Comment: Imagine you’re standing in a room with a group of teenagers from all walks of life. They have favourite foods, hobbies, worries, and big dreams. But some of them have made mistakes. Maybe they’ve been caught breaking a rule at school or had a run-in with the law. Some will keep getting into trouble, while others will find a way to turn things around.
What makes teens different when it comes to reoffending? This has been the central question of my PhD research over the past few years. It’s involved looking beyond ‘good’ and ‘bad’ labels and examining traits such as self-control (which helps stop impulsive reactions), anxiety (which shapes worry about consequences), impulsiveness (the urge to act without thinking) and callous unemotional traits (no feelings of guilt or remorse and low empathy).
To do this, I used the renowned dataset of the Pittsburgh Youth Study, a longitudinal dataset widely used in criminology. I extracted data from more than 1000 young people, which allowed me to dig into different traits. I was particularly interested in how these traits combined, like puzzle pieces, to form unique patterns that influence behavioural choices.
Longitudinal datasets like this enable researchers to see patterns across a large group with similar stories. It’s like viewing a forest from above, spotting clusters of similar-looking trees, though each one is unique.
Using statistical methods to reveal “clusters” based on a combination of traits, I found some teens had low anxiety and high impulsiveness along with high or moderate callousness, while others were high in anxiety but lower in impulsiveness with low or moderate callous traits.
By identifying these patterns, I started to see how each group’s traits may shape their choices and influence any wrongdoing. In other words, different characteristics combined to create greater (or lesser) propensities to engage in delinquency and crime.
Of course, it’s not as simple as saying, “Oh, this person has low self-control, so they’re bound to get into trouble again”. Instead, the likelihood of reoffending is influenced by a complex mix of traits that vary from person to person.
For example, someone with high anxiety may avoid risky behaviour, even if they have low self-control, because their anxiety keeps them cautious. But another person with low self-control and high impulsiveness may not have anything to counter those impulses, which could lead them to make riskier decisions.
What is particularly fascinating is that these traits aren’t necessarily static. Many are pliable and can change over time. We can say this because for almost 50 percent of the sample of at-risk youth, their combination of characteristics changed during the period of the longitudinal study.
So instead of labelling people “good” or “bad” for ever, we need to recognise that everyone has the potential to change. Teenagers can break cycles of trouble and start afresh.
This has obvious implications for programmes targeted at young offenders. Imagine if, instead of treating all teens the same, we tailored programmes to fit their needs. For instance, a teenager with low self-control could learn to pause before acting, and one with high anxiety could be helped to build confidence.
Addressing these individual needs could make interventions more effective, helping teens avoid bad decisions and build lasting skills for success—and ensuring they aren’t defined by their mistakes.
There would also be merit in teaching kids about character traits and how they can influence behaviour. If they had a friend who keeps landing in trouble, that friend may just need a little help understanding their own traits and finding a better way forward. It may also help them understand why people make the choices they do—and that everyone deserves a chance to make better ones.
This kind of approach to understanding behaviour may also reshape how society thinks about crime and punishment. Shouldn’t we then focus more on helping people change, rather than simply punishing them for their mistakes?
There’s always more beneath the surface. Behind each action is a story and within each story lies a chance for change. It’s a powerful reminder that we all have a role to play in shaping our own lives and the lives of those around us. By understanding the uniqueness in each person, we can create a world where everyone gets the support they need to make better choices.
This article was originally published on Newsroom. It was written for a psychology communications competition run by the University’s School of Psychology and supported by the New Zealand Psychological Society.
Manjuparna Raychaudhuri is a PhD graduand in Psychology at Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington.