1. Introduction

Substance use, unsafe sexual practice, self-harm, transport injuries and interpersonal violence are examples of risk-taking behaviors related to the main causes of death in adolescents and youth (GBD 2019 Adolescent Mortality Collaborators, 2021). Generally, engagement in risk-taking behaviors has been explained by approaches such as psychopathological (e.g., Satchell et al., 2018) or developmental cognitive imbalances during adolescence and youth (Murray et al., 2021). Both approaches assume that risk-taking is irrational or illogical; given the potential costs to both the individual carrying them out (e.g., injuries and death), and to the proximate environment and society in general (Hawley, 1999).

One important consequence of a dysfunctional perspective on risk-taking behaviors has been to overlook the potential payoffs for the individuals who engage in them. However, risk-taking can be used as a means of gaining status and ascending in social hierarchies (Van Kleef et al., 2021), and as a mating strategy (Baker & Maner, 2009).

1.1. An adaptive perspective on risk-taking behaviors

The fundamental social motives approach proposes that individuals are equipped with a set of social motives defined as “systems shaped by our evolutionary history to energize, organize and select behavior to manage recurrent social threats and opportunities to reproductive fitness” (Neel et al., 2016, p. 887). Social motives help individuals to cope with the evolutionary challenges of survival, growth and reproduction, and are arranged in a hierarchical disposition following an adaptive logic. More specifically, survival and social motives will form the bases for mate acquisition, which in turn will be the prior requirement for establishing a long-term partner, the ultimate objective being the production and rearing of offspring. Moreover, one motive does not replace another; rather, the individual assigns motives different priority along the life cycle. As Kenrick et al. (2010) established, individuals need to continue to contribute to their social and physical needs even after they have started to mate. Activation of the social motives will depend on the evolutionary objective to be achieved, which generates individual differences at the affective, cognitive and behavioral level (Kenrick et al., 2010). As a result, social motives have been demonstrated as powerful means for analyzing individual differences in a wide variety of behaviors (Cook et al., 2021). Age and sex are two factors that help to understand these individual differences (Ko et al., 2020).

1.2. Life stages

Through the different stages of the life cycle, individuals will have to cope with different evolutionary objectives (Kenrick et al., 2010). According to the evolutionary goals of each life stage, the social motives to be prioritized will be different. Specifically, adolescence and young adulthood are characterized as mating stages, in which mate-seeking, status and affiliation motives will exert a strong influence (Griskevicius & Kenrick, 2013). The activation of these social motives might help to explain why risk-taking behaviors are typically initiated and heightened during this life stage (Willoughby et al., 2021).

Previous studies have examined risk-taking in young adults aged 18–30 years (e.g., Vincke, 2016) or even up to 35 years (e.g., Tamás et al., 2019). Research assume no differences in these individuals aged 18–30 years, since studies typically did not take into account the relevant developmental changes during this 12 years' period. However, findings suggest a specific pre-adult period of emerging adulthood at approximately 18–25 years old (Hochberg & Konner, 2020). From an evolutionary standpoint, emerging adulthood is a particularly relevant biological stage in humans and other mammals. In human beings, the brain continues its maturation process until approximately the age of 25 years. In addition, emerging adulthood is characterized as a social stage where individuals develop the skills needed for mating and reproduction success. In short, emerging adulthood is an extension of the adolescent stage aimed at growth and brain maturation but increasing the individual's reproductive value, which allows the acquisition of survival skills and reproductive behaviors (Hochberg & Konner, 2020).

1.3. Sex

In general, men are more predisposed to take risks than women anywhere (e.g., Mata et al., 2016). One explanation for these sex differences comes from social and gender norm theories, which establish that differences between men and women in risk-taking are socially constructed and learned (Heise et al., 2019). From an evolutionary perspective, sex differences in risk-taking are due mainly to the higher disposition of men towards mating compared to women, who in turn are more oriented towards caring and parenting (Ko et al., 2020). Given their fundamental role in offspring survival, females' minimal parental investment is greater than male parental care (Mogilski, 2021; Trivers, 1972). According to the evolutionary perspective, that is one of the reasons why women tend to be more averse to risk-taking than men (Archer, 2019).

Men compared to women can increase their reproductive success through access to multiple partners (Mogilski, 2021; Trivers, 1972). Wilson and Daly (1985) coined the term young male syndrome to refer to the higher tendency of young men to take interpersonal risks as a mechanism for enhancing their reputation and achieving status and access to resources, including opposite-sex partners. In addition, Apalkova et al. (2018) found that women judged occasional risk-takers as more attractive than lower risk-takers for short-term relationships. For this purpose, men may exhibit health risks (e.g., Vincke, 2016) or take part in interpersonal risks (e.g., Griskevicius et al., 2009).

On the other hand, women tend to take unhealthier risks that are aimed at increasing their attractiveness (Hill & Durante, 2011), and to rely on interpersonal risks and deviant behaviors, such as denigration of same-sex competitors and trying to socially exclude them (Vaillancourt & Krems, 2018).

1.4. Present study

Because of the lack of research on the contribution of fundamental social motives to risk-taking according to sex and the life stages, our first aim was to explore the relationship between fundamental social motives and engagement in different risk-taking behaviors across men and women and different life stages in the transition to adulthood. In addition, our second aim was to compare engagement in the three types of risk-taking behaviors as a function of sex and age.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

A total of 1370 participants from the metropolitan area of Málaga (Spain) took part in the study. Data from young adults (26–30 years old, n = 487) were collected in community settings; data from emerging adults (18–24 years old, n = 598) were collected both in community settings and high schools; and data from adolescents (14–17 years old, n = 285) were exclusively collected in high schools. Most of the participants were Spanish (n = 1287), aged 14–30 years (M = 21.83, SD = 4.50), students (66.23 %) and at post-secondary level (i.e., 12 years of school finished; 45.51 %). Table 1 summarizes the sociodemographic statistics.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Fundamental social motives inventory – short version

This inventory (FSM: Neel et al., 2016; Spanish version: Gómez-Jacinto & Salas-Rodríguez, 2018) was applied to measure the following social motives: self-protection, disease avoidance, affiliation (group), affiliation (exclusion concern), affiliation (independence), status, mate-seeking, and kin care (family). The FSM short form is an abbreviated version of the FSM that includes 33 of the original items, with three items per social motive. The response format from the original version was reduced from a 7-point to a 5-point Likert scale. Participants rated their level of agreement across the items at that time in their life on a scaled that ranged from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. Both the Spanish and original versions of the FSM showed satisfactory psychometric qualities (Gómez-Jacinto & Salas-Rodríguez, 2018; Neel et al., 2016). In the present study, the internal consistency of the dimensions ranged between α = 0.82 for mate-seeking to α = 0.65 for affiliation (exclusion concern).

2.2.2. Risky behavior questionnaire (RBQ)

This questionnaire is a one-dimensional instrument that measures, through 20 questions, participants' level of engagement in a wide range of risk-taking behaviors in the last six months (Auerbach & Gardiner, 2012; Spanish version: Gómez-Jacinto & Salas-Rodríguez, 2018). Responses were operationalized on a four-point Likert scale from Never to Always. Items were grouped into three risk-taking domains: health risks (substance use, unsafe sexual practices, self-injurious behaviors); interpersonal risks (aggressive and/or violent behaviors); and deviant non-violent behaviors (illegal and dangerous behaviors). The internal consistency in the current sample was appropriate, ranging between α = 0.70 (interpersonal risks) to α = 0.63 (health risks).

2.2.3. Sociodemographic questionnaire

Participants reported their sex (man/woman), nationality (Spanish/foreign), level of education (none/primary, secondary, postsecondary, or tertiary), employment status (employed, unemployed, student, housework, other), relationship status (in a relationship/single), parental status (yes/no), and age (in years).

2.3. Procedure and statistical analysis

For access to the general community sample, undergraduate Social Psychology students were trained to handle the questionnaires for the adult population aged 18–30 years. Participants were recruited from community settings, including universities, workplaces and sports organizations. The survey was carried out in two phases: at the end of 2016 (n = 429) and at the beginning of 2017 (n = 617). The high school sample (n = 324) was obtained from six education centers, where members of the research team and school counsellors handed the questionnaires to students during school hours. A subgroup of participants from the community settings responded to the Risky Behavior Questionnaire and the Fundamental Social Motives Inventory using a 5-point and a 7-point Likert scale, respectively. Therefore, it was necessary to standardize these data to the remaining sample before conducting the statistical analyses.

Regarding data analysis, hierarchical linear regressions were carried out separately by sex and by life stage. Sex and age were introduced as predictors in Step 1. Given that groups at risk of social exclusion are a relevant variable in the study of risky deviant behaviors (Piquero et al., 2015), nationality was introduced as a predictor in Step 1 to control its potential effect. In all cases, health risks, interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors were introduced as dependent variables, and the fundamental social motives were added in Step 2 as predictors. Because only 39.5 % of the participants were in a relationship and 10.2 % were parents (see Table 1), we decided not to introduce the mate retention and kin care (children) social motives in the regression analysis to avoid a significant loss of participant data.

Finally, hierarchical linear regressions were carried out to verify interaction effects between sex and age for health risks, interpersonal risks, and deviant non-violent behaviors, respectively. Sex, age, and sex*age were the predictor variables. Age was introduced as a continuous variable and nationality as a control variable.

The present study was approved by the ethical committee on experimentation from the University of Málaga (CEUMA) (Registry number: 45-2018-H). In all the waves, participants gave their consent before answering the questionnaires. In the adolescent wave, parents and/or legal tutors of the participants were informed so that they could approve the objectives and methods of the study.

3. Results

Table 2 summarizes the descriptive statistics and the correlations. The three domains of risk-taking behaviors had significant positive correlations between them. Status and kin care (family) motives were the only ones that correlated with all the three domains of risk-taking behaviors. Status seeking is positively correlated with health risks, interpersonal risks, and deviant non-violent behaviors. Kin care (family) showed a negative association with the three domains of risk-taking behaviors.

The results of the hierarchical regression analyses for the prediction of health risks are displayed in Table 3. Status seeking was positively related to risky health behaviors in both men and women and in emerging adults and young adults. Kin care (family) was negatively related to health risks in men and women and in adolescents and young adults. Self-protection motive was negatively related to health risks in men and in adolescents. Affiliation (independence) motive was inversely related to health risks in women and in emerging adults.

The data in Table 4 show that, for all models, individuals with a higher activation-of-status motive showed greater engagement in interpersonal risks. Mate seeking was positively related to interpersonal risks for both men and women and in young adults. Kin care (family) was negatively correlated with interpersonal risks in men and in emerging adults. Affiliation (group) motive was negatively associated with interpersonal risks in women and in emerging adults. Affiliation (exclusion concerns) motive was negatively related to interpersonal risks in men and in young adults. In adolescents, self-protection motive was negatively related to interpersonal risks.

Table 5 indicates that status seeking was positively related to engagement in deviant non-violent behaviors in men and women and in emerging adults and young adults. Mate seeking motive was positively associated with deviant non-violent behaviors in females and young adults, and kin care (family) was negatively related to deviant non-violent behaviors in men and in adolescents and in emerging adults. In addition, affiliation (group) was negatively associated with deviant non-violent behaviors in women and in emerging adults. Last, self-protection motive was negatively correlated with deviant non-violent behaviors in women and in adolescents.

The interaction effects between sex and age for the three types of risk-taking behavior are presented in the supplementary materials (Table S1). For health risks, the interaction effect between sex and age was significant. Women took more health risks than men during adolescence. This pattern reversed later, in early adulthood, when men began to take more health risks than women (Fig. S1). For interpersonal risks, the interaction between sex and age was almost significant. Specifically, men engaged in more interpersonal risks than women from adolescence to young adulthood (Fig. S2). Finally, the interaction effect between sex and age for deviant non-violent behaviors was non-significant.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the fundamental social motives and risk-taking behaviors. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the role of fundamental social motives in intrapersonal and interpersonal risk-taking behaviors, including antisocial outcomes, across sex and different stages of development. In general, the findings showed that status-seeking acted as a risk factor for risk-taking behaviors, as it was expected. Remarkably, kin care (family) acted as a protective factor. Furthermore, the association of status and kin care (family) with risk-taking behaviors through adolescence, emerging adulthood and young adulthood suggests a long-term effect of these motives. The inverse association found between status and kin care (family) with the three types of risk-taking behaviors would be in line with the tradeoff between mating and parenting effort (Ko et al., 2020). Consistent with this allocation problem, our findings show that individuals who engage in risk-taking behaviors are more motivated to seek status but less motivated towards kin care.

Our findings suggest that the search for status promoted engagement in risk-taking behaviors which supports the adaptive function of risk-taking as a means of attaining the respect and deference from others in adolescence and youth (Ellis et al., 2012). Interestingly, the effect of status-seeking over health risks and deviant non-violent behaviors showed a growth pattern, with the highest correlation occurring in young adulthood. Moreover, the status motive related only with interpersonal risks in adolescents, even though adolescence is considered to be the onset of a wide variety of risk-taking behaviors (Willoughby et al., 2021). This finding is particularly relevant because violent behaviors such as aggression peak in adolescence (Willoughby et al., 2021). Mate-seeking promoted higher interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors in young adults. Given that emerging adulthood is still a developmental stage of maturation (Hochberg & Konner, 2020), it is possible that it is not until young adulthood that mate-seeking starts to exert its higher influence on behavior, when individuals are biologically, socially and economically more prepared (and/or pressured) for having children.

Kin care (family) exerted a protective effect against some of the risk-taking behaviors in the life stages analyzed. This finding reinforces the high value of family support as a buffer against youth and adolescent risk-taking behaviors (e.g., Steiner et al., 2019). In addition, kin care (family) might activate in individuals an awareness of the potential costs that risk-taking behaviors could have on their relatives, thus reducing their involvement.

In adolescents, self-protection inversely predicted engagement in the three risk-taking behaviors. Thus, self-protection appears to show an adaptive function by reducing the likelihood of engaging in highly costly behaviors in a developmental stage where individuals start to spend more time with peers and less with parents. In emerging adults, affiliation (independence) was related to less engagement in health risks and affiliation (group) was related to less interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors. These findings reinforce the view of emerging adulthood as a relevant social stage of development (Hochberg & Konner, 2020).

4.1. Fundamental social motives of risk-taking behaviors in men and women

Mate-seeking only predicted interpersonal risks among men, suggesting that aggressive behaviors are the main strategy to mate-seeking, in line with other studies (Griskevicius et al., 2009). In addition, this relationship can be explained by the male warrior hypothesis(McDonald et al., 2012), which establishes that men engage in interpersonal conflicts to gain access to reproductive resources, in this case opposite-sex partners. These findings can also be explained by gender norm approaches which state that across most of societies, aggressive strategies are perceived as a valid strategy to increase male sexual opportunities (Heise et al., 2019).

In women, mate-seeking positively predicted health risks, interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors. This finding was particularly remarkable given that, compared with men, mate seeking related to a higher variety of risk-taking behaviors in women. Women's engagement in health risks could be aimed at increasing their attractiveness (Hill & Durante, 2011), whereas engaging in interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors could be directed towards romantic competition (Vaillancourt & Krems, 2018).

Kin care (family) was related with a reduction of engagement in health risks, interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors in men. In accordance with the good-father hypothesis (Lu et al., 2015), men's interest in caring for their relatives could have a signaling function for attracting women who put more emphasis on rearing as opposed to competition qualities. As a result, lesser engagement in risk-taking behaviors would act as an honest indicator of men's kin care compromise. It is interesting that kin care (family) correlated negatively only with health risks in women, which could be explained by their higher minimal investment in offspring survival (Trivers, 1972). Affiliation and self-protection motives were shown to be a protective factor towards some of the risk-taking behaviors in both men and women. This finding suggests that these motives seem to be not only crucial in women's aversion to social and physical risk-taking behaviors (Benenson et al., 2021) but also in men, specifically by decreasing engagement in health and interpersonal risk-taking behaviors.

4.2. Interaction effects between sex and age on risk-taking behaviors

Women's greater expression of health risks during adolescence might be due to their earlier entry in puberty (Fechner, 2003). However, in the initial stages of emerging adulthood, men surpass women in health risks, although both sexes still express an increase in these risk-taking behaviors. This is in line with the proposition that emerging adulthood is a developmental stage in which mating motives become more salient and individuals begin to experience greater autonomy from their parents (Hochberg & Konner, 2020).

With respect to interpersonal risks, the results were in the opposite direction, with men expressing the highest levels of these behaviors during adolescence. In addition, men engaged in interpersonal risks more than women throughout the life stages analyzed. Also, although not significant, the pattern of deviant non-violent behaviors was similar to that of interpersonal risks. These findings suggest that the use of violence and deviant behaviors as a dominance mechanism appears to be more effective and adaptive in the high school years, being less accepted later in university and older years.

In general, these results are in line with the young male syndrome hypothesis, given the greater tendency of men to express risk-taking behaviors. However, the pattern is different in the function of the type of risk-taking behavior, which could depend on differences in evolutionary needs from adolescence to young adulthood. Specifically, emerging and young adult males showed more engagement in health risks, which could be related to the aim of meeting their reproductive needs. In contrast, interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors were more frequent in male adolescents, possibly as a way of attaining social dominance and respect from peers.

4.3. Implications, limitations and future directions

The present study has several relevant theoretical and practical implications. At a theoretical level, the findings strengthen the major role of the social status motive on risk-taking behaviors in both men and women. On the other hand, kin care (family) stood out as the main protective factor against the engagement in risk-taking behaviors. As Ko et al. (2020) suggested, despite its relevance in human behavior, social and evolutionary psychologists have paid little attention to kin relations. The results from the present study reinforce the need to carry out further research to analyze the role of kinship relationships on human behavior. Moreover, even though we have found some commonalities in the impact of social motives on risk-taking behaviors in adolescence and emerging and young adulthood, there have also been unique influences in specific life stages, reinforcing the need to establish a distinction between these life stages (Hochberg & Konner, 2020).

This work is not free of limitations. Mate retention and kin care (children) dimensions were omitted from the regression analyses to avoid losing a high proportion of cases. Furthermore, despite the level of concordance between both gender and sex self-identification (e.g., Kal Kaltiala-Heino & Lindberg, 2019), the binary approach that was applied, and the fact that only biological sex was evaluated across samples, are important limitations. Moreover, the sample was obtained in Spain, a Western context, which means that the generalizability of results can be challenging for other culturally, socially, and politically diverse countries. In addition, due to the cross-sectional nature of present study, it would be appropriate to carry out longitudinal research to test the intra-individual long-term effects of social motives on risk-taking behaviors. Finally, given that the young male syndrome hypothesis covers an age range from the final years of adolescence to young adulthood, it is necessary to compare the interaction effects between sex and age including other developmental stages.

Nonetheless, our findings have several implications. This work highlights the key protective role of family bonds in relation to risk-taking behaviors. In addition, they suggest the potential adaptive value of risk-taking behaviors and might explain why health and safety campaigns aimed at adolescents and young people are not as effective as expected and may even exert the opposite effect. Instead of using zero-risk interventions, efforts might be oriented towards reducing the potential costs of risk-taking behaviors.

Link to Article

An Adaptive Perspective on the Relationship Between Fundamental Social Motives and Risk-Taking Behaviors in Adolescence and Young Adulthood: Differences by Sex and Life Stage

1. Introduction

Risk-taking behaviors, including substance use, unsafe sexual practices, self-harm, transport injuries, and interpersonal violence, constitute major contributors to mortality among adolescents and youth (GBD 2019 Adolescent Mortality Collaborators, 2021). Traditional perspectives, such as psychopathological (e.g., Satchell et al., 2018) or developmental cognitive imbalance models (e.g., Murray et al., 2021), often frame risk-taking as inherently irrational due to potential negative consequences for individuals and society (Hawley, 1999).

However, overlooking potential benefits associated with risk-taking behaviors presents an incomplete perspective. Engaging in risk can be instrumental in status acquisition and social hierarchy ascension (Van Kleef et al., 2021), and serve as a viable mating strategy (Baker & Maner, 2009).

1.1. An Adaptive Perspective on Risk-Taking Behaviors

The fundamental social motives approach offers a nuanced understanding of risk-taking. This framework posits that individuals possess an array of evolved social motives, which are "systems shaped by our evolutionary history to energize, organize and select behavior to manage recurrent social threats and opportunities to reproductive fitness” (Neel et al., 2016, p. 887). These motives, hierarchically organized to address evolutionary challenges (survival, growth, reproduction), prioritize different objectives across the lifespan (Kenrick et al., 2010). This intricate interplay of social motives is critical for understanding individual differences in behavior (Cook et al., 2021), with age and sex being particularly salient factors (Ko et al., 2020).

1.2. Life Stages

Distinct evolutionary goals characterize different life stages, influencing the prioritization of social motives (Kenrick et al., 2010). Adolescence and young adulthood, marked by heightened salience of mating, status, and affiliation motives (Griskevicius & Kenrick, 2013), often witness increased risk-taking behaviors (Willoughby et al., 2021).

Previous research has examined risk-taking in young adults (18–30 years; e.g., Vincke, 2016; Tamás et al., 2019), often overlooking developmental nuances within this period. However, the concept of emerging adulthood (18–25 years; Hochberg & Konner, 2020) highlights a distinct pre-adult phase characterized by continued brain maturation and the development of skills essential for mating and reproductive success. Emerging adulthood, therefore, represents an extension of adolescence focused on enhancing reproductive value through the acquisition of survival and reproductive skills (Hochberg & Konner, 2020).

1.3. Sex

Men consistently exhibit higher risk-taking propensities compared to women (e.g., Mata et al., 2016). Social and gender norm theories attribute these differences to socially constructed and learned behaviors (Heise et al., 2019). However, an evolutionary perspective posits that these sex differences stem from varying reproductive strategies: men prioritize mating effort, while women prioritize parental care (Ko et al., 2020). Given their greater minimal parental investment (Mogilski, 2021; Trivers, 1972), women tend to be more risk-averse (Archer, 2019).

Men, on the other hand, can enhance their reproductive success through multiple partners (Mogilski, 2021; Trivers, 1972). This, coupled with the "young male syndrome" – a term coined by Wilson and Daly (1985) to describe young men's proclivity for interpersonal risks to enhance reputation and gain access to resources and partners – sheds light on men's engagement in health risks (e.g., Vincke, 2016) and interpersonal risks (e.g., Griskevicius et al., 2009).

Women, while generally more risk-averse, engage in specific risky behaviors. These often involve health risks aimed at enhancing attractiveness (Hill & Durante, 2011) or interpersonal risks and deviant behaviors aimed at undermining same-sex competitors (Vaillancourt & Krems, 2018).

1.4. Present Study

This study addresses the lack of research on the relationship between fundamental social motives and risk-taking behaviors across sex and different life stages during the transition to adulthood. Specifically, we aimed to:

1. Explore the relationship between fundamental social motives and different risk-taking behaviors across men and women and different life stages in the transition to adulthood.

2. Compare engagement in three types of risk-taking behaviors as a function of sex and age.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

A total of 1370 participants (14-30 years old; M = 21.83, SD = 4.50) from Málaga, Spain, participated. Data were collected from adolescents (14–17 years old; n = 285) in high schools, emerging adults (18–24 years old; n = 598) in community settings and high schools, and young adults (26–30 years old; n = 487) in community settings. See Table 1 for detailed sociodemographic information.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Fundamental Social Motives Inventory – Short Version

We used the Fundamental Social Motives Inventory - Short Version (FSM; Neel et al., 2016; Spanish version: Gómez-Jacinto & Salas-Rodríguez, 2018) to assess eight social motives: self-protection, disease avoidance, affiliation (group), affiliation (exclusion concern), affiliation (independence), status, mate-seeking, and kin care (family). Participants rated their level of agreement with 33 items (three per motive) on a 5-point Likert scale. Internal consistency was satisfactory (α = 0.65 - 0.82).

2.2.2. Risky Behavior Questionnaire (RBQ)

The Risky Behavior Questionnaire (RBQ; Auerbach & Gardiner, 2012; Spanish version: Gómez-Jacinto & Salas-Rodríguez, 2018) measured engagement in 20 risk-taking behaviors over the past six months using a 4-point Likert scale. Items were grouped into three domains: health risks, interpersonal risks, and deviant non-violent behaviors. Internal consistency was acceptable (α = 0.63 - 0.70).

2.2.3. Sociodemographic Questionnaire

Participants provided information on sex, nationality, education, employment status, relationship status, parental status, and age.

2.3. Procedure and Statistical Analysis

Data were collected via trained undergraduate psychology students and researchers in community and high school settings. Data standardization was performed for subgroups with different Likert scale formats.

Hierarchical linear regressions were conducted separately by sex and life stage to examine the relationships between fundamental social motives and risk-taking behaviors. Control variables (sex, age, nationality) were entered in Step 1, followed by fundamental social motives in Step 2. Mate retention and kin care (children) motives were excluded due to limited data. Interaction effects between sex and age were examined for each risk-taking behavior.

Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Málaga (CEUMA), and informed consent was acquired from all participants (and parents/legal guardians for adolescents).

3. Results

Table 2 presents descriptive statistics and correlations. Positive correlations were observed among all three risk-taking domains. Status seeking was positively correlated with all three risk-taking domains, while kin care (family) showed negative correlations.

Hierarchical regression results for health risks (Table 3) revealed that status seeking was positively associated with health risks across sexes and in emerging and young adults. Kin care (family) was negatively associated with health risks across sexes and in adolescents and young adults.

For interpersonal risks (Table 4), status seeking again emerged as a significant predictor across all models. Mate seeking positively predicted interpersonal risks in both sexes and in young adults. Kin care (family) was negatively associated with interpersonal risks in men and emerging adults.

Table 5 shows that status seeking positively predicted deviant non-violent behaviors across sexes and in emerging and young adults. Mate seeking was a significant predictor for females and young adults, while kin care (family) showed a negative association in men and in adolescents and emerging adults.

Supplementary materials (Table S1) present interaction effects. A significant interaction was found for health risks, indicating that women engage in more health risks during adolescence, with this pattern reversing in early adulthood (Fig. S1). For interpersonal risks, a marginally significant interaction suggested that men engage in more interpersonal risks across all life stages (Fig. S2). No significant interaction was observed for deviant non-violent behaviors.

4. Discussion

This study provides novel insights into the relationship between fundamental social motives and risk-taking behaviors across sex and different life stages. As hypothesized, status seeking emerged as a consistent risk factor, while kin care (family) exhibited a protective effect. The enduring influence of status and kin care (family) throughout adolescence, emerging adulthood, and young adulthood suggests a long-term impact of these motives.

The inverse relationship observed between status and kin care (family) aligns with the tradeoff between mating and parenting effort (Ko et al., 2020). Individuals engaging in risk-taking behaviors appear to prioritize status over kin care, reflecting this allocation challenge.

Our findings underscore the adaptive function of risk-taking as a means of gaining social capital during adolescence and young adulthood (Ellis et al., 2012). The escalating influence of status seeking on health risks and deviant non-violent behaviors, peaking in young adulthood, is particularly noteworthy. Interestingly, while adolescence marks the onset of diverse risk-taking behaviors (Willoughby et al., 2021), status only predicted interpersonal risks in this age group. This finding carries significant weight considering the prevalence of violent behaviors, such as aggression, during adolescence (Willoughby et al., 2021).

The delayed impact of mate seeking on risk-taking behaviors, particularly interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors, observed in young adulthood, may reflect the developmental readiness and societal pressures associated with this life stage. Emerging adulthood, characterized by ongoing maturation (Hochberg & Konner, 2020), may not fully capture the influence of mating motives on behavior until individuals are biologically, socially, and economically prepared for parenthood.

The protective effect of kin care (family) observed across various life stages underscores the importance of family support in mitigating risk-taking (e.g., Steiner et al., 2019). Heightened awareness of the potential consequences of risk-taking behaviors on family members may contribute to this protective effect.

The negative association between self-protection and all three risk-taking domains in adolescents suggests an adaptive response to navigate increased peer influence and reduced parental supervision. Similarly, in emerging adults, affiliation (independence) and affiliation (group) were associated with reduced health risks, interpersonal risks, and deviant non-violent behaviors, respectively. These findings highlight the significance of social connections and autonomy during this life stage (Hochberg & Konner, 2020).

4.1. Fundamental Social Motives of Risk-Taking Behaviors in Men and Women

Consistent with previous research (e.g., Griskevicius et al., 2009), mate seeking predicted interpersonal risks exclusively in men, suggesting that aggression remains a central strategy for securing mates. This finding aligns with the "male warrior hypothesis" (McDonald et al., 2012), which posits that interpersonal conflict serves as a means to acquire reproductive resources. Gender norm perspectives, which emphasize the societal acceptance of aggression as a valid strategy for men to enhance sexual opportunities (Heise et al., 2019), offer further support for this relationship.

Conversely, mate seeking in women predicted a broader range of risk-taking behaviors, including health risks, interpersonal risks, and deviant non-violent behaviors. Engaging in health risks may serve to enhance attractiveness (Hill & Durante, 2011), while interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors could be employed to navigate romantic competition (Vaillancourt & Krems, 2018).

The protective effect of kin care (family) observed in men across all three risk-taking domains is consistent with the "good-father hypothesis" (Lu et al., 2015), which suggests that paternal care serves as a signal of mate quality. By minimizing risk-taking behaviors, men may be conveying their commitment to kin care, making them more attractive partners. In contrast, kin care (family) only protected women from engaging in health risks. This finding might be attributed to their greater minimal investment in offspring survival (Trivers, 1972).

Affiliation and self-protection motives emerged as protective factors for both sexes, indicating their crucial role in mitigating social and physical risk-taking behaviors (Benenson et al., 2021).

4.2. Interaction Effects Between Sex and Age on Risk-Taking Behaviors

The observed sex differences in health risks, with women engaging in more health risks during adolescence followed by a reversal in emerging adulthood, may reflect earlier pubertal timing in females (Fechner, 2003). As individuals enter emerging adulthood and experience greater autonomy and the increasing salience of mating motives (Hochberg & Konner, 2020), men surpass women in engaging in health risks.

The consistent pattern of men exhibiting higher levels of interpersonal risks across all life stages aligns with the "young male syndrome." The peak in adolescence, followed by a decline in emerging and young adulthood, suggests that violence and deviant behaviors might be more effective for achieving social dominance during the high school years. This pattern underscores the evolving social landscape and the decreasing acceptance of such behaviors in university and beyond.

These findings, while supporting the "young male syndrome," highlight the nuanced interplay between sex, age, and evolutionary pressures in shaping risk-taking behaviors. The prevalence of health risks in emerging and young adult males may be linked to fulfilling reproductive needs, while interpersonal risks and deviant non-violent behaviors in adolescent males might serve as mechanisms for attaining social dominance among peers.

4.3. Implications, Limitations and Future Directions

This study offers valuable theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, our findings reinforce the central role of social status and kin care (family) in shaping risk-taking behaviors, emphasizing the need for further exploration of kinship dynamics in social and evolutionary psychology (Ko et al., 2020). Practically, our results highlight the importance of family bonds in mitigating risk-taking behaviors and challenge the effectiveness of zero-risk interventions.

However, limitations should be acknowledged. The exclusion of mate retention and kin care (children) motives due to data limitations, the binary approach to sex and reliance on biological sex, and the Western, culturally homogenous sample limit the generalizability of findings. Furthermore, the cross-sectional design precludes causal inferences.

Future research should incorporate longitudinal designs to examine the long-term impact of social motives on risk-taking behaviors. Including diverse samples and expanding the age range to encompass later developmental stages will enhance generalizability.

Despite these limitations, this study offers valuable insights. By highlighting the adaptive nature of risk-taking behaviors and the protective role of family, our findings encourage a shift from zero-risk interventions to harm-reduction strategies. Understanding the complex interplay of social motives, sex, and age is crucial for developing effective interventions and promoting the well-being of adolescents and young adults.

Link to Article

Risky Business: Exploring the Link Between Social Needs and Risky Behaviors in Young People

1. Introduction

We all know that young people often take risks. Substance use, unsafe sex, self-harm, reckless driving, and fighting are just some examples of risky behaviors that are common in adolescence and young adulthood. These behaviors are major contributors to death and injury among young people. Traditionally, we've viewed these risky actions as irrational and illogical, focusing on the negative consequences for individuals and society. However, there's another side to this story that often gets overlooked: the potential benefits of risk-taking.

1.1. A New View: The Potential Perks of Taking Risks

Instead of just seeing risk-taking as negative, what if we looked at it from an evolutionary perspective? This approach suggests that risky behaviors might actually be strategies for achieving important social goals, like gaining status and attracting mates. It's all about survival, growth, and, ultimately, reproduction. Think of it like this: risky actions might lead to rewards that outweigh the potential costs, especially in the competitive world of adolescence and young adulthood.

1.2. Different Stages, Different Goals

Life is a journey, and as we transition through different stages, our priorities shift. The same goes for our social needs. Adolescence and young adulthood are periods marked by the desire to find a partner, climb the social ladder, and establish a sense of belonging. These social motives become powerful driving forces, potentially explaining why risk-taking peaks during these years.

While past research often lumped young adults (18-30) together, we now understand that the period from 18-25, known as "emerging adulthood," is a unique developmental stage. The brain is still maturing, and individuals are figuring out how to succeed in the adult world, especially when it comes to finding a mate and starting a family.

1.3. The Gender Divide: Men, Women, and Risk

Across the board, men tend to take more risks than women. Social norms suggest that these differences are learned, with boys often encouraged to be bolder and more assertive. However, an evolutionary perspective offers a different explanation. Men, biologically driven to spread their genes, may see risk-taking as a way to attract multiple partners and outcompete rivals. This is particularly true in their younger years, a phenomenon dubbed "young male syndrome."

Women, on the other hand, face different evolutionary pressures. Their role as primary caregivers might make them more cautious, as they need to ensure their own survival to raise their offspring. However, they also engage in strategic risk-taking, often focusing on enhancing their attractiveness to potential partners or outmaneuvering romantic rivals.

1.4. Our Study: Connecting the Dots

Despite what we know about social motives and risk-taking, research hasn't fully explored how these factors interact across different genders and life stages. That's where our study comes in. We wanted to investigate:

1. How do different social motives predict risk-taking behaviors in men and women across adolescence, emerging adulthood, and young adulthood?

2. Do men and women of different ages engage in different types of risky behaviors?

2. How We Did It: Our Methods

2.1. Our Participants

Our study included 1370 participants from Spain, ranging in age from 14 to 30. They came from diverse backgrounds, including high schools, universities, workplaces, and community groups.

2.2. Our Tools: Measuring Social Motives and Risky Behaviors

We used questionnaires to measure:

• Fundamental Social Motives: This included motives like self-protection, avoiding disease, connecting with others, achieving status, finding a mate, and caring for family.

• Risky Behaviors: We looked at three types of risks:

  • Health Risks: Substance use, unsafe sex, self-harm.

  • Interpersonal Risks: Aggressive and violent behavior.

  • Deviant Non-Violent Behaviors: Illegal and dangerous actions.

2.3. Analyzing the Data: Making Sense of the Numbers

We used statistical techniques to see how different social motives were related to risk-taking behaviors in men and women across different age groups. We also examined whether the types of risks people took changed depending on their age and gender.

3. What We Found: The Results

• Status Matters (for Everyone): Across the board, the desire for status was a strong predictor of all types of risk-taking. This was true for both men and women and across all age groups. It seems that the drive to be respected and admired by peers can lead young people to engage in risky actions.

• Family First: Interestingly, valuing family and caring for loved ones seemed to protect against risk-taking. This suggests that strong family bonds can act as a buffer against risky choices.

• Love and Aggression (in Men): For men, the drive to find a mate was linked to increased interpersonal risks, like aggression. This supports the idea that men might use aggression to compete for partners.

• Women, Attraction, and Competition: For women, the desire for a mate was associated with a wider range of risks, including health risks, interpersonal risks, and deviant behaviors. This suggests that women might use a variety of strategies, from enhancing their appearance to engaging in social competition, to attract a partner.

• Age and Gender Differences: We found some interesting age and gender differences in risk-taking:

  • Health Risks: Teenage girls reported more health risks than teenage boys. However, this pattern reversed in emerging adulthood, with men engaging in more health risks.

  • Interpersonal Risks: Men consistently reported more interpersonal risks than women across all age groups.

4. Making Sense of It All: What Does It Mean?

Our findings suggest that:

• Status is a powerful motivator for risk-taking, and this drive seems to persist throughout adolescence and young adulthood.

• Family support can play a critical role in reducing risky behaviors.

• Men and women might engage in different types of risks to achieve similar social goals, particularly when it comes to finding a mate.

• Risk-taking patterns can change as young people transition through different life stages.

4.1. Why the Gender Differences?

Our findings support the idea that men and women face different evolutionary pressures, which might explain why they engage in different types of risks. For men, aggression might be a way to establish dominance and compete for partners. For women, the risks might be more about enhancing attractiveness or navigating the complexities of social competition.

4.2. Age Matters Too

The finding that risk-taking patterns change with age highlights the importance of understanding the unique developmental challenges faced in adolescence, emerging adulthood, and young adulthood.

4.3. Implications: What Can We Do?

Our findings have important implications for parents, educators, and anyone who works with young people:

• Focus on Building Strong Family Bonds: Promoting healthy family relationships could be an effective way to reduce risk-taking behaviors.

• Rethink Zero-Risk Messages: Simply telling young people not to take risks is often ineffective. Instead, we need to acknowledge the potential benefits they see in these behaviors and focus on harm reduction strategies.

• Tailor Interventions to Gender and Age: It's crucial to develop interventions that are sensitive to the unique challenges and motivations of different genders and age groups.

Limitations and Future Directions:

Our study has some limitations. We only looked at a specific population in Spain, so we need more research to see if these findings hold true in other cultures. Also, we relied on self-reported data, which can be biased. Future research should explore these questions using a wider range of methods and populations.

In Conclusion:

Risk-taking is a complex issue, and understanding the social motivations behind it is crucial for developing effective prevention and intervention programs. By recognizing the interplay of biology, social needs, gender, and age, we can better support young people as they navigate the challenges and opportunities of this exciting but often risky period of life.

Link to Article

Risky Business: Why Teens Take Risks and How Family Can Help

1. Introduction

We all know that teens sometimes make risky choices. Things like drinking, unsafe sex, hurting themselves, reckless driving, and fighting are all examples of risky behaviors. Sadly, these behaviors are some of the leading causes of death among young people. Most people think teenagers take these risks because of mental health problems or because their brains aren't fully developed yet. This view makes it seem like risk-taking is always a bad thing, especially since it can lead to harm for both the person taking the risk and the people around them.

But what if there are actually some benefits to taking risks? What if, for young people, taking risks is a way to climb the social ladder, impress potential partners, and figure out their place in the world?

1.1. A New Way to Look at Risk-Taking

The "fundamental social motives" theory offers a fresh perspective. It suggests that we're all driven by basic social needs that are hardwired into us from our ancestors. These needs helped humans survive and thrive throughout history. They include things like staying safe, avoiding disease, making friends, finding love, achieving status, and caring for family. These motives aren't static; they change in importance throughout our lives.

During the teenage and young adult years, the need to find a mate, gain status, and fit in with a group become super strong. This might be why we see risk-taking behaviors spike during these years.

1.2. Growing Up: More Than Just a Number

As we journey through life, we face different challenges. Think about it – a five-year-old has different goals than a twenty-five-year-old! Our social needs shift as we age. For teenagers, it's all about figuring out who they are, where they fit in, and who they want to be with.

Researchers have noticed a distinct phase called "emerging adulthood," roughly from ages 18 to 25. During this time, our brains are still developing, and we're focused on gaining skills for independence and building relationships. This stage is all about prepping for adulthood, and that includes navigating the world of relationships and responsibility.

1.3. Guys and Girls, Risks and Rewards

It’s no secret that guys often take more risks than girls. Some people think this is because of how boys and girls are raised and the expectations society places on them. From an evolutionary perspective, some argue that guys take more risks to stand out and attract partners, while girls are more cautious because they're biologically wired to protect future children.

Think about it – guys might show off physical skills or do daring things to prove their strength and bravery, which might have attracted partners in the past. Girls, on the other hand, might focus on building social connections and being supportive, traits that would have been essential for raising a family.

1.4. What We Studied

There hasn't been a lot of research on how these basic social needs affect risk-taking in guys versus girls and at different ages. So, we wanted to see if there was a connection between these needs and different types of risky behaviors in teenagers and young adults. We also wanted to see how risk-taking differed between guys and girls and how this changed as they got older.

2. How We Did It

2.1. Who We Studied

We talked to 1370 people from Spain, ranging in age from 14 to 30. Some were still in high school, while others were in college, working, or doing something else.

2.2. What We Asked

We used a few different questionnaires to understand our participants better.

2.2.1. Figuring Out Social Needs

First, we used the "Fundamental Social Motives Inventory" to see how important different social needs were to our participants. This questionnaire asked about things like feeling safe, avoiding getting sick, having close friends, being independent, being respected, finding a romantic partner, and taking care of family.

2.2.2. Measuring Risky Behavior

Next, we used the "Risky Behavior Questionnaire" to see what kinds of risks people were taking. This questionnaire asked about things like substance use, unsafe sex, self-harm, aggression, breaking the law, and other risky behaviors. We grouped these behaviors into three categories: health risks (things that could hurt your body), interpersonal risks (things that could hurt others), and deviant non-violent behaviors (things that break rules or laws).

2.2.3. Getting to Know You

Finally, we asked some basic questions about age, gender, nationality, education, job, and relationship status to understand our participants' backgrounds.

2.3. Making Sense of the Data

We used a statistical technique called "hierarchical linear regression" to look for patterns in the data we collected. This fancy term just means we used math to see if there was a connection between the different things we measured – like if people who really cared about status were also more likely to take risks.

3. What We Found

Here's the short version of what we discovered:

• Status seekers are risk-takers. People who were really motivated to achieve status were more likely to engage in all three types of risky behaviors. This was true for both guys and girls and across all age groups.

• Family matters. People who were really motivated to care for their families were less likely to take risks. This suggests that having strong family connections can be a powerful buffer against risky behavior.

• Status and family are a balancing act. It seems like these two motives – wanting status and wanting to care for family – pull people in opposite directions.

• Guys and girls, different risks. Guys were more likely to take risks in general, especially when it came to behaviors that could hurt others. This was particularly true during adolescence. Girls, on the other hand, showed a greater increase in health risks during adolescence but then decreased those behaviors in young adulthood.

4. What Does It All Mean?

Our findings show that the desire for status is a powerful motivator for risk-taking, but strong family connections can help steer young people away from danger. It's like a tug-of-war between wanting to fit in and be popular and wanting to do right by loved ones.

Here's a breakdown of our main findings:

• Status matters, especially for young adults. As people transition into adulthood, status becomes even more important, which might be why we saw the link between status-seeking and risky behavior increase with age.

• Family is a safety net. Teens and young adults who were close to their families were less likely to engage in risky behaviors. This makes sense, as families can provide support, guidance, and a sense of accountability.

• Guys and girls take risks for different reasons. The type of risks guys and girls take might be tied to different biological and social pressures. Guys might use risk-taking to compete with other guys and showcase their strength, while girls might use it to navigate social dynamics and enhance their appearance.

• Age matters. The types of risks people take seem to shift as they move through adolescence and young adulthood, suggesting that these life stages come with unique social challenges and opportunities.

4.1. Social Needs and Risk-Taking in Guys and Girls

Here's a closer look at the differences we saw between guys and girls:

• Guys + Status = Riskier Behavior. For guys, the desire to find a partner was linked to a greater willingness to take interpersonal risks, particularly aggression. This could be because, historically, men who were physically dominant had an advantage in attracting partners and protecting their families.

• Girls Take Risks Too. Interestingly, girls who were motivated to find a partner were more likely to engage in all three types of risky behaviors, not just interpersonal risks. This could be because girls face pressure to conform to certain beauty standards or because they might use risky behavior to navigate complex social situations, like competing for attention from potential partners.

• Family First, for Guys. Guys who highly valued family were less likely to take risks across the board. This suggests that family can be a powerful motivator for guys to make healthy choices.

4.2. Age, Gender, and the Changing Face of Risk

Our findings also showed that risk-taking isn't just about being a guy or a girl; it's also about age:

• Girls Take More Health Risks in Early Adolescence. This could be because girls go through puberty earlier than boys, exposing them to hormonal changes and social pressures that might increase their likelihood of engaging in behaviors like substance use or disordered eating.

• Guys Catch Up and Surpass Girls in Health Risks. As guys enter their late teens and early twenties, they start taking more health risks than girls. This could be because they have more freedom and are more likely to engage in risky behaviors with their friends.

• Guys Take More Interpersonal Risks Throughout Adolescence and Young Adulthood. This pattern suggests that guys might use aggression and other risky behaviors to establish dominance and compete for status, particularly during the teenage years when social hierarchies are being formed.

4.3. The Big Picture: What We've Learned and What's Next

This study gives us a lot to think about. It's a reminder that risk-taking isn't always a sign of stupidity or rebellion; it can be a way for young people to figure out who they are, find their place in the world, and attract potential mates. It also highlights the crucial role families play in providing a safety net and promoting healthy choices.

Of course, our study has limitations. We need more research to understand these complex relationships fully. But our findings have important implications for parents, educators, and anyone who works with young people.

Instead of just telling young people to "say no" to risk, we need to understand the motivations behind their choices and find ways to channel their energy toward positive outlets. We need to have open conversations about the pressures they face and the potential consequences of their actions. And we need to provide them with the support and resources they need to navigate the challenges of adolescence and young adulthood safely and successfully.

Link to Article

1. Why Do Teens Take Risks?

What if some risky behavior isn't just about being reckless?

1.1. Maybe Risk-Taking Can Be Good?

Some scientists believe that risk-taking can be helpful for teenagers. Think about it: trying new things and standing out from the crowd can help you make friends and even find a boyfriend or girlfriend!

1.2. Growing Up is a Journey

As we grow up, we go through different stages in life. Teenagers' goals are different from when you're a little kid or a grown-up. Teenagers are often focused on making friends, becoming popular, and finding a partner. These goals can sometimes lead to riskier behavior.

Scientists also believe there's a special stage between being a teenager and a young adult called "emerging adulthood." During this time, your brain is still developing, and you're learning how to be independent and successful in relationships.

1.3. Boys and Girls Take Different Risks

It's no secret that boys and girls sometimes act differently. Generally, boys tend to take more risks than girls. This might be because boys want to impress girls and compete with other boys. They might do things like fighting or showing off to get attention. Girls, on the other hand, might focus on their appearance or gossip about rivals to attract a partner.

1.4. What We Wanted to Find Out

Scientists wanted to understand how your goals in life are linked to risky behavior. They also wanted to see if this is different for boys and girls, and for teenagers of different ages.

Link to Article