed at
fighting social ills such as drug abuse, juvenile delinquency and other deviant
behaviour. (United Nations, 1995)

Most young people do tend to spend significant periods of time hanging around and
‘doing nothing’(AS ELDERS SAY), and this may be interpreted ​negatively as
unconstructive or as ‘wasted time’​ (Abbott-Chapman and Robinson, 2009).
This is a misunderstanding, as ​‘doing nothing’ is in itself an important part of
youth life. ​Young people need to ​reflect, to make sense of experiences​ and to
withdraw, at times, from communal life. Teenagers ‘​need space​ to retreat from
the things or people that “bother them” and, to develop independence and a
sense of self, they need ​privacy and psychological “space” away from the
surveillance of parents and other adults’​ (Abbott-Chapman and Robinson, 2009:
246).

In the face of negative public attitudes and ​unwelcome attention by the police,
those who are too young to spend time in pubs and bars and ​who lack the
resources to spend much time in commercial forms of leisure, often seek
alternative spaces like YOUTH CLUBS.
Youth clubs have long provided a safe space for young people to socialize and
engage in both structured and unstructured activities. Youth clubs also provide
informal education and youth workers tend to see themselves as helping empower
young people. However, youth club membership, which tends to peak in the early
teenage years, tends to fall sharply with age and is often more attractive to young
people from middle class families whose parents may discourage ‘hanging around’
and promote more structured activities (Furlong ​et al​., 1997).

LEISURE TIME DIFFERENCES ACROSS CULTURES:

While young people in Western societies spend their leisure time in broadly similar
ways, there are quite strong contrasts between the West and Eastern Europe and the
former Soviet Union (Roberts, 2009), ​where rates of participation in out of home
activities are relatively low​. In part, differences between the East and West are due
to resources, but they are also shaped by tradition and patterns of availability.

Under communist regimes, commercial leisure provision was almost non-existent,

but young people were well provided for with state-sponsored youth organizations
and high quality sports and cultural facilities (Roberts, 2009).
EXAMPLE FROM A STUDY: Comparing leisure patterns among young people in
neighbouring regions of Finland and Russia, Puuronen and colleagues (2000) found
that the Finns spent more time in bars and cafes, drinking alcohol and taking drugs,
while the Russians spent more time at home, reading books, listening to music and
watching videos.

The advance of information technologies has had a profound impact on

the leisure lifestyles of young people in all developed societies​. By 2000, mobile
phone use among young people was almost ubiquitous, texting friends had become
a constant feature of young people’s lives and access to the internet at home was
spreading fast, bringing with it new forms of sociability among youth (Henderson ​et
al​., 2007).
Information communication technologies (ICT) intensified communication
between peers and between families and led to ​a blurring of the relationship
between the public and private spheres (Henders​on ​et al.​ , 2007).
In contemporary contexts, ​new technologies make it even more difficult to
separate public and private space or compartmentalize time among what
Abbott-Chapman and Robertson (2009) have referred to as the ‘always on’
generation​.
Digital communications mean that young people may be socializing via text or
email while working or studying, and computer games may be played as a freely
undertaken leisure pursuit or as part of an educational activity.

ICT can smooth direct communications between peers and allows young
people to avoid direct parental scrutiny of their social contacts. Here Henderson
and colleagues (2007) offer the example of a young woman from a British/Turkish
family who was able to use ICT to communicate with her boyfriend in ways that
would not normally have been possible and of a ​gay male whose ‘coming out’ was
facilitated via chat rooms.
On the negative side, ​ICT can become a catalyst for cyber bullying (Collin and
Burn, 2009), TROLLING, .

The rapid spread of ICT has also helped close the digital divide: mobile phones and
computers are no longer the preserve of the affluent. Indeed, in a study of street
youth in Canada, Karabanow and Naylor (2010) found that the vast majority were
not only competent users of ICT, but they managed to incorporate use into their
daily lives, gaining access through homeless drop-in centres and libraries. These
homeless young people reported that use of ICT helped them feel more connected,
provided a way of passing the time and allowed them to disengage from their street
identities.

In the late-modern world, youth cultures were ​no longer represented as

sub-sets of a parent class culture, but as a potpourri of styles picked
up and put down by young people without involving broader
commitments to a perspective or position. In this context it has been
argued that the active diversity of the culture industries help block stable
bounded subcultures (Muggleton, 1977).
A) GENDER (A SIGNIFICANT ASPECT OF YOUTH CULTURE)

Among the central ingredients in a youth culture are various ideas about the
qualities and achievements that reveal an individual's masculinity or
femininity.
Traditionally, for boys the critical signs of manhood are physical mastery, athletic
skill, sexual prowess, risk taking, courage in the face of aggression, and willingness
to defend one's honor at all costs.
TRADITIONALLY, for girls the most admired qualities are physical attractiveness
(including popular clothing), behaving properly and obeying rules, the ability to
delicately manipulate various sorts of interpersonal relationships, and skill in
exercising control over sexual encounters (Pipher, 1994).
Some scholars believe that the concept of youth culture overshadows
individuality in adolescence, since most are motivated to join a peer group over
time so they do not feel isolated (Ryan, 2001).

We see how youth culture can affect the way clothes, roles and expected
behaviors of a particular gender by the ​example of “Flappers​”​. ​The flappers were
young women, confident about a prosperous future after World War I, and they
became the symbol of effervescence. This liveliness was seen in her new attitude in
life in which she openly drank, smoked, and many socialized with gangster type men.
The fashionable dress at the time also reflected the flapper’s new lifestyle. Hems were
raised, waists dropped, and hair was cut into bobs. This not only created a look that
was dramatically different from the corseted, structured dresses of previous
generations, but it also ​created a new freedom that allowed the wearer to move in
ways one was unable to before​. ​This break from older values was also apparent in
a new posture embraced by the flappers. Instead of an upright, corseted posture, they
preferred "a ‘lop-sided’ stance characterized by ‘sunken chests and round shoulders,’
[which] suggested fatigue rather than beauty." ​The flappers exemplified how youth
culture was influential in fashion and lifestyle.

‘MALE’STREAM SOCIOLOGY OF YOUTH CULTURES:

Gender being a social construct governed by youth culture is a topic written on

by many people. ​Throughout the studies completed by sociologists in the 60's and
70's on youth culture, ​feminists claim that females were invisible from the studies
on youth culture. ​If females are considered it is only in the role of 'pillion
passengers' or tag alongs of the male subculture. In particular Heidensohn pointed
out that sociology was 'malestream' - written by men about men and this may be an
expression of ​male dominance over females​.

Despite being active participants in youth subcultures in the 1950s and 60s, females
too, often ​had a low visibility in youth research. ​Youth cultures were
arenas where gender roles were rehearsed and challenged​, and in
the 1950s and 60s male and female roles within youth cultures where often
differentiated, involving a physical separation of activities. A hegemonic masculinity
prevailed in which boys were prepared for a future in male-dominated workplaces
while females anticipated future roles as wives and mothers. Yet while gender roles
within early youth subcultures were largely conservative, youth cultures often tend to
contain some seeds of change, implicit challenges to the existing order and
an element of sexual rebellion (Kehily, 2007a)

During the 80's there were some changes. Firstly ​youth subculture were more
androgynous (the subculture was genderless) like new romantics, rave and emo.
Secondly ​females had become more involved in music and fashion.

Also during the 90's with increasing sexual equality and the rise of girl power,
sociologists such as Hollands noted that girls roles in youth culture were becoming
more similar to that of men. McRobbie (1976) also wrote about “bedroom culture”.
McRobbie believed that in bedroom culture, girls had an escape where they could
discuss other girls in private away from the male dominating presence or patriarchy.
With the rise of feminism, more equality, opportunities in terms of education and
career, as well as more freedom is being granted to women.

Gender in itself is now considered a vile and socially controlling phenomenon. ​Youth
culture today is in many ways playing with the boundary of gender roles and the
concept of “fluidity” in gender is emerging.

There is a need to develop new understandings ​of the ways structured

inequalities are negotiated through cultural practices and present
culture as a process within which people are active in shaping their
social milieu.
B) MEDIA

Media or mass media, ​is the form of communication in which ​large audiences
quickly receive a given message via an impersonal medium between the sender
and the receiver.
Examples include newspapers, magazines, books, radio, television, movies, videos,
popular music, computers, and various multimedia. Media has a huge influence on
everyone, especially the youth who are constantly involved in some form of media.

The Expanding Role ​of Teen Social Networking Sites ​Today's teens are immersed
in a constant ​technosocial world​. The explosive popularity of online social networking
sites, such as in Facebook or MySpace provides opportunities to ​reinforce existing
friendships, make new friends, or flirt with total strangers who might be questionable,
at best. It provides methods to stay ​connected to friends and family, extend the
friendships they already have from other areas of their life, such as school, religious
organizations, sports and other local activities (Ito, 2008).

- Social networking sites provide a way for people to experience

connectedness and opportunities to learn from each other (Ito, 2008).

- Social networking sites can allow teens to ​find support online that they may
lack in traditional relationships, especially for teens who are often
marginalized, such as lesbian, gay, bi and transgendered (LGBT) teens,
those who are living with an illness or disability, or those who may feel
physically unattractive or socially reticent (McKenna & Bargh, 2000).

- Such social networking sites can include a ​blog (​ a type of online diary or
commentary), pictures, songs, videos, and messages. Think of these sites
as "virtual" town malls where teens gather 24 hours per day with little or
no adult presence​. Thus its a ​platform for self expression.

- A 2006 national study finds that ​more than half of all teens (thus millions) use
social ​networks and have created online profiles, revealing private information
and photos in a public setting. ​Through creating such sites, teens are
developing their personal identities (and sometimes alternate identities),
literacy skills, and computer literacy skills--considered to be job tools of
the twenty-first century ​(Willard, 2007).

- Information can also be easily accessed. Cyberspace has seen people’s

ability to better inform themselves improve dramatically, ​if they should
desire.
Through a large number of online newspapers, magazine, books and bulletin
boards people can find any information they want in unlimited amounts.

FASTER COMMUNICATION; In cyberspace there is also the ease and speed

with which messages are transmitted across huge distances. People can send
and receive messages in a ​very short time (Zivko, 2011). Further, there is ​No
limitation of geographical space: ​Geographical distance does not exist in
 cyberspace as computer networks enable people to interact with each other no
matter where they are.
Furthermore, even time is stretched in cyberspace. One can take hours or
days to reply to an email. Or one can reply in a few seconds if chat rooms are
being used.

However, there are many concerns associated with media and social media.

1) The Influence of Media Violence

Research on violent television and films, video games, and music reveals unequivocal
evidence that ​media violence increases the likelihood of aggressive and violent
behavior in both immediate and long-term contexts​.

The effects appear larger for milder than for more severe forms of aggression, but the
effects on severe forms of violence are also substantial when compared with effects of
other violence risk factors or medical effects deemed important by the medical
community (e.g., effect of aspirin on heart attacks).The research base is large; diverse
in methods, samples, and media genres; and consistent in overall findings. The
evidence is clearest within the most extensively researched domain, television and
film violence. ​According to the Center for Media and Public Affairs (1999), scenes of
serious violence (physical force) hammer TV viewers and moviegoers every four
minutes.
The NTVS ( Murray, 2007) demonstrated that the context in which most violence
is presented on TV poses the following risks for viewers: (1) learning to behave
violently, (2) becoming desensitized to violence, and (3) becoming fearful of being
attacked.

The growing body of video-game research yields essentially the same conclusions.

Recent surveys reveal an extensive presence of violence in modern media.

Furthermore, many children and youth spend an inordinate amount of time consuming
violent media. Although it is clear that reducing exposure to media violence will
reduce aggression and violence, ​it is less clear what sorts of interventions will
produce a reduction in exposure. ​The sparse research literature suggests that
counter attitudinal and parental-mediation interventions are likely to yield beneficial
effects, but that media literacy interventions by themselves are unsuccessful.

Though the scientific debate over whether media violence increases aggression and
violence is essentially over, several critical tasks remain.

Additional laboratory and field studies are needed for a better understanding of
underlying psychological processes, which eventually should lead to more effective
interventions.

Large-scale longitudinal studies would help specify the magnitude of media-violence

effects on the most severe types of violence. Meeting the larger societal challenge of
providing children and youth with a much healthier media diet may prove to be more
difficult and costly, especially if the scientific, news, public policy, and entertainment
communities fail to educate the general public about the real risks of media-violence
exposure to children and youth.

2) Construction of reality:

Televised representations of social realities reflect ideological bents in their

portrayal of human nature, social relations, and the norms and structure of the
society ​(Adoni &Mane, 1984).

SYMBOLIC WORLD: Heavy exposure to this symbolic world may eventually make
the televised images appear to be the authentic state of human affairs. We construct
our reality in context of others and our interactions with the environment. Thus
Media, being a powerful tool of disemminating information about various
cultures and history can affect the way we construe reality.

Media is replete with stereotypes and fantasy elements.

Often over dramatization is done to keep the interest of the audience and
consumers.
Media, especially TV and movies can therefore, promote stereotypes and change
the way we view the world.

3) Affect on Family Relationships and other areas of life

The statistics on TV viewing habits indicate that, on average, youth spend three
to five hours a day in front of the television set. (Comstock & Scharrer, 2006).

As a result the activities they might otherwise be engaged in, such as reading,
hobbies, games, physical activity or sports, and family or peer interactions, are
being neglected.

Television has replaced family rituals. Most family gatherings revolve around
television.

ISOLATION AND SOCIAL MEDIA:

Media has in fact adversely affected many social relations and interactions. A
study ​by Primrack et al., (2017), found young adults with high Social Media Use
seem to feel more socially isolated than their counterparts with lower Social Media
Use.

Other activities like exercise and physical activities are also being influenced​.

There is evidence linking heavy media consumption and obesity (Escober-Chavez &
Anderson, 2008). A study found that children who watched four or more hours of TV
per day were significantly more likely to be obese than children who watched an hour
or less. Media also has an impact on learning and achievement. Most young adults
now multitask while working. They use social media along with the work they are to
do. Evidence from cognitive psychology suggests that this has an adverse impact on
the learning ability. There is also a concern that time spent in front of the TV has been
responsible for the general decline in reading levels and test scores on standardized
tests, such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (Healy, 1998).
C) ​VALUES

The meaning of values is also very central for individual identity and its
formation during youth.

What are values?

Values are important and lasting beliefs or ideals shared by the members of a culture
about what is good or bad and desirable or undesirable. ​Values​ have major influence
on a person's behavior and attitude and serve as broad guidelines in all situations.
Values are the criteria people use in assessing their daily lives; arrange their priorities
and choosing between alternative course of action. Values account for the stability of
social order. They provide the general guidelines for social conduct.

Schwartz (1992), defined values as desirable, transsituationally enduring goals that

vary in importance and serve as guiding principles in people's lives. The
internalization of cultural values constitutes an important developmental task for
adolescents in all cultures.

Values can be conceptualized on the individual and group level. At the individual
level, values are internalized social representations or moral beliefs that people appeal
to as the ultimate rationale for their actions.. At the group level, values are scripts or
cultural ideals held in common by members of a group; the group’s ‘social mind.’
Differences in these cultural ideals, especially those with a moral component,
determine and distinguish different social systems.

There are three perspectives that can be used to understand values and youth:

● Social sciences and psychological perspective​: ​values are embedded in

culture: they impact the societal institutions and they structure, motivate,
and give meaning to individual behavior and social interactions. The
meaning of certain values is influenced by the self- and world-view
transmitted in a certain culture. For example, the values of freedom, honor,
and justice have different meanings in different cultural contexts.

● Sociological Approaches​: ​Weber (1988) and Parsons (1951), the

founding fathers of value research in sociology, distinguished between
individual values (motivational aspects) and group values (normative
aspects; Parsons & Shils, 1951). Interestingly, although this differentiation
is difficult to assess empirically, it still guides most research on values.
More recently, theories on modernization and secularization have shifted
the perspective in value research, focusing on questions of stability and
changes in values.

● Psychological Approaches: ​Values have long been a topic in psychology

beginning with the work of Wilhelm Wundt (1926), the founding father of
experimental psychology, who attempted to study the sociocultural basis
of psychological phenomena as part of his Volkerpsychologie. One of the
earliest examples of an empirically oriented approach was that of Allport
and Vernon (1931) influenced by Spranger's (1921) "Lebensformen:' An
 influential approach to the study of values was initiated by Milton
Rokeach (1973) on the basis of his widely used Rokeach Value Survey
(RVS), which, however, did not follow a consistent theoretical model. His
view on values as guiding principles in people's behavior (Rokeach, 1973)
is generally in line with Schwartz (1992). Schwartz's complex theoretical
model allows researchers to study values on both the cultural and
individual levels, including individual differences in value priorities and
their effects on attitudes and behavior. His theory on the structure of
human values refers to culture-specific and universal aspects. A central
assumption of Schwartz's theory of basic individual values is that the array
of values represents a circular continuum of motivations. Partitioning the
continuum into 10 discrete values or into broader or more finely tuned
value constructs depends on how one's preference discriminates among
motivations. The underlying structure of the relations among the 10 value
types has been validated in more than 50 countries (e.g., Schwartz, 2006),
supporting the assumption of a universal structure of human values.

Values tell something about the big questions: who we are; where do we come from;
where are we going to; how can we defi ne our identity; what do we want to become;
what do we think about others or diversity? And fi nally: what gives the basic
meaning to our lives? Professor Shalom Schwartz, one of the most well-known
researchers of values at present, defi nes values as “desirable, transsituational goals,
varying in importance, that serve as guiding principles in people’s lives” (Schwartz,
1994). According to him, there is widespread agreement in the literature regarding fi
ve features of the conceptual defi nition of values: A value is (1) belief (2) pertaining
to desirable states of modes of conduct, that (3) transcends specifi c situations, (4)
guides selections or evaluation of behaviour, people, and events, and (5) is ordered by
importance relative to other values to form a system of value priorities (Schwartz,
1992; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987). Both in classical philosophy and religion, the
concept used instead of values was a “virtue”. For Aristotle the main virtues were
wisdom, justice, temperance and courage, associated with prudence, magnanimity,
liberality and gentleness. Then Christian virtues faith, hope and love, as well as truth,
righteousness and justice, were emphasised. Yet secular philosophers also insisted
upon the importance of virtues – 138 – relative and equal in their “worth”. Growing
ability to recognise these different basic approaches signifi cantly helps young people,
and others, to make sense of various values, ideologies and world views. About values
and value changes in multi cultural world What is meant by a value? It can be said
that values are about our thinking and our thinking is about our values. So the origin
of values is hard to reach as such. Thinking is the foundation to all our action, the
decisions we make both individually and collectively and what directions we choose.
Values tell something about the big questions: who we are; where do we come from;
where are we going to; how can we defi ne our identity; what do we want to become;
what do we think about others or diversity? And fi nally: what gives the basic
meaning to our lives? Professor Shalom Schwartz, one of the most well-known
researchers of values at present, defi nes values as “desirable, transsituational goals,
varying in importance, that serve as guiding principles in people’s lives” (Schwartz,
1994). According to him, there is widespread agreement in the literature regarding fi
ve features of the conceptual defi nition of values: A value is (1) belief (2) pertaining
to desirable states of modes of conduct, that (3) transcends specifi c situations, (4)
guides selections or evaluation of behaviour, people, and events, and (5) is ordered by
importance relative to other values to form a system of value priorities (Schwartz,
1992; Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987). Both in classical philosophy and religion, the
concept used instead of values was a “virtue”. For Aristotle the main virtues were
wisdom, justice, temperance and courage, associated with prudence, magnanimity,
liberality and gentleness. Then Christian virtues faith, hope and love, as well as truth,
righteousness and justice, were emphasised. Yet secular philosophers also insisted
upon the importance of virtues – 139 – not only for the good life of individuals but for
the well-being of society and the state (Himmelfarb, 1995). According to Himmelfarb
the concept “value” in its present sense comes from 1880s as Friedrich Nietzsche
began to speak of “values” instead of “virtues”, connoting the moral beliefs and
attitudes of a society. “His ‘transvaluation of values’ was to be the fi nal, ultimate
revolution, a revolution against both classical virtues and the Judaic-Christian ones.
The ‘death of God’ would mean the death of morality and the death of truth – above
all the truth of any morality. There would be no good and evil, no virtue and vice.
There would be only values’.” (Ibid.) “Values” brought with it the assumptions that
all moral ideas are subjective and relative, that they are mere customs and
conventions, that they have a purely instrumental, utilitarian purpose, and that they
are peculiar to specifi c individuals and societies. And, as Himmelfarb continues, in
the current intellectual climate, to specifi c classes, races and sexes (Himmelfarb,
1995). Global ethics can be one ground for transnational value discussion. We may
ask, is there some basis for universal values that would be considered more or less
objective? The Institute of Global Ethics states: “After more than a decade of doing
research across the globe, we have discovered that while different people use different
words to voice their values, the concepts nearly always can be distilled into a set of fi
ve or ​six shared values with a common subset: compassion, fairness, honesty, respect,
and responsibility”. (Institute of Global Ethics, 2007) One of the main differences in
the understanding of values is whether by values one is referring to mere preferences,
beliefs and attitudes or is there a moral assessment included. Rokeach (1973, 6-7)
suggests three categories of values: existential beliefs, which determine whether
something is right or wrong; evaluative beliefs which determine whether something is
good or bad; and beliefs which determine whether or not a certain activity is
acceptable. The current defi nitions in general are far more relativistic: values are seen
as mainly as subjective preferences. – 140 – Already Rokeach made lists of values
which were supposed to be comparable and measurable so as to put them into order of
importance. The universal value theory of Schwartz (1992; 1994) continued on this, in
the fi rst hand socio-psychological – not philosophical – understanding of values as
personally or socially desirable subjective goals. It does not take a stand concerning
good or bad, right and wrong. Instead, the choice of values presented in the
dimensional categories is referenced like the values being equal. Value subjectivism
(in practise synonymous to value relativism) is a view, which sees values as mere
subjective beliefs, preferences or attitudes. This seems a very remarkable trend in
postmodern way of thinking and refl exive identity (see more Giddens, 1991; Beck,
1992). Absolute standards or norms have diminished in this kind of thinking. Nothing
seems to be objectively and universally valuable. An individual or a community
decide only in their minds what is valuable. Value subjectivism makes a clear
difference between value arguments and fact arguments. Value arguments cannot be
true or untrue, right or wrong. They are matters of taste, which people may disagree
without getting into clash with each other. Values are also related to the meaning of
life. The uncertainty of today’s world, as not giving sure prospects of decent jobs,
peace and place in the society for adolescents, leaves many of them without hope and
perspective. This situation is common even among the “healthy” population and
especially obvious for youngsters with long term diffi culties. There is a specifi c need
to support young people to gain trust for life and fi nd meaning (Lindh, Gashi &
Hämäläinen, 2005). Viktor Frankl pointed out for years the problems of young people
in integrating into society and the danger of mass neurosis by hopelessness and
emptiness. Frankl says that the man’s search for meaning is a primary motivation of
our existence and one that gives us a reason for living in spite of life’s diffi culties.
The primary message is: “You have right and it is your responsibility to search for
purpose in your life, in work, in human relationships and in values.” (Frankl, 1963;
1975)

YOUTH AND VALUES:

The building blocks for values in youth are, for instance, our ideas about us and about
others and the different sociocultural growth environments in which we act and live.
Important growth and learning environments for identity and value socialization are
for example family, friends, peer group, studying or workplace, hobby and leisure
time communities and other kind of local activity communities. – 136 – Introducti on
Values are a vital element in all cultures and value awareness can be seen as an
essential part of intercultural competence. The meaning of values is also very central
for individual identity and its formation during youth. One of the most important
general goals in today’s world universally is the search for peace and security,
combined with general well-being. The reality is unfortunately the opposite for many
and well-being is not equally distributed. Thus the questions of what could bring
equity between people and different cultural groups, freedom yet suffi cient order
against chaos, are increasingly strident. Values may be the essential area where to
seek answers from cultural and transnational perspective. Values are strongly
interconnected with both thinking and emotions and form a basis of action, both good
and bad. They can even be traced as the background of some dramatic recent
tragedies like the school shootings. ​The value discourse is necessary in the
multicultural world. One crucial question is how to solve the huge problems we face
in societies and globally. Another crucial question is individual: how each of us
should live, how to orientate ourselves in life, how can we manage our life and on
which basis we can build our world view. Values are supposed to give some answers
to these kinds of questions. In the multicultural world we also need refl ection on how
we should orient ourselves towards diversity and differences. It is a question touching
us globally but more and more also locally and individually when people, ideas,
policies, practices, etc travel from one place to another faster and faster. The building
blocks for values in youth are, for instance, our ideas about us and about others and
the different sociocultural growth environments in which we act and live. Important
growth and learning environments for identity and value socialization are for example
family, friends, peer group, studying or workplace, hobby and leisure time
communities and other kind of local activity communities.

In changing and globalizing society capabilities to understand and cope with

diversifi ed social and cultural reality and construct one’s own identity and value
related world view are pivotal, especially for young people. Adolescents are
negotiating complex “identities” as they manage these challenges (Thomson, 2007).
The identity work of postmodern human being is in principle a versatile, lifelong
developmental task. Although traditional conceptions on identity and human
development emphasize youth as being the central period for the identity work (for
instance Erikson, 1968), ​identity is necessarily never ready or definitive. It is
developing and changing throughout the whole human life cycle. Everyone is
constantly affected by different world views and ideologies. A lack of
value-self-awareness leads to adoption of prevalent values, instead of intentional and
aware value formation. Without conscious choices we tend to adopt the common
opinion, to go with the group. ​In the globalizing world, young people are seeking
their identities and values within a jungle of cultural approaches, ideologies and
philosophies. To make sense of who they are and what they want, they need tools
and support for understanding.

Youth goals: from Monitoring the Future Survey, 1998, 2001 (nap.edu)

The question of whether values can predict behavior has been dealt with in various
studies, which, however, have mostly ignored the role of cultural variables. A cultural
focus for the prediction of behavior is suggested by Schwartz's value theory and also
by the social axioms theory that draws on expectancy-value theory to predict behavior
(e.g., Bond, Leung, Au, Tong, & Chemonges-Nielson, 2004). There is considerable
empirical evidence on the motivational and behavioral qualities of values based on the
Schwartz Value Theory. According to Schwartz (2006), values represent priorities in
life and serve a motivational function. Self-reported value priorities are related to
certain personality variables and reported (or observed) behaviors such as prosocial,
antisocial, environmental, political, consumer, and intellectual behaviors (see Bardi &
Schwartz, 2003, for a review). However, research on individual and cultural/structural
aspects regarding the value behavior relationship is still rare.

Early value research assumed that the cultural context is interwoven with values,
norms, and meaning. An example is the famous Values Project by Kluckhohn and
Strodtbeck (1961), which was influenced by sociologists (e.g., Talcott Parsons), social
psychologists (George Homans), and anthropologists (John and Beatrice Whiting),
among others. This Values Project was a starting point for several studies to focus on
value orientations as a means to differentiate cultural dimensions. However, according
to D'Andrade (2008), the study of cultural values was left without an organizing
framework. In his recent study on value orientations in three societies, D'Andrade
(2008) dealt with institutionalized values, personal values, and the degree of fit
between both, thus relating issues from sociological and psychological value research
in his anthropological approach on personal and cultural values.' Across societies, he
did not see many differences in personal values due to universal needs and motives;
however, differences in institutionalized values were great. The antecedents of values
are seen in the cultural heritage of ideas, in institutions (norms, roles), and in
individual feelings and motives. Accordingly, some values may be stable while other
values may change.

RELIGION AS A BASIS FOR VALUES IN YOUTH:

Wilhelm Wundt (1926) was one of the first scientists in the psychology of religion to
elaborate on the psychological, cultural, and anthropological foundations of religion.
Among others have been William James (1985; religion as useful hypothesis),
Sigmund Freud's theories on religion (1961; religion as solid illusion), attachment
theory (God as attachment figure), and humanistic psychology (Wulff, 1991). The
study of religion has recently been the subject of new interest in psychological
research .Recent studies in the psychology of religion have focused on the individual
level of religiosity (including emotions, cognitions, and behavior) as a subjective
experience (Emmons, Barrett, & Schnitker, 2008) and have examined religion as an
individual and a collective "meaning system" (Silb erman, 2005). Some approaches
view religion as unique because it provides people with ultimate meaning in life
(Emmons, 1999). Recently, the construct of spirituality has been discussed as being
distinct from religiosity and as related to psychological growth (Boyatzis, 2005) .
Whereas religiosity encompasses the institutional aspects of religious beliefs,
spirituality encompasses the personal and transcendent aspects (Barry, Nelson,
Davarya, & Urry, 2010).

VAUES AND YOUTH IDENTIY

Individuals undergo significant changes in physical (e.g., brain maturation), cognitive,
and psychosocial development during adolescence, which stimulate the search for
self-definition, identity, and religious orientations. The field of sociology has
recognized adolescence as a crucial period for religious and spiritual development as
well (Desmond, Morgan, & Kikuchi, 2010; Smith & Lundquist Denton, 2005).
Overviews on youth and religion in the United States have shown that the
majority of adolescents report following the teachings of their religion (King &
Boyatzis, 2004)​. However, no simple generalizations are possible. There is relation
between religiosity and moral development. According to Kohlberg (1981), moral
development occurs rather independently from religious development, but ​religious
structures support morality​. However, not everyone supports this view.
Nonetheless, religion can define what types of values one is going to follow.

1) NARRATIVE OF CHANGING VALUES:

FROM MATERIALISM TO POST-MATERIALISM:

The influential sociological theory on value change by Ronald Inglehart (1 977, 1

997, 2007) assumes that values change from materialism (traditional values) to
post-materialism in industrializing countries. Traditional "materialist" values are seen
in the need for security, achievement, and discipline; modern "post-materialist" values
include the need for self-realization, participation, and environmental concerns
(Inglehart & Baker, 2000). Three basic assumptions underlie Inglehart's theory on the
"silent revolution": (1) the socialization thesis, which assumes a lifelong stability of
values that are formed in early childhood; (2) the thesis of a generation-specific value
change, which contrasts to the life-cycle assumption and to the assumption of period
effects (historical events such as the postwar period or reunification of Germany); and
(3) the basic-need thesis, which refers to Maslow's (1943) assumption of a hierarchy
of material and nonmaterial needs. ​Adolescent development is of special
importance to Inglehart because he believes that changes in adolescents' values
can drive societal value changes.
Another major topic in the discussions on value change is whether an
individualization of family values has taken place. In their study on two decades of
value change in Europe and the United States (based on the European Values Study),
Scott and Braun (2006) concluded that the individualization thesis is overstated
because considerable diversity in family values across Western countries can be
observed.

Only a few culture-informed studies on adolescents' development of values are

available. Adolescence has been recognized as a crucial period for value
development. In the literature, it is widely assumed that a certain level of abstract
thinking, brain maturation, and identity formation is a precondition for adolescents'
value development (cf. Nurmi, 1998; Schwarz, 2007). ​Development of self concept
has been related to value development but religion and culture play a huge role.

2) NARRATIVE OF Conflicting Values of the Past and Present ​AND MORAL

DECLINE

Society is dynamic not static and as societies change from simple traditional societies
to complex modern societies; people, values, trends and activities also change. For
instance, traditional African societies where relatively simple with no literary heritage
(Ibia; 2006) as oral transmission was what was in vogue as opposed to the modern
African societies which have been greatly influenced by the Western world and is
more advanced with a lot of literary collections on an array of subjects.

Just as societies have developed, values have also continued to change to suit the
character of a changing world which has brought in an increased wave of moral
decadence and moral laxity in present day societies.

According to a Nigerian study some cherished and upheld moral values of the past
include (Dr. Ime N. George & Unwanaobong D. Uyanga; 2014):
2.1 Truthfulness or honesty, Isichei and Bolaji (2010) define honesty as “the
awareness of what is right and appropriate in one‟s role, one‟s behavior and one‟s
relationship”. Honesty is the foundation of integrity; having moral standards.
2.2 Respect Respect is an acknowledgement of the inherent worth and innate rights of
the individual and collectivity (Isichei and Bolaji; 2010).

2.3 Tolerance and Cooperation For persons to work together to accomplish set
objectives, they must learn to appreciate their differences, accommodate their
weaknesses and pull together their strengths. Tolerance means being receptive to the
beauty of differences while cooperation is simply identified as team work. Tolerance
involves mutual understanding resulting from mutual respect while cooperation
involves mutually beneficial relations.
2.4 Hard work: ​Traditional societies did not support laziness and as such did not
encourage it. Individuals had to learn to value hard work as a channel for an improved
life.
2.5 Respect for human life and Dignity of persons ​Human belief in the ultimate
power of “immortal gods” has caused men to have great respect for human life and
regard persons with dignity. Traditional societies promoted the security of life
because of their beliefs in its sacredness.

Values of the Present (the change)​: With civilization came a lot of changes both
positively and negatively. One negative change that came with „the dawn of the new
era‟ was moral decadence and laxity. Society has witnessed a fall in moral standards
and an increased interest in pleasure and enjoyment as opposed to more serious
things. ​Moral decadence has resulted in indiscipline at all levels in the society and
its resultant effects are seen in our lackadaisical attitude to work; our readiness
to cheat and embezzle, lack of dignity and respect for human life and the
monster of corruption.

Values that are predominantly held and pursued today include ​dishonesty, disrespect,
intolerance and lack of cooperation, profit oriented relationships, profane of life
and abuse of human dignity, loss of pride in hard work and an increased interest
in the pursuit of injustice and other crimes all in a bid to acquire wealth by
adopting the philosophy that “the end justifies the means”. Modern societies are
experiencing the wave of corruption driven by the ​“get rich quick syndrome”​.
Public goods and resources are audaciously stolen by individuals who are in
leadership positions in a bid to acquire wealth for themselves and secure the future of
their families caring less about the pain and burdens to be borne by other members of
the society as a consequence of their actions. Today, people take pride in telling lies,
engaging in ungodly practices and embellishment of various criminal acts. Integrity is
lacking in the interactions of men with one another and flagrant abuse of the laws and
of human rights is the order of the day.

3) Moral Values for Youth in a changing Society: YOUTH AS A HOPE FOR

MORAL UPGARADATION

In a world were development continues to take place and societies rapidly move with
latest developmental trends; it is very important for youths to hold on to moral values
taught them in their childhood. In as much as societies continue to change, there are
certain principles that genuinely focused societies want to strictly adhere to. Youths
are being faced with peculiar problems in their societies that tend to challenge their
moral stance, they are surrounded with people who have thrown morality aside and
are „making it‟. Society tends to favor those who can do almost anything to attain
power and money and even celebrates corruption in several ways.

Notwithstanding this, youths have the power that lies within them to bring about the
societies they want. In as much as they continue to observe such sad practices, they
can choose to make a positive impact in society by the way they live. Still, the world
celebrates men and women of great values who held on and continue to hold on to
values that are undeniable and true. The Late ​South African President, Nelson
Mandela​, is celebrated the world over as a truly remarkable man who changed the
face of South Africans and made black South Africans proud young men and women
whose spirits were dampened by the apartheid era. This he did as a young man.
Mandela stood for truth, justice and freedom and is today hailed as a hero, an icon and
a man of the people. ​The young Pakistani youth, Malala Yousafzai stands out as a
youth with values. She continues to advocate for good even in the face of persistent
danger. Youths especially in our dear country Nigeria, do not need to follow the path
of destruction by not being morally conscious but can make a difference in their
society by doing what is right. Life always presents choices; man is always a product
of his choices. What you choose can make or mar you. Being a total man with
knowledge, competence (skills) and right attitudes can leave lasting legacies for the
future of any society. Moral values of the past can still be practiced by youths in
present day societies and with this they (youths) can determine the type of change that
occurs in society and not just be swept off their feet and be victims of the changes that
are bound to occur in a changing world. In the book titled: Maximizing your youthful
season; Onuoha quoting Bernard Shaw writes “the reasonable man adapts himself to
the world; the unreasonable man persist in trying to adapt the world to himself;
therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man”. Youths of today can make
a difference in their societies by standing out of the crowd and upholding moral
values in a morally bankrupt society.

IV. Recommendations
1. The family which is the base structure of every society must begin to right their
wrongs with regards to restructuring their value systems because most youths learn
from the elders in their families and if truly there has to be a positive change in
society, the family must play its role as the major primary agent of socialization in the
society.

2. Government and other authorities especially in leadership positions must see

themselves as role models for young persons and begin to be responsible adults. They
have to realize that the future of tomorrow depends on the foundations laid today and
youths cannot become trusted leaders if they cannot follow in trust.

3. Youths must encourage themselves by interacting with one another and creating
social networks that can easily strengthen them when faced with discouraging
attitudes about moral issues. This can bring about the institution of a strong and viable
moral base founded on principles that work.

4. The national goals for the inculcation of national consciousness and national unity
and the inculcation of the right type of values and attitudes for the survival of the
individual and the Nigerian nation can become a reality if the Nigerian nation adopts
moral values that will be recognized as its core identity and encourage its spread
among its youths by proving that this identity penetrates all facets of life and is
worthwhile.
Young people and their parents: Supporting families through changes that occur in
adolescence
Elly Robinson
AFRC Briefing No. 1 — July 2006

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/surviving-your-childs-adolescence/201006
/parenting-after-the-adolescent-becomes-adult