Report Prepared by Laurence Steinberg, Ph.d.
Laurence Steinberg, Ph.D. 
SummaryOriginal

Summary

Report Prepared by Laurence Steinberg, Ph.d.

Keywords Adolescent; Neurobiological; Judgment; Decision-Making; Risk-Taking; Impulse Control; Brain Development; Maturity; Sensation-Seeking; Emotional Arousal

Report Prepared by Laurence Steinberg, Ph.D. 

Name of Expert: Laurence Steinberg, DR. 

Area of Expertise: Psychiatry & Psychology >> Psychology 

Representing: Plaintiff 

Jurisdiction: W.D.Tex. 

PROFESSIONAL POSITION 

1. My name is Laurence Steinberg. My address is 1924 Pine Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103, USA. 

2. I hold the degrees of A.B. in Psychology from Vassar College (Poughkeepsie, New York) and Ph.D. in Human Development and Family Studies from Cornell University (Ithaca, New York). 

3. I am a developmental psychologist specializing in adolescence, broadly defined as the period of life between 10 and 25. I am on the faculty at Temple University, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, where I am the Distinguished University Professor and Laura H. Carnell Professor of Psychology. I am a member and Fellow of the American Psychological Association and the Association for Psychological Science, a member of the Society for Research in Child Development and the Society for Research on Adolescence, and a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. I was a member of the National Academies' Board on Children, Youth, and Families and chaired the Academies' Committee on the Science of Adolescence. I was President of the Division of Developmental Psychology of the American Psychological Association and President of the Society for Research on Adolescence. 

4. I received my Ph.D. in 1977 and have been continuously engaged in research on adolescent development since that time. I am the author or co-author of approximately 400 scientific articles and 17 books on young people. Prior to my appointment at Temple University, where I have been since 1988, I was on the faculty at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (1983-1988) and the University of California, Irvine (1977-1983). From 1997-2007, I directed the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice, a national multidisciplinary initiative on the implications of research on adolescent development for policy and practice concerning the treatment of juveniles in the legal system. I am currently a member of the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Law and Neuroscience, a national initiative examining the ways in which neuroscientific research may inform and improve legal policy and practice. 

5. Although my work has focused broadly on adolescent psychological development, I have a special interest in the development of judgment and decision-making, which I have been studying for nearly 20 years. In my capacity as chair of the National Academies' Committee on the Science of Adolescence, I organized and oversaw several workshops on adolescent risk-taking and its consequences for health and well-being. The summary of these workshops, which was published in 2011, discusses findings from recent research on adolescent brain development and the implications of this work for understanding why adolescents often display poor judgment in a range of situations. 

6. Since 1997, I have been engaged in research on the implications of research on adolescent development for legal decisions about the behavior of young people. More specifically, my colleagues and I have been studying whether, to what extent, and in what respects adolescents and adults differ in ways that may inform decisions about the treatment of juveniles under the law. 

7. The work that my colleagues and I have conducted has had demonstrable impact on American jurisprudence. Most significantly, it was cited and/or quoted verbatim in the majority opinion of the United States Supreme Court in Roper v. Simmons, the 2005 case that abolished the juvenile death penalty, and in both Graham v. Florida (2010), which banned the imposition of the sentence of life without parole for juveniles convicted of crimes other than homicide, and Miller v. Alabama / Jackson v. Hobbs (2012) (subsequently referred to in this report as “Miller”), which banned mandatory sentences of life without parole for juveniles, even those convicted of homicide. In these cases, I served as the lead scientist in the drafting of amicus briefs filed by the American Psychological Association, which argued that adolescents' neurobiological and behavioral immaturity warranted treating them differently than adults. 

8. It is my professional opinion that the diminished decision-making capacity and heightened inclination toward risky behavior among adolescents and young adults, relative to older individuals, is a critical consideration in the present matter. 

9. This report is prepared at the request of Mr. Robert Wilson, an attorney in the Law Offices of Thomas J. Henry. I have been asked to discuss what is known about psychological and neurobiological development of individuals during adolescence and young adulthood and to render an opinion as to what this research suggests regarding the judgment and decision-making of individuals in their early 20s. 

DOCUMENTS 

10. I have received and read the following documents: the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Deposition of Driver Zackary Brooks, the Deposition of Mary Janus, the Deposition of Edward Freeman, the Deposition of Greg Sierra, and the Deposition of Leticia Dawson. All documents were provided by Mr. Wilson's office. 

RELEVANT U.S. SUPREME COURT OPINIONS 

11. In its majority opinion in Roper, the U.S. Supreme Court noted that “As any parent knows, and as the scientific and sociological studies...tend to confirm, a lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility are found in youth more often than in adults. These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and opinions.” 

12. In Graham, the Court reiterated the logic behind its ruling in Roper and noted that “No recent data provide reason to reconsider the Court's observations in Roper about the nature of juveniles.... ... Developments in psychology and brain science continue to show fundamental differences between juvenile and adult minds. For example, parts of the brain involved in behavior control continue to mature through late adolescence.” 

13. In Miller, the Court reiterated the logic behind its prior rulings, in Roper and Graham, and noted that “the science and social science supporting Roper's and Graham's conclusions have become even stronger”; that “[A]n ever-growing body of research in developmental psychology and neuroscience continues to confirm and strengthen the Court's conclusions”; and that, “It is increasingly clear that adolescent brains are not yet fully mature in regions and systems related to higher-order executive functions such as impulse control, planning ahead, and risk avoidance.” 

14. Although these Supreme Court cases concern the juvenile death penalty and the use of life without the possibility of parole in juvenile sentencing, I believe that the general points made by the Court in its majority opinions extend to situations in which young people must exercise mature judgment. 

SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PSYCHOLOGICAL AND NEUROBIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT IN ADOLESCENCE AND YOUNG ADULTHOOD 

15. Several conclusions that have emerged from scientific research on brain and psychological development in adolescence are especially relevant to the present case (for a recent summary, see Steinberg, L. (2014). Age of Opportunity: Lessons from the New Science of Adolescence. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt). As noted above, in this report, “adolescence” refers to the period of development extending from 10 to 25. Where a distinction among age groups within this range is important, I use the phrase “late adolescents” to refer to individuals who are between 18 and 25. (In some scientific writings, these individuals have been referred to as “emerging adults.”) 

16. First, adolescents are more likely than adults to underestimate the number, seriousness, and likelihood of risks involved in a given situation. When asked to make a decision about a course of action, compared to adults, adolescents have more difficulty identifying the possible costs and benefits of each alternative, underestimate the chances of various negative consequences occurring, and underestimate the degree to which they could be harmed if the negative consequences occurred (see Grisso, T., Steinberg, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., Scott, E., Graham, S., Lexcen, F., Reppucci, N., & Schwartz, R. (2003). Juveniles' competence to stand trial: A comparison of adolescents' and adults' capacities as trial defendants. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 333-363). 

17. Second, adolescents are more likely than adults to engage in what psychologists call “sensation-seeking,” that is, the pursuit of arousing, rewarding, or novel experiences. As a consequence of this, adolescents are more apt to focus on the potential rewards of a given decision while neglecting to consider the potential costs (see Steinberg, L., Albert, D., Cauffman, E., Banich, M., Graham, S., & Woolard, J. (2008). Age differences in sensation seeking and impulsivity as indexed by behavior and self-report: Evidence for a dual systems model. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1764-1778). Other studies have indicated that heightened sensation-seeking among adolescents is due to the greater attention they pay to the potential rewards of a risky choice relative to the potential costs (Cauffman, E., Shulman, E., Steinberg, L., Claus, E., Banich, M., Graham, S., & Woolard, J. (2010). Age differences in affective decision making as indexed by performance on the Iowa Gambling Task. Developmental Psychology, 46, 193-207). This tendency is especially pronounced among individuals between the ages of 18 and 21. 

18. Third, adolescents are less able than adults to control their impulses and consider the future consequences of their actions and decisions. In general, adolescents are more short-sighted and less planful, and they have more difficulty than adults in foreseeing the possible outcomes of their actions and regulating their behavior accordingly (see Steinberg, L., Graham, S., O'Brien, L., Woolard, J., Cauffman, E., & Banich, M. (2009). Age differences in future orientation and delay discounting. Child Development, 80, 28-44). Importantly, gains in impulse control continue to occur during the mid-20s (see Steinberg, L., Albert, D., Cauffman, E., Banich, M., Graham, S., & Woolard, J. (2008) Age differences in sensation seeking and impulsivity as indexed by behavior and self-report: Evidence for a dual systems model. Developmental Psychology, 44, 1764-1778). 

19. Fourth, the development of basic cognitive abilities, including memory and logical reasoning, matures before the development of emotional maturity, including the ability to exercise self-control, properly consider the risks and rewards of alternative courses of action, and resist coercive pressure from others. Basic cognitive abilities reach adult levels of maturity

by age 16, but emotional maturation is ongoing into the early 20s, a phenomenon that has been referred to as a “maturity gap.” As a consequence of this gap between intellectual and emotional maturity, the tendencies of adolescents, relative to individuals in their mid-20s, to be more focused on rewards, more impulsive, and more myopic are exacerbated when adolescents are making decisions in situations that are emotionally arousing, such as those that generate negative emotions, such as fear, threat, or anxiety. Accordingly, adolescents' deficiencies in judgment, relative to adults, are greater under circumstances in which emotions are aroused (Steinberg, L., Cauffman, E., Woolard, J., Graham, S., & Banich, M. (2009). Are adolescents less mature than adults? Minors' access to abortion, the juvenile death penalty, and the alleged APA “flip-flop”. American Psychologist, 64, 583-594). 

20. In a recent study my colleagues and I conducted we assessed individuals' impulse control while experimentally manipulating their emotional state. Under conditions during which individuals were not emotionally aroused, individuals between 18 and 21 were able to control their impulses as well as those in their mid-20s, but under emotionally arousing conditions, 18- to 21-year olds demonstrated impulsive behavior comparable to those in their mid-teens (Cohen, A. et al. (2015). When does an adolescent become an adult? Assessing cognitive capacity under emotional influences. Paper under review.) 

21. Like emotional arousal, fatigue also increases the risk for poor judgment among adolescents. The combination of immature self-control and fatigue has been linked to driving accidents among adolescent drivers (Dahl, R. (2008). Biological, developmental, and neurobehavioral factors relevant to adolescent driving risks. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35, S278-S284). According to a report from the Institute of Medicine, the peak age for “falling-asleep accidents” is in the late teens and early 20s. Contrary to popular belief, the peak time of day for adolescent crashes due to sleepiness is during the morning, not at night (Institute of Medicine. (2007). Preventing Teen Motor Crashes: Contributions from the Behavioral and Social Sciences: Workshop Report. Washington (DC): National Academies Press). Just one night's sleep deprivation can significantly impair adolescents' behavioral functioning. Inadequate nighttime sleep during adolescence has been linked to daytime sleepiness, cognitive difficulties, slower reaction times, and inattentiveness (Beebe, D. W. (2011). cognitive, behavioral, and functional consequences of inadequate sleep in children and adolescents. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 58, 649-665; Louca, M., & Short, M. (2014). The effect of one night's sleep deprivation on adolescent neurobehavioral performance. SLEEP, 37, 1799-1807). 

22. The combination of heightened attentiveness to rewards and still-maturing impulse control makes middle and late adolescence a period of greater risk taking than any other stage of development. This has been demonstrated both in studies of risk-taking in psychological experiments (when other factors, such as outside influences, can be controlled) and in the analysis of data on risky behavior in the real world. In recent experimental studies of risk taking in the lab, the peak age for risky decision-making was between 19 and 21 (Braams, B., van Duijvenvoorde, A., Peper, J., & Crone, E. (2015). Longitudinal changes in adolescent risk-taking: A comprehensive study of neural responses to rewards, pubertal development and risk taking behavior. Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 7226-7238; Shulman, E., & Cauffman, E. (2014). Deciding in the dark: Age differences in intuitive risk judgment. Developmental Psychology, 50, 167-177). 

23. This age trend is consistent with epidemiological data on age trends in risky behavior, which show peaks in the adverse outcomes of risk-taking in the late teens and early 20s on a wide range of behaviors, including driver deaths, unintended pregnancy, arrests for violent and non-violent crime, and binge drinking (for a review, see Willoughby, T., Good, M., Adachi, P.J.C., Hamza, C.A., & Tavernier, R. (2013). Examining the link between adolescent brain development and risk taking from a social-developmental perspective. Brain and Cognition, 83, 315-323). 

24. The tendency of adolescents to show heightened sensation-seeking and poor impulse control is demonstrably greater among males than females (Shulman, E., Harden, K., Chein, J., & Steinberg, L. (2015). Sex differences in the developmental trajectories of impulse control and sensation-seeking from early adolescence to early adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44, 1-17), as is the tendency toward risky decision-making (Shulman, E., & Cauffman, E. (2014). Deciding in the dark: Age differences in intuitive risk judgment. Developmental Psychology, 50, 167-177). Thus, to the extent that this combination increases the chance that individuals will engage in reckless behavior, the risk for this will be greatest among young men in their late teens and early 20s. 

25. Recent research on brain development sheds light on the biological underpinnings of these age differences in judgment and decision-making and supports the conclusion that adolescents are inherently less able than adults to regulate their impulses; give proper consideration to the longer-term consequences of their decisions; appropriately attend to the risks, as well as the rewards, of their options; and resist the coercive influence of others. There is broad consensus among scientists on these points. There is considerable scientific evidence that these characteristics of adolescent decision-making are attributable to neurobiological immaturity. 

26. Scientists also agree that brain maturation continues well beyond the teen years. Specifically, research on neurobiological development shows continued maturation into the early- or even mid-20s of brain regions and systems that govern various aspects of self-regulation and executive function (i.e., higher-order cognitive skills, such as planning and thinking ahead). These developments involve structural (anatomical) and functional (activity) changes in the prefrontal and parietal cortices (Gogtay, N., et al. (2004). Dynamic mapping of human cortical development during childhood through early adulthood. Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences, 101, 8174-8179. Hedman A., van Haren N., Schnack H., Kahn R., & Hulshoff Pol, H. (2012). Human brain changes across the life span: A review of 56 longtitudinal magnetic resonance imaging studies. Human Brain Mapping, 33, 1987-2002; Pfefferbaum, A., Rohlfing, T., Rosenbloom, M., Chu, W., & Colrain, I. (2013). Variation in longitudinal trajectories of regional brain volumes of healthy men and women (ages 10 to 85 years) measured with atlas-based parcellation of MRI. Neurolmage, 65, 176-193; Simmonds, D., Hallquist, M., Asato, M., & Luna, B. (2014). Developmental stages and sex differences of white matter and behavioral development through adolescence: A longitudinal diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) study. Neurolmage, 92, 356-368) as well as improved structural and functional connectivity between cortical and subcortical regions (Dosenbach, N., et al. (2011). Prediction of individual brain maturity using fMRI. Science, 329, 1358-1361; Fair, D., et al. (2009). Functional brain networks develop from a “local to distributed” organization. PLoS Computational Biology, 5, 1-14; Sowell, E., et al. (2004). Longitudinal mapping of cortical thickness and brain growth in normal children. Journal of Neuroscience, 24, 8223-8231.) 

27. Many scientists, including myself, believe that the main underlying cause of immaturity in judgment during middle and late adolescence is the different timetables along which two important brain systems change during adolescence, sometimes referred to as a “maturational imbalance.” The system that is responsible for the increase in sensation-seeking and reward-seeking that takes place in adolescence undergoes dramatic changes very early in adolescence, around the time of puberty. Attentiveness to rewards remains high through the late teen years and into the early 20s. But the system that is responsible for self-control, regulating impulses, thinking ahead, evaluating the rewards and costs of a risky act, and resisting peer pressure is still undergoing significant maturation well into the mid-20s (Casey, B. J., et al. (2010). The storm and stress of adolescence: Insights from human imaging and mouse genetics. Developmental Psychobiology, 52, 225-235; Steinberg, L. (2008). A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Review, 28, 78-106; Van Leijenhorst, L., Moor, B. G., Op de Macks, Z. A., Rombouts, S. A. R. B., Westenberg, P. M., & Crone, E. A. (2010). Adolescent risky decisionmaking: Neurocognitive development of reward and control regions. Neurolmage, 51, 345-355). Thus, during middle and late adolescence there is an imbalance between the reward system and the self-control system that inclines adolescents toward sensation-seeking and impulsivity

28. As this “maturational imbalance” diminishes, during the mid-20s, there are improvements in such capacities as impulse control, resistance to peer pressure, planning, and thinking ahead (for reviews, see Albert, D., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Judgment and decision making in adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 211-224; and Blakemore, S-J., & T. Robbins, T. (2012). Decision-making in the adolescent brain. Nature Neuroscience, 15, 1184-1191).

29. It is believed that, because of their relative immaturity in brain systems that govern self-control, adolescents are more vulnerable to the effects of fatigue and emotional arousal than are adults (Albert, D., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Judgment and decision making in adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 211-224; Louca, M., & Short, M. (2014). The effect of one night's sleep deprivation on adolescent neurobehavioral performance. SLEEP, 37, 1799-1807). 

APPLICATION OF SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS TO THE PRESENT MATTER 

30. There is strong scientific evidence that individuals in their late teens and early 20s are characterized by immaturity in judgment that leave them prone, especially in emotionally arousing situations and when fatigued, to make decisions that are impulsive, myopic, and ill-considered. Inadequate sleep is likely to have a more debilitating effect on adolescents than on older individuals, leading to slower response times and inattentiveness, as well as daytime sleepiness. 

31. Immaturity of judgment at this age has been linked to incomplete brain maturation, especially in brain systems responsible for impulse control and self-regulation. This suggests that there is a strong biological basis for the deficient judgment and risky behavior often displayed by individuals in their late teens and early 20s, especially when they are tired or emotionally aroused. 

32. Given these neurobiological differences, it is sensible for organizations to have different policies that regulate the behavior of individuals in their late teens and early 20s versus those who are older. To date, most discussion of this issue has concerned the treatment of individuals who have violated the law, but a similar line of reasoning can be reasonably extend to decisions about the behavior of young people in other contexts, including work settings. This is especially important for organizations that oversee young people who are in positions in which poor judgment or risky decision making can have harmful consequences. 

33. Individuals whose self-regulatory abilities are still immature require additional measures to prevent risky and reckless behavior. I have argued elsewhere that education alone is unlikely to be an effective means of preventing adolescent risk taking (Steinberg, L. (2014). Age of opportunity: Lessons from the new science of adolescence. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt). Instead, I recommend policies and practices that limit opportunities for young people to put themselves in situations in which their natural inclinations toward risky behavior can result in harm to themselves and others. Such policies and practices might involve providing additional or more vigilant supervision by older individuals and/or placing restrictions on the activities and situations in which adolescents are permitted to engage on their own. 

STATEMENT OF TRUTH 

34. Throughout my report I have attempted to be accurate and complete and to discuss all matters that I regard as being relevant to the opinions expressed within my report. 

35. I have indicated the source of any factual information upon which I have based an opinion on facts. 

36. I have not included anything in my report that has been suggested to me by anyone without forming my own view on the matter. 

37. I have received payment for my consultation with counsel and for the preparation of this report. 38. Where a range of reasonable opinion is present, I have indicated the extent of that range in my report. 

39. If I believe that my existing report requires any correction or qualification, I will notify my instructing attorneys immediately in writing. If the correction or qualification is significant, I will prepare a supplementary report as soon as possible.

40. I believe that the facts I have stated in this report are true and that the opinions I have expressed are correct.

Summary

Name of Expert: Laurence Steinberg, Ph.D.

Area of Expertise: Developmental Psychology

Representing: Plaintiff

Jurisdiction: W.D.Tex.

Professional Background

  1. I am Laurence Steinberg, residing at 1924 Pine Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103, USA.

  2. My academic credentials include an A.B. in Psychology from Vassar College and a Ph.D. in Human Development and Family Studies from Cornell University.

  3. As a developmental psychologist, my specialization lies in adolescence (ages 10-25). I am currently the Distinguished University Professor and Laura H. Carnell Professor of Psychology at Temple University. My professional affiliations include being a fellow of the American Psychological Association, the Association for Psychological Science, and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, as well as a member of the Society for Research in Child Development and the Society for Research on Adolescence. I have previously served as the chair of the National Academies' Committee on the Science of Adolescence and president of both the Division of Developmental Psychology of the American Psychological Association and the Society for Research on Adolescence.

  4. Since obtaining my Ph.D. in 1977, my research has consistently focused on adolescent development. I have authored or co-authored approximately 400 scientific articles and 17 books on this topic. Prior to joining Temple University in 1988, I held faculty positions at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the University of California, Irvine. Between 1997 and 2007, I directed the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and Juvenile Justice. Currently, I am involved with the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Law and Neuroscience.

  5. Within the broader scope of adolescent development, my particular research interest lies in judgment and decision-making processes, an area I have been studying for nearly two decades. My work with the National Academies' Committee on the Science of Adolescence included organizing workshops on adolescent risk-taking and its implications, culminating in a 2011 publication summarizing research on adolescent brain development and its influence on judgment.

  6. Since 1997, my research has explored the implications of adolescent developmental research for legal proceedings involving young individuals. Specifically, my colleagues and I have examined the differences in cognitive and behavioral processes between adolescents and adults, and how these differences might inform legal decisions regarding juveniles.

  7. Our research has significantly impacted American jurisprudence, notably influencing the U.S. Supreme Court's decisions in Roper v. Simmons (2005), Graham v. Florida (2010), and Miller v. Alabama / Jackson v. Hobbs (2012). These landmark cases, which abolished the juvenile death penalty and mandated sentencing modifications for juveniles, cited our work emphasizing the neurobiological and behavioral immaturity of adolescents.

  8. It is my professional opinion that the diminished decision-making capacity and heightened proclivity for risky behavior observed in adolescents and young adults, compared to their older counterparts, are crucial considerations in the case at hand.

  9. This report, commissioned by Mr. Robert Wilson of the Law Offices of Thomas J. Henry, will delve into the current understanding of psychological and neurobiological development during adolescence and young adulthood, with a specific focus on how this research informs our understanding of judgment and decision-making in individuals in their early twenties.

Documents Reviewed

  1. In preparation for this report, I have reviewed the following documents provided by Mr. Wilson's office: Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Deposition of Driver Zackary Brooks, Deposition of Mary Janus, Deposition of Edward Freeman, Deposition of Greg Sierra, and Deposition of Leticia Dawson.

Relevant U.S. Supreme Court Opinions

  1. The U.S. Supreme Court, in its Roper ruling, acknowledged the inherent immaturity of adolescents, stating, "As any parent knows, and as the scientific and sociological studies...tend to confirm, a lack of maturity and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility are found in youth more often than in adults. These qualities often result in impetuous and ill-considered actions and opinions.”

  2. The Court, in Graham, further emphasized the neurological basis for adolescent immaturity, stating, "Developments in psychology and brain science continue to show fundamental differences between juvenile and adult minds. For example, parts of the brain involved in behavior control continue to mature through late adolescence.”

  3. The Miller ruling reiterated the Court's previous stance, noting that scientific evidence supporting the conclusions in Roper and Graham has only grown stronger. The Court emphasized that "adolescent brains are not yet fully mature in regions and systems related to higher-order executive functions such as impulse control, planning ahead, and risk avoidance."

  4. While the aforementioned Supreme Court cases addressed specific legal contexts, the underlying principles regarding adolescent judgment and decision-making hold broader relevance, particularly in situations requiring mature judgment.

Scientific Knowledge About Psychological and Neurobiological Development in Adolescence and Young Adulthood

  1. A wealth of scientific research on brain and psychological development in adolescence highlights several key findings relevant to this case (for a comprehensive review, see Steinberg, L. (2014). Age of Opportunity: Lessons from the New Science of Adolescence. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt). For the purposes of this report, "adolescence" encompasses the developmental period between 10 and 25 years of age. The term "late adolescents" will refer to individuals aged 18 to 25.

  2. Firstly, adolescents, compared to adults, exhibit a tendency to underestimate the potential risks associated with various situations. They often struggle to accurately assess the potential costs and benefits of different choices, underestimating both the likelihood and severity of negative consequences (see Grisso et al., 2003).

  3. Secondly, adolescents demonstrate an increased propensity for "sensation-seeking"—the pursuit of novel and stimulating experiences. This inclination often leads them to prioritize potential rewards while neglecting potential risks (Steinberg et al., 2008). Studies suggest this heightened sensation-seeking stems from an amplified focus on rewards rather than potential costs (Cauffman et al., 2010), particularly prominent in individuals between 18 and 21 years old.

  4. Thirdly, adolescents exhibit a reduced capacity for impulse control and struggle to fully grasp the long-term consequences of their actions compared to adults. They tend to be more short-sighted and less planful, demonstrating difficulty in anticipating potential outcomes and regulating their behavior accordingly (Steinberg et al., 2009). It's noteworthy that impulse control continues to develop well into the mid-twenties (Steinberg et al., 2008).

  5. Fourthly, research reveals a "maturity gap" wherein basic cognitive abilities (e.g., memory, logical reasoning) mature earlier than emotional maturity, which encompasses self-control, risk-reward assessment, and resistance to social pressure. While basic cognitive abilities reach adult levels around age 16, emotional maturation continues into the early twenties. Consequently, adolescents' judgment deficiencies, particularly in emotionally charged situations, are exacerbated due to this disparity between intellectual and emotional development (Steinberg et al., 2009).

  6. Our recent research, employing experimental manipulation of emotional states, found that while individuals aged 18 to 21 exhibited comparable impulse control to those in their mid-twenties under neutral conditions, emotional arousal led to impulsive behavior comparable to mid-adolescents (Cohen et al., 2015).

  7. Fatigue, similar to emotional arousal, has been shown to amplify the risk of poor judgment in adolescents. This combination of immature self-control and fatigue is a significant contributor to driving accidents among young drivers (Dahl, 2008). Research indicates that individuals in their late teens and early twenties are most susceptible to "falling-asleep accidents," particularly during the morning hours (Institute of Medicine, 2007). Sleep deprivation, even for a single night, can significantly impair adolescents' behavioral functioning, impacting daytime alertness, cognitive abilities, reaction times, and attention (Beebe, 2011; Louca & Short, 2014).

  8. The confluence of heightened reward sensitivity and developing impulse control renders middle and late adolescence a period of elevated risk-taking, surpassing other developmental stages. This is evidenced by both controlled laboratory studies and real-world data (Braams et al., 2015; Shulman & Cauffman, 2014; Willoughby et al., 2013).

  9. Epidemiological data further substantiates this age-related trend, indicating peaks in adverse outcomes associated with risky behaviors—including driving fatalities, unintended pregnancies, criminal arrests, and binge drinking—during the late teens and early twenties (Willoughby et al., 2013).

  10. Notably, this tendency towards heightened sensation-seeking, poor impulse control, and risky decision-making is more pronounced in males compared to females (Shulman et al., 2015; Shulman & Cauffman, 2014). This gender difference further underscores the heightened vulnerability of young men in their late teens and early twenties to engaging in reckless behaviors.

  11. Recent advances in neuroscience provide valuable insights into the biological underpinnings of these age-related differences in judgment and decision-making. There is a strong consensus within the scientific community that adolescents' reduced ability to regulate impulses, consider long-term consequences, accurately assess risks and rewards, and resist social pressure stems from neurobiological immaturity.

  12. Importantly, brain development, particularly in regions and systems governing self-regulation and executive functions, continues well into the early to mid-twenties. This ongoing maturation involves both structural and functional changes in the prefrontal and parietal cortices, as well as enhanced connectivity between cortical and subcortical regions (Gogtay et al., 2004; Hedman et al., 2012; Pfefferbaum et al., 2013; Simmonds et al., 2014; Dosenbach et al., 2011; Fair et al., 2009; Sowell et al., 2004).

  13. Many scientists, myself included, posit that the "maturational imbalance" between two key brain systems contributes significantly to immature judgment in middle and late adolescence. The system driving increased sensation- and reward-seeking undergoes rapid changes early in adolescence, around puberty, remaining highly active into the early twenties. Conversely, the system responsible for self-control, impulse regulation, future planning, risk-reward assessment, and resisting peer influence continues to mature well into the mid-twenties (Casey et al., 2010; Steinberg, 2008; Van Leijenhorst et al., 2010). This disparity creates an imbalance, predisposing adolescents towards impulsivity and sensation-seeking.

  14. As this maturational imbalance gradually diminishes throughout the mid-twenties, improvements in impulse control, resistance to peer influence, planning, and future-oriented thinking emerge (Albert & Steinberg, 2011; Blakemore & Robbins, 2012).

  15. The relative immaturity of brain systems governing self-control in adolescents is believed to underpin their heightened susceptibility to the effects of fatigue and emotional arousal compared to adults (Albert & Steinberg, 2011; Louca & Short, 2014).

Application of Scientific Findings to the Present Matter

  1. There is compelling scientific evidence demonstrating that individuals in their late teens and early twenties are characterized by immature judgment, rendering them susceptible to impulsive, short-sighted, and ill-conceived decisions, particularly when fatigued or emotionally aroused. Furthermore, inadequate sleep disproportionately impacts adolescents, leading to compromised behavioral functioning, including slowed reaction times, inattentiveness, and daytime sleepiness.

  2. This immature judgment is linked to incomplete brain maturation, specifically in regions responsible for impulse control and self-regulation, highlighting a strong biological basis for the observed deficiencies in judgment and increased risk-taking behaviors in this age group, especially when tired or emotionally aroused.

  3. Given these neurobiological differences, implementing age-specific policies regulating the behavior of individuals in their late teens and early twenties is both prudent and necessary. While much of the current discourse focuses on legal implications, similar reasoning should be applied to other contexts, including work environments. This is particularly crucial for organizations overseeing young individuals in positions where poor judgment or risky decision-making could lead to detrimental consequences.

  4. Individuals with developing self-regulatory abilities require additional safeguards to mitigate the risk of reckless behaviors. While education plays a role, I have previously argued that it alone is insufficient to effectively prevent adolescent risk-taking (Steinberg, 2014). Instead, implementing policies and practices that limit opportunities for risky behavior is paramount. This might involve heightened supervision by older individuals or restrictions on activities and situations where adolescents are unsupervised.

Statement of Truth

  1. In preparing this report, I have striven for accuracy, completeness, and objectivity, including all relevant information pertaining to my expressed opinions.

  2. The source of any factual information upon which I have based my professional opinions is clearly indicated.

  3. All information included in this report reflects my own independent professional judgment and has not been influenced by external parties.

  4. I have received compensation for my consultation and the preparation of this report.

  5. Where a range of reasonable professional opinions exists, I have endeavored to accurately represent the scope of such opinions.

  6. Should any corrections or qualifications to this report become necessary, I will immediately inform my instructing attorneys in writing. Significant corrections or qualifications will warrant the prompt preparation of a supplementary report.

  7. I affirm that the facts stated in this report are true to the best of my knowledge and that the expressed opinions are accurate and reflective of my professional expertise.

Summary

Report Prepared by Laurence Steinberg, Ph.D.

Name of Expert: Laurence Steinberg, Ph.D.

Area of Expertise: Psychology, specializing in Adolescent Development

Representing: Plaintiff

Jurisdiction: W.D.Tex.

I. INTRODUCTION AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND

  1. My name is Laurence Steinberg, and I am a developmental psychologist specializing in the study of adolescence, the period between roughly 10 and 25 years of age. My research focuses on the psychological development of young people.

  2. I hold a Ph.D. in Human Development and Family Studies from Cornell University and am currently a Distinguished University Professor at Temple University. I have authored numerous scientific articles and books on adolescent development.

  3. My expertise lies in adolescent judgment and decision-making. I have studied this for over 20 years, including leading national initiatives on the topic and chairing the National Academies' Committee on the Science of Adolescence.

  4. My research has influenced legal policy, notably informing Supreme Court decisions like Roper v. Simmons (abolishing the juvenile death penalty) by providing scientific evidence about adolescent brain development.

  5. This report, requested by attorney Robert Wilson, will discuss scientific findings on adolescent and young adult psychological and brain development, specifically how this research relates to judgment and decision-making in individuals in their early 20s.

II. CASE MATERIALS & LEGAL PRECEDENT

  1. I have reviewed case materials including the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint and depositions provided by Mr. Wilson's office.

  2. It's important to acknowledge relevant U.S. Supreme Court rulings. Roper v. Simmons, Graham v. Florida, and Miller v. Alabama all cited scientific evidence of adolescent immaturity in their decisions to limit harsh punishments for young offenders.

  3. While these cases focus on legal sentencing, the Court's reasoning about adolescent development has broader implications for understanding how young people make decisions, even outside of legal contexts.

III. SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS ON ADOLESCENT & YOUNG ADULT DEVELOPMENT

  1. Scientific research, including my own, reveals key differences between adolescent and adult decision-making relevant to this case:

    • Risk Perception: Adolescents often underestimate the likelihood and severity of risks compared to adults, making them more likely to engage in risky behavior.

    • Sensation-Seeking: Driven by a heightened desire for excitement and rewards, adolescents are more focused on the positives of a decision than potential downsides, especially between 18 and 21 years old.

    • Impulse Control: Adolescents have a harder time controlling impulses and thinking about long-term consequences compared to adults. Impulse control continues developing into the mid-20s.

    • Maturity Gap: While basic thinking abilities mature around 16, emotional maturity, crucial for self-control and resisting peer influence, continues developing into the early 20s. This "maturity gap" makes adolescents more susceptible to poor judgment, especially in emotionally charged situations.

  2. Research shows that fatigue amplifies these tendencies. Like emotional arousal, lack of sleep significantly impairs adolescent judgment and has been linked to car accidents.

  3. The combination of reward-seeking and developing impulse control makes mid-to-late adolescence a peak period for risk-taking. Studies using both lab tasks and real-world data (like driving records and crime rates) confirm this, with the riskiest behavior peaking between 19 and 21.

  4. Notably, these tendencies are amplified in males compared to females.

  5. Neuroscience provides evidence for these behavioral differences. Brain imaging shows that regions responsible for self-control and planning (like the prefrontal cortex) continue maturing into the mid-20s.

  6. The "maturational imbalance" theory suggests that the brain system driving reward-seeking develops faster than the self-control system during adolescence, creating a predisposition for risk-taking that diminishes as these systems mature in the mid-20s.

  7. This ongoing brain development makes adolescents more vulnerable to fatigue and emotional influences than adults.

IV. APPLICATION TO THE PRESENT MATTER

  1. Scientific consensus shows that individuals in their late teens and early 20s are more prone to impulsive, short-sighted decisions, especially when tired or stressed. This vulnerability is driven by ongoing brain development and should be considered when evaluating their behavior.

  2. While legal discussions often focus on these developmental differences, similar reasoning applies to other contexts, including workplaces. Organizations supervising young people, especially in roles with potential for harm, should consider these factors.

  3. Since education alone is insufficient to prevent risky behavior, I recommend organizations implement policies to minimize risk, such as increased supervision by older individuals and restrictions on certain activities for those with immature self-regulation.

V. STATEMENT OF TRUTH

  1. This report represents my best professional opinion based on current scientific understanding. I have strived for accuracy and completeness, citing all sources of information.

  2. My opinions are my own, and I am being compensated for my consultation and report preparation. I will promptly disclose any necessary corrections or qualifications.

  3. I believe the facts presented here are accurate, and my opinions are well-founded.

Summary

Report Prepared by Laurence Steinberg, Ph.D.

Name of Expert: Laurence Steinberg, Ph.D.

Area of Expertise: Psychology

Representing: Plaintiff

Jurisdiction: W.D.Tex.

ABOUT DR. STEINBERG

  1. My name is Laurence Steinberg. My address is 1924 Pine Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103, USA.

  2. I have a Ph.D. in Human Development and Family Studies.

  3. I am a psychologist who studies teenagers and young adults. I'm a professor and researcher at Temple University. I'm also a member of important psychology organizations and have done a lot of research on how young people think and make decisions.

  4. I have been studying teenagers since 1977 and have written many articles and books about them. I've worked at other universities and led research projects on teenage development, especially how their brains affect their decisions. I'm currently part of a project studying how brain science can help create better laws.

  5. My main research interest is how teenagers and young adults think and make decisions, especially about risky choices. I've been studying this for almost 20 years and have helped organize workshops about teen risk-taking for the government.

  6. Since 1997, I've been researching how brain science can help us make better laws for teenagers. My colleagues and I are studying how the teenage brain is different from the adult brain, and what that means for how we treat young people in the legal system.

  7. Our research has actually been used by the Supreme Court! They used my research in important cases like Roper v. Simmons (which ended the death penalty for juveniles), Graham v. Florida (which banned life without parole for non-homicide crimes), and Miller v. Alabama / Jackson v. Hobbs (which banned mandatory life without parole sentences). I helped write the arguments for these cases, explaining that teenagers' brains aren't fully developed and they shouldn't be punished the same way as adults.

  8. I believe that because young people's brains are still developing, they make decisions differently than adults. This is important information for this case.

  9. I was asked by Mr. Robert Wilson, a lawyer, to write this report. He wants me to explain what we know about how teen and young adult brains work, and what that means for how they make decisions in their early 20s.

DOCUMENTS

  1. I have read the following documents: the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Deposition of Driver Zackary Brooks, the Deposition of Mary Janus, the Deposition of Edward Freeman, the Deposition of Greg Sierra, and the Deposition of Leticia Dawson. Mr. Wilson's office gave me these documents.

IMPORTANT SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

  1. In the Roper case, the Supreme Court said that teenagers are less mature and responsible than adults. They make impulsive decisions because they're not fully grown up yet.

  2. In the Graham case, the Court said that brain science continues to show that teenagers' brains are different from adults' brains. For example, parts of the brain responsible for self-control are still developing well into a person's 20s.

  3. In the Miller case, the Court said that the science behind their decisions in Roper and Graham is even stronger now. It's clearer than ever that teenagers' brains aren't fully developed in areas that control impulses, planning, and avoiding risks.

  4. While these Supreme Court cases are about punishment for crimes, I think the Court's reasoning applies to other situations where young people need to make mature decisions.

WHAT SCIENCE SAYS ABOUT TEEN & YOUNG ADULT BRAINS

  1. Scientists have learned a lot about how the brain develops during adolescence (from ages 10 to 25). This information is important for understanding this case.

  2. First, teenagers are more likely to underestimate risks than adults. They may not identify all the dangers of a situation or understand how seriously they could be hurt.

  3. Second, teenagers are more likely to do risky things for thrills. This is called "sensation-seeking." They tend to focus on the excitement and not think about the possible consequences. This is especially true for people between 18 and 21.

  4. Third, teenagers have a harder time controlling their impulses and thinking about long-term consequences. They often make decisions without thinking about what might happen in the future. It's important to understand that people don't develop this ability to control their impulses fully until their mid-20s.

  5. Fourth, teenagers' brains mature at different rates. The parts of the brain responsible for logic and memory develop faster than the parts of the brain responsible for emotional control and self-control. This means teenagers can be smart and logical, but still make bad decisions because they can't control their emotions as well. Stress and pressure can make it even harder for them to make good choices.

  6. We did a study that showed teenagers between 18 and 21 can control their impulses in calm situations, but when they feel stressed, they act impulsively like younger teenagers.

  7. Being tired also makes it harder for teenagers to make good decisions. This is a big problem for young drivers, because fatigue combined with an underdeveloped ability to control impulses can be deadly. It's actually more common for teenagers to have car accidents in the morning because of sleep deprivation!

  8. All of this means that teenagers are most likely to take risks between the ages of 19 and 21. They're still developing the ability to control their impulses and they are drawn to exciting experiences.

  9. This is backed up by real-world data, too. The late teens and early 20s are peak times for car accidents, unintended pregnancies, crime, and binge drinking.

  10. It's also important to note that young men are more likely to engage in risky behavior than young women. This might be because their brains develop differently.

  11. Scientists are discovering that these differences in teen behavior are related to how their brains are wired. We now have scientific evidence that shows teenagers' brains are not fully developed in areas that control impulses, planning, and risk assessment.

  12. And brains don't stop developing in the teen years! The parts of the brain that help with self-control and planning continue to mature into a person's 20s.

  13. Scientists believe this is because different parts of the brain grow at different speeds. The part of the brain that makes us seek rewards develops early in adolescence, but the part that controls impulses matures much slower. This creates an imbalance, which is why teenagers sometimes make risky decisions.

  14. As people reach their mid-20s, their brains become more balanced. They're better at controlling their impulses, resisting peer pressure, and making plans.

  15. Because teenagers' brains are still developing, they're more affected by fatigue and stress. This is why it's important to consider their age when setting rules and expectations.

WHAT THIS MEANS FOR THIS CASE

  1. Research shows that people in their late teens and early 20s don't always make the best decisions. They're more likely to be impulsive, short-sighted, and easily influenced, especially when they're tired or stressed. Lack of sleep can be a major problem for young people, slowing down their reaction time and making it hard to pay attention.

  2. Science is showing that these poor decisions are often due to immature brain development. This is especially true for parts of the brain that control impulses and self-control. It's not just about willpower; there's a biological reason why young people sometimes act recklessly.

  3. This means that organizations should have different rules and expectations for young people. Just like the justice system is changing how it treats young offenders, workplaces and other organizations also need to adapt. This is especially important when a young person's bad decisions could put others at risk.

  4. We need to help young people make better decisions by creating environments that minimize risks. Simply educating them about dangers is not enough, because their brains are wired to seek thrills. We need to provide better supervision and limit opportunities for dangerous behavior.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

  1. I have tried to be accurate and complete in my report and have only included information that is important to this case.

  2. If I have stated an opinion, I have explained how I reached that opinion.

  3. No one told me what to write in this report. These are my own opinions.

  4. I am being paid for my time and expertise in writing this report.

  5. I have explained the range of scientific opinions if there are different viewpoints on a topic.

  6. I will correct any mistakes or inaccuracies in my report immediately.

  7. I believe that the information in this report is true and accurate.

Summary

Expert Name: Dr. Laurence Steinberg

What They Know a Lot About: Psychology, especially how teenagers think

Who They are Helping: The Plaintiff (the person who is suing someone)

Where the Case is: W.D.Tex. (This stands for the Western District of Texas, which is a type of court)

ABOUT DR. STEINBERG

  1. My name is Laurence Steinberg. My address is 1924 Pine Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103, USA.

  2. I have a college degree from Vassar College and a very important degree called a Ph.D. from Cornell University. My degrees are in psychology, which is the study of how people think and act.

  3. I am a special kind of psychologist who studies teenagers. I work at Temple University and I'm a really important professor! I belong to a bunch of groups for psychologists and I've been in charge of some of them. I also helped a group that looks at how teenagers act when they break the law.

  4. I became a real psychologist (with a Ph.D.!) in 1977, and I've been studying teenagers ever since. I've written hundreds of articles and lots of books about young people. Before I worked at Temple University, I taught at other universities. For a long time, I was the boss of a group that studied teenagers and how the law works for them. Now, I'm in a group that studies how brains and the law work together.

  5. I study all sorts of things about teenagers, but I'm really interested in how they make decisions, especially good and bad choices. I was in charge of some meetings about why teenagers make risky choices and how it affects them. We talked about how teenagers' brains are still growing and how that can make them do risky things.

  6. Since 1997, I've been looking at how understanding teenagers can help us make better laws for them. For example, my friends and I have been studying how teenagers and grown-ups make different choices and what that means for how we punish young people who break the law.

  7. Our work has actually helped change some laws in America! We helped with really important cases about teenagers who were given the death penalty or told they had to stay in jail forever. We said that teenagers' brains aren't done growing yet, so they shouldn't be punished the same way as grown-ups. The judges listened to us!

  8. I believe that teenagers don't make decisions as well as adults, and sometimes make riskier choices. This is really important to remember for this case!

  9. A lawyer named Robert Wilson asked me to write this report. He wants me to explain what we know about how teenagers' brains and thinking change as they grow up, especially in their early twenties. This information might be important for his case.

DOCUMENTS

  1. Mr. Wilson gave me some important papers to read for this case: the Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, the depositions of Zackary Brooks, Mary Janus, Edward Freeman, Greg Sierra, and Leticia Dawson.

IMPORTANT COURT DECISIONS

  1. In a very important case called Roper v. Simmons, the highest court in the US said that teenagers often act without thinking things through because their brains are still developing. They said this is something parents and scientists already know.

  2. In another case called Graham v. Florida, the court said they were still right about what they said about teenagers' brains in the Roper case. They said that new information about brains proves that teenagers' brains are very different from adult brains.

  3. In the Miller v. Alabama / Jackson v. Hobbs case, the court again talked about how science proves teenagers' brains are different. They said it's becoming clearer that teenagers' brains are not as good at controlling impulses or thinking about the future as adult brains.

  4. These court cases were all about punishing teenagers, but what the judges said is important for all kinds of situations where young people need to make good choices.

WHAT SCIENTISTS KNOW ABOUT TEENAGERS' BRAINS

  1. Scientists have learned a lot about how teenagers' brains grow and change. This information is important for this case. (If you want to learn more, read my book: Age of Opportunity: Lessons from the New Science of Adolescence. It's a little hard, but interesting!) In this report, when I say "adolescence," I mean the time between when you're 10 and when you're 25. When I'm talking about older teenagers, I'll say "late adolescents." These are people between 18 and 25.

  2. First, teenagers are more likely than adults to think that risky things are safe. They don't always see danger as well as grown-ups do. They have a harder time understanding the bad things that could happen.

  3. Second, teenagers like to try new and exciting things, even if they might be dangerous. This is because teenagers' brains pay more attention to how good something might feel than how bad it could be. This is especially true for people between 18 and 21.

  4. Third, it's harder for teenagers to control themselves and think about the future than it is for adults. Teenagers are more likely to do something without thinking about what might happen later. Importantly, people don't get really good at controlling their impulses until their mid-twenties!

  5. Fourth, teenagers can be really smart and good at figuring things out, but they aren't always good at controlling their emotions or making good choices under pressure. This is because the part of their brain that controls thinking grows up faster than the part that controls emotions. This means that teenagers make even worse decisions when they are scared, angry, or stressed.

  6. My scientist friends and I did an experiment where we asked teenagers and adults to do a task that was hard because it made them feel emotional. The adults were much better at doing the task when they felt emotional than the teenagers were.

  7. Being tired makes it even harder for teenagers to make good choices, just like feeling emotional does. This is one reason why there are a lot of car accidents involving teenagers, especially in the morning when they are tired from not getting enough sleep. Even just one night of bad sleep can make teenagers act without thinking!

  8. Teenagers are more likely to do risky things than any other age group, especially between the ages of 19 and 21. This is because they love excitement but aren't very good at controlling themselves.

  9. We see this in real life, too! The worst car accidents, the most unwanted pregnancies, and even the most crimes happen when people are in their late teens and early twenties.

  10. Young men are even more likely to do risky things than young women. This means that teenage boys and guys in their early twenties are the most likely to do something reckless and dangerous.

  11. We can see all of this when we look at pictures of teenagers' brains. Scientists can actually see that the parts of the brain that control impulses and good decision-making are still growing until the mid-twenties. This is why teenagers sometimes act without thinking things through!

  12. Scientists agree that brains don't stop growing in the teenage years. They keep changing until people are in their twenties. The parts of the brain that help us control ourselves and plan for the future are some of the last parts to finish growing.

  13. Lots of scientists think that teenagers act impulsively because different parts of their brains grow up at different speeds. The part of the brain that makes us want exciting and fun things grows up fast, but the part that controls those feelings grows up slowly! This makes teenagers feel like doing risky things without thinking about the consequences.

  14. As people get to be in their mid-twenties, the different parts of their brains finish growing up. They get better at controlling themselves, thinking about the future, and saying "no" to peer pressure.

  15. Because teenagers' brains aren't done growing yet, they get tired and emotional more easily than adults.

WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR THE CASE?

  1. Scientists have proven that teenagers and young adults don't make decisions as well as older people. They often act impulsively and don't think about the consequences of their actions, especially when they are tired or stressed. They also get tired more easily than adults.

  2. Teenagers' brains aren't done growing yet, especially the parts that help with self-control. This means that teenagers are biologically programmed to be more impulsive than adults!

  3. Because of this, it's important for schools, workplaces, and even the law to have different rules for teenagers and young adults. These rules should help keep young people safe by limiting their opportunities to make risky decisions.

  4. Young people need extra help learning how to make good choices, and simply telling them to be more careful isn't enough. Instead, adults should supervise teenagers carefully and set limits to keep them safe.

IS THIS REPORT TRUE?

  1. I have tried my best to tell the truth and to include all the important information in my report.

  2. If I used information from somewhere else, I told you where I got it.

  3. I didn't let anyone tell me what to write in my report. These are my own thoughts and ideas.

  4. I got paid to talk to the lawyer and write this report.

  5. If there were different scientific ideas about this topic, I told you about them.

  6. If I need to change or add anything to my report, I will tell the lawyers right away.

  7. I believe that everything I wrote in this report is true.

Highlights