Sankey - Stereotypic Beliefs About Young People PDF

S TEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUNG PEOPLE:
NATURE, SOURCES , AND CONS EQUENCES
M elissa E. Sankey
BSc (Psychol.)
Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

School of Psychology, University of New South Wales
August, 2000.
ii
Adolescents are grouped together by adults

and defined as a problem, and yet we must
ask ourselves whether this problem refers
to something in the adolescent, or whether
it is making a statement about our society.
- E.Z. Friedenberg
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am grateful to my supervisor Associate Professor Gail Huon for her
conscientious and thorough supervision of this work. Also, her constant support
throughout my postgraduate career has been invaluable. I am also grateful to my
co-supervisor, Professor Kevin McConkey for his continuing guidance and assistance
throughout my doctoral studies.
I am grateful to Dr Amanda Barnier for her helpful advice, especially in the
early stages of my candidature. I would also like to thank Dr Kathryn Strong and
Kylie Oliver for their ongoing encouragement and friendship. Further thanks must go
to the principals and staff from the participating schools for their cooperation, and to
the many hundreds of young people and adults who took part in the studies.
Special thanks to my family and friends, and especially to M um and to Ron,
for their overwhelming support over the past three years, and for their confidence in
my capabilities. Finally, thanks to Goldy for his patience and cheerful support.
iv
ABSTRACT
M ost stereotypes of youth depict them as problematic. Yet, the effects of
those representations on behaviour are not understood. The nine studies conducted
for this thesis investigated stereotypic beliefs about youth. This thesis aimed to
specify the range of stereotypic beliefs about youth, the sources of those beliefs, and
the consequences of those beliefs for adults' and young people's behaviour. Chapter 1
reviews the stereotype literature and provides information about our current
understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth. It also highlights the limitations of
existing research and presents the rationale for this program of research.
Chapter 2 presents studies 1 to 4, which explored the breadth in the content of
four sets of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Study 1 investigated adults' knowledge
of the cultural stereotype of youth and Study 2A specified adults' personal beliefs
about youth. Adults' knowledge of the cultural stereotype was shown to consist of
very negative content, although their personal beliefs were both positive and negative
in content. Study 3A compared young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about
youth with their personal beliefs about youth. Young people's perceptions of adults'
beliefs were found to be extremely negative, and to be comparable with that identified
as adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth in Study 1. In contrast, young
peoples personal beliefs about youth were found to be more positive. Study 4
investigated the extent to which adults and young people hold multiple stereotypes of
youth. Adults and young people formed six conceptually similar subtypes of youth.
They were labelled as yuppies, lives for today and forget the consequences,
depressed, problem kids, active, and conventional. The problem kids subtype
v
was the most salient; it had the greatest number of descriptors assigned to it and the
greatest agreement across groups regarding the constellation of traits and behaviours
comprising it.
Studies 2B and 3B, also presented in Chapter 2, were carried out to develop
two valid and reliable measures of stereotypic beliefs about youth. In Study 2B, the
20-item Beliefs about Adolescence Scale was developed to assess adults' personal
beliefs about youth. Study 3B developed the 26-item Adolescents Perceptions of
Adults Beliefs Scale to assess young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about
them. Both measures were shown to be internally consistent and to have good test-
retest reliability. The Beliefs about Adolescence Scale also demonstrated good
convergent validity.
Chapter 3 presents studies 5 and 6, which examined the media as a possible
source of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Study 5 investigated media representations
of youth as they appear in newspaper reports. Study 6 aimed to establish an empirical
association between those representations and stereotypic beliefs about youth. In
Study 5, newspaper reports of young people were found to be largely negative; the
'problem kids' stereotype was afforded the most news space. In Study 6, newspaper
readership was shown to be predictive of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Further,
stereotypic beliefs were found to discriminate between readers of broadsheet and
tabloid newspapers.
Chapter 4 presents Studies 7 and 8, which focused on the consequences of
stereotypic beliefs about youth for evaluations and behaviour. Study 7 investigated
the extent to which beliefs that young people are problematic affect adults'
vi
evaluations of young people. Subjects who were presented with sentences that
described irresponsible and disrespectful behaviours later judged a youth target as
more irresponsible and disrespectful than subjects who were presented with sentences
that described neutral behaviours. Study 8 investigated whether beliefs that young
people are problematic can result in self-fulfilling prophecies. Subjects were exposed
to faces of male teenagers or adults and were then paired with partners who had been
exposed to faces of male adults. Each pair of subjects played a word-guessing game
and their interaction was recorded. Judges who were blind to the experimental
hypotheses listened to the recordings and rated each participant for the degree of
rudeness that was displayed. Subjects who had been exposed to the teenage faces
were rated as ruder than those who had been exposed to adult faces. Moreover, those
who interacted with subjects who had been exposed to teenage faces were rated as
ruder than those who interacted with subjects who had been exposed to adult faces. In
that way, stereotypic beliefs about youth were shown to produce self-fulfilling
prophecies.
Chapter 5 presents Study 9. Its focus was on young people's perceptions of
adults' beliefs about them. It examined the way those beliefs influence young people's
engagement in problem behaviour, in interaction with established correlates of
problem behaviour. This was explored via the testing of a structural model of
problem behaviour. The findings provided partial support for the model, and the
model accounted for a substantial proportion of the variance in problem behaviour.
Young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about them made an important
contribution to the explanation of problem behaviour involvement. Subsidiary

vii
analyses determined that young people's perceptions that adults believe them to
engage in problem behaviour was the 'active ingredient' of that construct.
Chapter 6 presents the general discussion of the findings from this program of
research. It also outlines their theoretical and practical implications, and points to
specific research that is needed to add to the findings of this thesis. The findings
emphasise the important influences of stereotypic beliefs about youth on adults' and
young people's behaviour. Recommendations are made for improving adult-youth
relations and preventing adolescent problem behaviour. In particular, the media and
adult members of the community need to recognise the role that they play in the
causation of adolescent problem behaviour. The media have a responsibility to
disseminate accurate and balanced information about young people and youth-related
issues. In addition, interventions aimed at reducing adolescent problem behaviour
need to incorporate a community-based component that seeks to promote positive
adult-youth relations within the wider community.

viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEM ENTS iii
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF TABLES xiv
LIST OF FIGURES xv
1. INVESTIGATING STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH: 1

AN INTRODUCTION
Introduction and overview 2
Perspectives on stereotyping 5
A conceptual framework 8
Stereotypes 9
As cultural beliefs and as personal beliefs 10
As perceived by the stereotyped group 11
M ultiple categories 13
Sources of stereotypic beliefs 15
Personal experience 15
Social learning: Family, friends, and the media 17
Consequences of stereotypic beliefs 19
Evaluations of stereotyped group members 20
Self-fulfilling prophecies 22
Current understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth 25
Summary of aims 31
ix
2. STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH 34
INTRODUCTION 36
STUDY 1: Cultural stereotype of youth 37
Introduction 37
M ethod 38
Participants 38
M easures and Procedure 38
Results and Discussion 39
Phase one: Content generation 39
Phase two: Knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth 40
Summary 42
STUDIES 2A & 2B: Personal beliefs about youth 43
Introduction 43
M ethod 44
Participants 44
Study 2A 46
Adults' personal beliefs about young people 46
Cultural stereotype compared with personal beliefs 50
Study 2B 51

x
Summary 55
STUDIES 3A & 3B: Young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about youth 56
Introduction 56
M ethod 57
Participants 57
Study 3A 58
Study 3B 63
Summary 66
STUDY 4: Investigating multiple stereotypes of youth 66
Introduction 66
M ethod 67
Participants 67
Summary 76
DISCUSSION 77
3. SOURCES OF STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH 80
INTRODUCTION 81
STUDY 5: Newspaper reports of young people 84

xi
Introduction 84
M ethod 85
Newspapers 85
Procedure 86
M ajor issues in newspaper reports of young people 88
Detailed examination of newspaper reports of young people 94
Summary 103
STUDY 6: Newspaper readership and stereotypic beliefs about youth 104
Introduction 104
M ethod 104
Participants 104
Predicting stereotypic beliefs from newspaper readership habits 106
Discriminating tabloid from broadsheet readers 107
Summary 109
DISCUSSION 110
4. CONSEQUENCES OF STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH 113
INTRODUCTION 114
STUDY 7: Effects of stereotypic beliefs about youth on evaluations of youth 120
Introduction 120
M ethod 122
xii
Participants 122
M aterials 122
Procedure 126
Summary 133
STUDY 8: Behavioural confirmation of stereotypic beliefs about youth 133
Introduction 133
M ethod 136
Participants 136
M aterials 137
Procedure 138
Observer ratings of the perceiver-target interaction 140
Outside observer ratings 141
Perceivers' and targets' ratings of each other 144
Summary 148
DISCUSSION 149
5. A STRUCTURAL M ODEL OF PROBLEM BEHAVIOUR: THE ROLE 151

OF YOUNG PEOPLE'S PERCEPTIONS OF ADULTS' BELIEFS
INTRODUCTION 152
STUDY 9: Evaluating a model of problem behaviour 161
Introduction 161
M ethod 162
xiii
Participants 162
M aterials 162
Procedure 167
Characteristics of the sample 168
Evaluating the model of problem behaviour 171
Subsidiary path analyses 186
Summary 195
6. GENERAL DISCUSSION 197
Introduction 198
Understanding stereotypic beliefs about youth 200
Nature of stereotypic beliefs 200
Limitations of current research and future directions 208
Improving adult-youth relations and preventing adolescent problem behaviour 209
REFERENCES 216
APPENDICES 241
Appendix A: Appendix to Chapter 2 (Studies 1 through to 4) 241
Appendix B: Appendix to Chapter 3 (Studies 5 and 6) 250
Appendix C: Appendix to Chapter 4 (Studies 7 and 8) 256
Appendix D: Appendix to Chapter 5 (Study 9) 297

xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Page
2.1 The top ten descriptors of the cultural stereotype of youth 41
2.2 The top ten descriptors endorsed as young and older adults' personal 47
beliefs about youth
2.3 Factors and item loadings representing personal beliefs about youth 54
2.4 The top ten descriptors endorsed as young people's perceptions of 59

adults' beliefs and as young people's personal beliefs about youth
2.5 Factors and item loadings representing young people's perceptions 65

of adults' beliefs about youth
2.6 Predictive association (lambda) between cluster structures across age 76

groups
3.1 Number (N) and percent (%) of each topic in the newspaper reports of 90
young people
3.2 Number (N) and percent (%) of crime-related topics in the newspaper 92
reports of young people
3.3 Predicting stereotypic beliefs about young people from newspaper 107
readership habits
3.4 Discriminant function analysis predicting newspaper readership habits 108
4.1 M ean ratings of irresponsibility as a function of Prime type and Target age 127
4.2 M ean disrespectfulness ratings as a function of Prime type and Target age 128
5.1 Number (& %) of subjects belonging to each of the demographic 169

categories, for males and females separately
5.2 M eans (& SD) of the participants' scores on the measures of 170
engagement in problem behaviour and association with problem peers,
presented for males and females separately
5.3 Predicting association with problem peers and engagement in problem 188
behaviour from adolescents' perceptions of adults' beliefs about them
5.4 Relative contribution of predictors of association with problem peers and 190
engagement in problem behaviour
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
2.1 Percentage of descriptors endorsed as the cultural stereotype that were 43

rated negative, neutral, or positive in social desirability
2.2 Percentage of descriptors endorsed as young and older adults' personal 49

beliefs that were rated negative, neutral, or positive in social desirability
2.3 Percentage of descriptors endorsed as young people's perceptions of 61

adults' beliefs and as their personal beliefs that were rated negative,
neutral, or positive in social desirability
2.4 Tree diagram of trait clusters produced by the older adult participants 72
(Stereotypic traits are between dashed lines and stereotypic labels are
at the left)
2.5 Tree diagram of trait clusters produced by the young adult participants 73
(Stereotypic traits are between dashed lines and stereotypic labels are
at the left)
2.5 Tree diagram of trait clusters produced by the young people 74

(Stereotypic traits are between dashed lines and stereotypic labels are at
the left)
4.1 The interaction between Time (before or after prime) and Prime (youth 142
or adult) on observer ratings of participant rudeness
4.2 Target rudeness ratings as a function of prime type, mediated via 144
perceiver rudeness ratings
5.1a Predicted (structural) model of problem behaviour 159
5.1b Hypothesised moderating effect of impulsiveness on commitment to 160

school and problem behaviour involvement
5.2 Standardised structural model showing factor loadings, path 178

coefficients and disturbance terms for the initial model for males

coefficients and disturbance terms for the model for males, excluding
parental overprotection
xvi

coefficients and disturbance terms for the model for males, excluding
alienation and parental overprotection

coefficients and disturbance terms for the model for females
5.6 Interaction between impulsiveness and perceptions of problem 192

behaviour involvement on males' association with problem peers
5.7 Interaction between impulsiveness and perceptions of problem 193

behaviour involvement on males' engagement in problem behaviour
5.8 Interaction between impulsiveness and liking for school on males 194
engagement in problem behaviour
5.9 Interaction between venturesomeness and liking for school on males 195
association with problem peers
1
CHAPTER 1
INVES TIGATING S TEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH:

AN INTRODUCTION
Page
Introduction and overview 2
Perspectives on stereotyping 5
A conceptual framework 8
Stereotypes 9
As cultural beliefs and as personal beliefs 10
As perceived by the stereotyped group 11
M ultiple categories 13
Personal experience 15
Social learning: Family, friends, and the media 17
Evaluations of stereotyped group members 20
Self-fulfilling prophecies 22
Current understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth 25
Summary of aims 31
2
Introduction and overview
Ever since Hall (1904) initiated the scientific study of adolescence, young
people have been the focus of much research and media attention. This widespread
interest has been assumed to derive from the popular construction of youth as
problematic (Griffin, 1997). M any representations of youth portray them as moody,
rebellious, and troublesome (see Bessant, 1994), and as naturally criminal or
disrespectful (see White, 1997). Although Hall was the first to formally study the
storm and stress of adolescent development, Greek philosophers provided the
earliest commentary on the problematic nature of young people. Aristotle, for
example, claimed that young people are fickle, irascible, and facetious, and Plato
gave advice concerning the control of their behaviour (M uuss, 1996). Socrates also
described the tendency of adolescents to contradict their parents and to tyrannise their
teachers (Willis, 1981).
Hall (1904) popularised the idea of equating youth with trouble in his
influential two-volume text, Adolescence. Drawing on Darwins concept of
biological evolution, he believed that all human development was controlled by
genetically determined factors and he emphasised the biological basis of adolescence.
According to Hall, adolescence begins at puberty and is characterised by emotional
turbulence caused by the hormonal upheavals that are associated with puberty (see
also Atwater, 1988; M oran & Vinovskis, 1994; Muuss, 1996). Perhaps most
importantly, Hall assumed that such difficulties and turmoil represented normal
adolescent development (Griffin, 1997).

3
Since Halls (1904) work, psychoanalytic theorists have been the strongest
proponents of the storm and stress account. Anna Freud (1958, 1969), for example,
viewed storm and stress as universal and unchangeable and claimed that its absence
indicated abnormality: To be normal during the adolescent period is by itself
abnormal (Freud, 1958; p.267). In recent years, however, studies of the storm and
stress account have yielded mixed findings. M any studies have investigated the
occurrence of storm and stress in adolescence (Gecas & Seff, 1990; Offer, Ostrov,
Howard, & Atkinson, 1988; Powers, Hauser, & Kilner, 1989) and their findings have
indicated that storm and stress is not a universal adolescent phenomenon, but rather
that most youths successfully meet the challenges of this developmental period with
relatively little disruption. Offer et al. (1988) conducted a cross-national survey on
adolescents self-image. Approximately 73 percent of adolescents across ten
countries were found to possess a healthy adolescent self-image; they reported that
they were happy most of the time, enjoyed life, valued work and school, and had
positive feelings toward their families. At a social level, the adolescents indicated
that they cared about how others might be affected by their actions.
Other studies have focused on public perceptions or stereotypes of
adolescence (Buchanan, Eccles, Flanagan, M idgley, Feldlaufer, & Harold, 1990;
Buchanan & Holmbeck, 1998; Holmbeck & Hill, 1988; Offer, Ostrov, & Howard,
1981). These have revealed that many people believe adolescence to be a time of
storm and stress. Offer et al. (1981), for example, found that mental health
professionals viewed adolescents as significantly more disturbed than adolescents
viewed themselves. Indeed, these professionals believed that normal adolescents

4
had more problems than were reported by either psychiatrically disturbed or
delinquent adolescents. In Buchanan and Holmbecks (1998) study, college students
and parents of adolescents reported that adolescents were significantly more likely
than elementary school children to engage in problem behaviours, display risk taking
and rebellious characteristics, and internalising disorders such as anxiety and
depression. Thus, despite research findings that adolescent storm and stress is not
especially widespread, professional and public perceptions of young people are
largely negative and tend to support the notion of adolescence as a time of storm and
stress. Until now, however, there has been limited research directed toward
understanding the consequences of negative perceptions or stereotypes about young
people. In other words, although we have some understanding that youth as
problematic is the dominant stereotype, we do not know the effects of those beliefs
on behaviour, that of the young people themselves, or that of other people, and
especially, the holders of the stereotype. The central aim of this thesis was to gain an
understanding of the way stereotypic beliefs about youth influence the behaviour of
adults and of young people themselves.
This thesis begins with a review of the literature concerning stereotypes. The
review provides information about the major perspectives on stereotyping. It then
highlights the different ways in which stereotypic beliefs must be explored when
trying to understand the content of any group stereotype. The findings from research
concerning the origins and the consequences of group-based stereotypes are
summarised. The chapter then provides information about our current empirical
understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth and highlights the limitations of

5
existing research for understanding those beliefs. Finally, the chapter ends with a
summary of the aims of the research that was conducted for this thesis.
Perspectives on stereotyping
Lippmann (1922) introduced the term, stereotype, to refer to the pictures in
our heads that determine our perceptions of people and events. When applied to a
group of people, stereotypes are preconceptions that the members of the group are all
alike and not distinguishable from one another (Hamilton, Stroessner, & Driscoll,
1994). Four major conceptual approaches have dominated the stereotype literature:
the psychodynamic, sociocultural, cognitive, and social cognitive orientations.
From a psychodynamic perspective, stereotypes and stereotyping are of
interest to the extent that they are related to prejudice and personality (Ashmore &
Del Boca, 1981). According to the psychodynamic viewpoint, stereotypes serve the
motivational needs of the perceiver (Snyder & Meine, 1994). This approach focuses
on the use of defense mechanisms, such as projection and displacement of negative
attributes of the self onto the members of some out-group. By perceiving an out-
group less favourably, ones in-group becomes preferable (Hamilton & Sherman,
1994). Stereotypes therefore serve to make people feel better about themselves and
less threatened by other groups of people (Wills, 1981); in that way, stereotypes are
said to fulfill an ego-defensive function (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981; Katz, 1960).
The sociocultural orientation emphasises the role of social learning and
reinforcement in the acquisition and maintenance of stereotypic beliefs. The focus is
on how stereotypes can be learned and perpetuated through family and peer group
6
influences and media portrayals (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981). The sociocultural
orientation suggests that stereotypes serve the social function of helping people fit in
and identify with their own social and cultural ingroups (Snyder & M eine, 1994). By
specifying the nature of various social groups, stereotypes support norms about how
those groups and individual group members are expected to behave and how they
should be treated (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981).
From a cognitive perspective, stereotypes are belief systems about the
attributes that characterise various social groups (Hamilton et al., 1994). The most
distinctive feature of the cognitive orientation is that stereotypes are not different
from other cognitive structures and processes (Ashmore & Del Boca; 1981). This
approach suggests that individuals are limited in the amount of incoming information
that they can process and therefore form stereotypes as a way of simplifying the
environment (Spears, Oakes, Ellemers, & Haslam, 1997). Stereotypes, therefore,
serve the function of cognitive economy by helping their holders to categorise and
manage incoming information (Snyder & Meine, 1994).
The psychodynamic, sociocultural, and cognitive orientations have had little
impact on guiding the nature of stereotype research (Hamilton et al., 1994). For
example, research emerging from the psychodynamic orientation has been directed
largely at determining the aetiology of prejudice rather than at explaining the nature
of stereotypes. Research from the sociocultural orientation has been concerned
mostly with specifying the extent to which people agree on the characteristics of
social groups, and research from the cognitive orientation has focused on stereotypes
as individual belief systems (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981).

7
During the mid-1970s, a new conceptual and empirical approach to
understanding social psychological phenomena began to emerge (Hamilton, Devine,
& Ostrom, 1994). That approach became known as social cognition. A social
cognitive approach attempts to explain social phenomena by investigating the
cognitive structures and processes by which they operate (Sherman, Judd, & Park,
1989). In addition to providing a conceptual framework for the investigation of a
wide range of social phenomena, social cognition provided a fourth conceptual
orientation to thinking about stereotypes and stereotyping.
From a social cognitive perspective, a stereotype is a cognitive structure that
can influence the way in which information about groups and group members is
processed (Hamilton, Sherman, & Ruvolo, 1990). This approach focuses not only on
the nature and origins of the cognitive structure itself, but also on the way that
structure influences subsequent information processing, perception, and behaviour.
Thus, the social cognitive perspective advanced the stereotyping literature by
broadening the research focus from the content and sources of stereotypic beliefs to
include an examination of the processes underlying those beliefs (Hamilton et al.,
1994).
Research from this perspective has shown that stereotypes influence
information processing in a number of ways. First, stereotypes affect what
information is attended to and encoded. Specifically, people are more likely to
process and encode information that is stereotype consistent (Bodenhausen, 1988).
Stereotypes also affect the interpretation of information, especially ambiguous
information. People often evaluate the ambiguous behaviour of stereotyped group

8
members in stereotype consistent ways (Banaji, Hardin, & Rothman, 1993; Darley &
Gross, 1983). Finally, stereotypes also affect how people behave when interacting
with members of a stereotyped group by influencing the way information is processed
(Chen & Bargh, 1997; Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974).
Although issues relating to the content and sources of stereotypic beliefs
remain relevant today, the psychodynamic, sociocultural, and cognitive orientations
did not consider the important influence of stereotypic beliefs on information
processing, perception, and behaviour. The social cognitive orientation did do this.
The program of research conducted for this thesis examined not only the content and
sources of stereotypic beliefs about young people, but also the consequences of those
beliefs for behaviour, that of the holders of the stereotype and that of young people
themselves. I now turn to review the stereotype literature that relates to the content,
sources, and consequences of stereotypic beliefs. In doing so, I outline the conceptual
framework within which this program of research was conducted.
A conceptual framework
The present research sought to specify the nature and content of stereotypic
beliefs about youth, identify the sources of those beliefs, and gather information about
the consequences of those beliefs. This section outlines the different belief sets that
can be examined by researchers seeking to establish the content of particular group
stereotypes, summarises the different explanations that have been offered to account
for the sources of stereotypic beliefs, and reviews our current understanding of the
consequences of stereotypic beliefs for perception and behaviour.

9
Stereotypes
The nature and content of a range of group stereotypes, including racial (Katz
& Braly, 1933), ethnic (Gardner, Lalonde, Nero, & Young, 1988), and gender
(Broverman, Vogel, Broverman, Clarkson, & Rosenkrantz, 1972), have been
documented. Some researchers who have investigated the content of group -based
stereotypes distinguish two sets of beliefs cultural stereotypes and personal beliefs
(Augostinous, Ahrens, & Innes, 1994; Esses, Haddock, & Zanna, 1994; Hort, Fagot,
& Leinbach, 1990; Krueger, 1994). Cultural stereotypes refer to shared or
community-wide patterns of beliefs, and personal beliefs refer to the beliefs held by
an individual regarding a social group (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981).
As a related set of beliefs, stereotypes can be investigated from the
perspective of the stereotyped group members in the form of reflected appraisals
(M yers, 1999). Those beliefs are important because they provide information about
the extent to which people are aware of the nature and content of stereotypic beliefs
about themselves. Investigations of cultural stereotypes and personal beliefs, and of
stereotypes as reflected appraisals, all assume that people have a single, general
stereotype of a particular social group. It has been established, however, that people
can have multiple stereotypes of social groups (Brewer, Dull, & Lui, 1981; Devine &
Baker, 1991). In other words, stereotypes can be hierarchically organised, with an
overriding global stereotype, and several distinct subtypes within the broad
classification (Brewer et al., 1981). Thus, the investigation of multiple stereotypes is
an important way in which to establish the nature and content of group-based
stereotypes.
10
As cultural beliefs and as personal beliefs. Several researchers have claimed
that knowledge about the stereotype of a particular group does not inevitably entail
endorsement of the stereotype (Ashmore & Del Boca, 1981; Devine, 1989; Lepore &
Brown, 1997). For instance, Devine (1989) viewed stereotypes and personal beliefs
as separate cognitive structures and claimed that the two structures are governed by
separate cognitive processes automatic and controlled processes. On the one hand,
stereotypes are learned early in childhood and therefore have a long history of
activation (Allport, 1954; Katz, 1976). For that reason, Devine (1989) argued that
they are automatically activated in the presence of a stereotyped group member. On
the other hand, personal beliefs about a group are newer cognitive structures,
developed after the initial learning of a stereotype and so they rely on controlled or
intentional processes for their activation.
Augostinous et al. (1994) obtained evidence to support the distinction between
cultural stereotypes and personal beliefs. They found that high- and low-prejudiced
people were equally knowledgeable of the cultural stereotype of Australian
Aborigines, although they differed with respect to their personal beliefs. High-
prejudiced subjects endorsed the negative aspects of the stereotype and low-
prejudiced subjects endorsed the positive stereotype components. Similarly, Lepore
and Brown (1997) showed that high- and low-prejudiced people shared the same
knowledge of the stereotype of Black people. High-prejudiced subjects, however,
formed a more negative and less positive impression of a Black person, whereas low-
prejudiced subjects tended in the opposite direction. Those findings were important
because they challenged the traditional perspective that there is an inevitability of

11
prejudice, that knowledge of a stereotype implies automatic prejudice toward the
group (Allport, 1954; Hamilton, 1981).
Investigations of the cultural stereotype of a social group and of peoples
endorsement of that stereotype provide information about the beliefs of the holders of
the stereotype. They do not, however, tell us the extent to which the stereotypic
beliefs are known to the stereotyped group. Based on the assumption that peoples
sense of self derives in part from their perceptions of how they are viewed by others,
the principle of reflected appraisals provides a useful framework within which to
consider individuals perceptions of stereotypic beliefs about them.
As perceived by the stereotyped group. With his notion of the looking glass
self, also known as reflected appraisals, Cooley (1902, 1964) proposed that peoples
self-perceptions are largely a reflection of how they appear to others. M ead (1934)
extended the concept by claiming that it is not what others actually think of us that is
important, but rather what we think they are thinking. Shrauger and Schoeneman
(1979) reviewed studies of the reflected appraisal process, and found that peoples
self-perceptions correlate better with the way they think others view them than with
how others actually view them. Davidson and Lang (1960), for example, compared
fourth and sixth grade students' self-perceptions with their perceptions of how they
were viewed by their teachers and found a correlation of .82. Bledsoe and Wiggins
(1973) found no congruence between adolescents' self-image and their parents' actual
perceptions of their self-image. Because peoples perceptions of how they are viewed
by others can have important consequences for their self-perceptions (Felson, 1985;
12
Kinch, 1963), researchers of stereotypes need to understand group members
perceptions of stereotypic beliefs about them.
Cooley (1964) and M ead (1934) differed, however, in their views regarding
which peoples beliefs were most important. Cooley (1964) believed that the self is
constructed from the appraisals of significant individuals (for example, family and
friends) whereas Meads (1934) looking glass self was reflective of a generalised
other, referring to ones whole sociocultural environment. DePaulo, Kenny, Hoover,
Webb, & Oliver (1987) conducted a review of research into the reflected appraisal
process and found that a majority of the studies supported M eads (1934) view that
reflected appraisals are influenced by a generalised other. That is, the self is affected
more by the beliefs of groups of people than by the beliefs of individuals. Similarly,
Felson (1989) obtained evidence that children have a general sense of how others
view them, although they are unable to judge how specific individuals view them. In
his longitudinal study, Felson (1989) examined fourth to eighth grade childrens
beliefs about how they were viewed by their parents. He focused on appraisals of
childrens academic and sporting ability, their attractiveness, and their popularity, and
found that although childrens self-appraisals were affected by reflected appraisals,
children were not able to distinguish how each parent viewed them. Rather, their
self-appraisals of their academic and sporting ability and of their attractiveness and
popularity were affected by their reflected appraisals of their parents in general.
Thus, the sense of self appears to be related more to peoples perceptions of how they
are viewed by others in general than to their perceptions of how they are viewed by
significant others. For that reason, researchers of stereotypes should investigate

13
group members perceptions of the cultural stereotype of themselves rather than
perceptions of the beliefs held by specific individuals.
M ultiple categories. Much research into the nature and content of stereotypic
beliefs has been conducted under the assumption that people have very general
conceptions of social groups (e.g., elderly people, women). An increasing number
of researchers have suggested, however, that stereotypes exist within a hierarchical
categorisation system (Rosch, 1978). In this system, broad or global stereotypes (e.g.,
women) are the highest or superordinate categories and beneath this level exist more
distinct, subordinate levels or subtypes (e.g., businesswoman, barmaid,
housewife; Hamilton & Sherman, 1994). Stereotyping can occur at any level within
the hierarchy (Hamilton et al., 1994).
Brewer et al. (1981) examined the hierarchical organisation of stereotypes,
and hypothesised that people have several stereotypes for different types of elderly
individuals. To test their hypothesis, Brewer et al. (1981) defined three elderly
subtypes grandmother, a nurturing, family-oriented woman; elder statesman, a
distinguished, conservative man; and senior citizen, an inactive, isolated person.
They then obtained photographs of elderly individuals to represent each of the
categories. Brewer et al. (1981) found that college students sorted the photographs
into subcategories fitting each of the expected stereotypes. Thus, people were shown
to have multiple stereotypes of the elderly.
Schmidt and Boland (1986) demonstrated that young adults have more
representations of older adults than the three conceptualised by Brewer et al. (1981).
In their study, college students generated all the descriptors that they associated with
14
the elderly; this yielded a list of 99 traits. Schmidt and Boland (1986) then asked an
independent sample of college students to sort the traits into groups where each group
represented an elderly subtype. A cluster analysis produced 12 elderly subtypes.
Four of those were positive subtypes John Wayne conservative, liberal matriarch/
patriarch, perfect grandparent, and sage. In addition, eight negative stereotypes
were produced despondent, mildly impaired, vulnerable, severely impaired,
shrew, recluse, nosy neighbour, and bag lady. Hummert, Garstka, Shaner, and
Strahm (1994) extended those findings by comparing the multiple stereotypes of the
elderly held by young, middle-aged, and elderly adults. They found that the three
separate age groups have many of the same stereotypes of the elderly, although the
middle-aged and elderly adults have more complex stereotype sets than do the young
adults. In light of those findings, group-based stereotypes should be specified at both
global and subcategory levels.
In summary, an inquiry into the nature and content of stereotypic beliefs about
any social group requires attention to four separate sets of beliefs. The specification
of the cultural stereotype of the group provides an important starting point. Having
done that, it is important to investigate the extent to which individuals personally
endorse the stereotype. Group members perceptions of stereotypic beliefs about
themselves are a third important set of beliefs. Finally, researchers can explore the
possibility that there are multiple stereotypes of the group.

15
Sources of stereotypic beliefs
Whatever their content, most researchers have attempted to understand from
where stereotypes come in the first place (Kunda, 1999). Two major explanations
have been offered to account for the initial formation of stereotypic belief systems. In
some instances, stereotypes are said to be formed through personal experience with
group members. However, when interaction with stereotyped group members is
limited, stereotypes are assumed to develop through social learning, from family and
friends, and from the media (Smith & M ackie, 1995).
Personal experience. To some extent, stereotypes develop through personal
experience with group members. In interacting with other people, we often see them
not as individuals, but rather as members of social groups (Hamilton & Sherman,
1994). In that way, stereotypes are formed through the categorisation of individuals
into social groups (Kunda, 1999).
Researchers have shown that basic cognitive processes underlie categorisation
and the subsequent development of group stereotypes. For instance, our attention is
drawn typically to the most salient or unusual characteristics of an individual
(M cKnight & Sutton, 1994). Taylor (1981), for example, demonstrated the effects of
attending to salient stimuli. In one study, subjects listened to an audiotape of a group
conversation while viewing photographs of the individuals who supposedly made
each comment. The photographs portrayed the group as either being composed of
three Black and three White people, or one Black person and five White people. In
the latter condition, the one Black person was highly salient due to group
composition. The conversation was identical in both conditions, although the solo
16
Black person was perceived as being more prominent and was rated more extremely
on trait scales than when he was part of the group consisting of the same number of
Black and White people. Thus, attending to individuals who are unusual or salient in
a context can lead to more extreme perceptions of that individual, and to more biased
perceptions of group differences. Those biased perceptions can provide a basis for
the formation of group stereotypes.
Another process that can lead to perceptual differentiation between groups is
the distinctiveness-based illusory correlation, which is the erroneous perception of the
co-occurrence of rare characteristics (M cGarty & de la Haye, 1997). In a
demonstration of the illusory correlation, Hamilton and Gifford (1976) presented
subjects with a series of statements describing the behaviour of members of two
groups, Group A and Group B. There were twice as many statements about Group A
members as about Group B members. Approximately two-thirds of the statements
described desirable behaviours and one-third described undesirable behaviours,
although the same ratio of desirable to undesirable behaviours was present in both
groups. Given that Group B occurred less frequently than Group A, and that
undesirable behaviours occurred less often than desirable behaviours, when a member
of Group B performed an undesirable behaviour, it constituted the occurrence of rare
or distinctive stimulus events. Hamilton and Gifford (1976) found that when subjects
were asked for their impressions of the groups, they reported more negative
impressions of Group B. They had, therefore, formed an illusory correlation by
perceiving an association between the two infrequent and distinctive characteristics
membership in the smaller group and undesirable behaviour.

17
Thus, stereotypes can develop through direct, personal contact with members
of social groups. Basic cognitive processes, such as attending to salient stimuli or the
co-occurrence of rare stimuli, can lead to the categorisation of individuals into social
groups and to biased perceptions of group differences. By generating the initial
perception of group differences, these cognitive mechanisms can contribute to the
foundation for stereotype development (Hamilton et al., 1994).
Social learning: family, friends, and the media. In many instances, people
develop stereotypes about certain groups even if they have not had any direct
experience with group members (Smith & M ackie, 1995). Parents, teachers, and
friends provide initial information about group differences. When stereotypes are
deeply embedded in the social norms of a culture, children learn them naturally as a
part of growing up and there is strong evidence that stereotypes are well established
in childrens memories before they develop the cognitive ability to question the
validity or acceptability of the stereotypes (Allport, 1954; Katz, 1976; Smith &
M ackie, 1995).
In addition to family and friends, however, people acquire stereotypic beliefs
about groups of people through media representations (Smith & M ackie, 1995).
Because stereotypes are recognisable, the media often use popular stereotypes in
material for mass production (M cMahon & Quin, 1987). Such media portrayals are
most likely to influence peoples perceptions when they have little or no direct
experience with the members of the stereotyped groups (Black & Bryant, 1995).
M ost studies of the effects of media portrayals on peoples beliefs have been
conducted within the context of gender and racial representations (Smith & M ackie,
18
1995). Historically, women have been dramatically underrepresented in prime-time
television, in television news, and in newspaper coverage. Further, when women
have been the focus of media representations, they have been depicted typically as
housewives and mothers (Black & Bryant, 1995). Similarly, racial minorities have
been underrepresented in the media relative to their proportions in the population.
Asians, for example, appear very rarely and differences between Chinese, Japanese,
and Koreans are minimised or ignored (Smith & Mackie, 1995). There is evidence
that media portrayals have subtle effects on peoples perceptions of groups. Morgan
(1982), for example, conducted a longitudinal examination of television viewing and
the development of sex-role stereotypes. He found that the more television
adolescent girls watched, the stronger were their beliefs in traditional gender
stereotypes one year later.
The mechanisms by which media representations influence public perceptions
are not clear. Sercombe (1997) claims that there is no one-to-one correspondence
between media representations and public perceptions of a group. Peoples use of the
media, how they perceive a particular event, and what they believe and do not
believe, depend on a range of complex factors. Media representations have been
shown to exert the most powerful effects when they confirm existing opinions of
audiences, or when audiences have few independent sources of information (Roshier,
1973).
In summary, stereotypes are formed through interaction with group members,
with other people who tell us about the group, or through the media. Once
established, stereotypes can exert powerful effects on information processing, on

19
perception, and on behaviour. People tend to look for stereotype-confirming, not
stereotype-disconfirming, evidence, and they tend to interpret ambiguous information
as if it is consistent with existing stereotypes.
Consequences of stereotypic beliefs
To examine the consequences of stereotypes, researchers are increasingly
focusing on stereotypic beliefs that are held implicitly. Implicit stereotypic beliefs
are the introspectively unidentified (or inaccurately identified) traces of past
experience that mediate attributions of qualities to members of a social category
(Greenwald & Banaji, 1995; p.15). This recent integration of implicit cognition into
social psychological theory has arisen as a consequence of the upsurge of interest in
implicit memory (Banaji & Greenwald, 1994). As a result, a growing body of
evidence points to the automatic operation of stereotypes (Dovidio, Evans, & Tyler,
1986; Gaertner & McLaughlin, 1983; Gilbert & Hixon, 1991; Greenwald, M cGhee,
& Shwartz, 1998).
Implicit stereotypes have important effects on information processing and on
subsequent evaluations of individuals (Banaji, Hardin, & Rothman, 1993; Darley &
Gross, 1983; Higgins, Rholes, & Jones, 1977). Implicit stereotypic beliefs can also
affect social interaction, both the behaviour of the holder of the stereotype and the
behaviour of the stereotyped group member. In such instances, stereotypes can direct
behaviour in confirmatory ways, thereby creating self-fulfilling prophecies (Chen &
Bargh, 1997). In other words, people may even elicit stereotype-consistent
information from stereotyped individuals by the way they interact with them.
20
Evaluations of stereotyped group members. Social cognition researchers have
used priming procedures to investigate the effects of stereotypic beliefs on peoples
judgements and evaluations of individuals. Priming refers to any experience or
procedure that brings a particular concept to mind (Higgins, 1996). A concept that has
been primed is likely to be applied to the interpretation of novel information, even in
unrelated contexts (Banaji et al., 1993; Higgins et al., 1977; Srull & Wyer, 1979,
1980). Srull and Wyer (1980), for example, asked subjects to unscramble a series of
sentences that described either hostile or non-hostile behaviours. For half of the
subjects, 35 sentences described hostile behaviours and for the remaining subjects
only 15 sentences described hostile behaviours. In a seemingly unrelated task,
subjects read a paragraph that described the behaviours of a hypothetical target
person. The behaviours he engaged in were ambiguously hostile. Finally, subjects
were required to judge the target person on a series of trait rating scales, some related
to and others unrelated to hostility. Srull and Wyer (1980) found that subjects who
received the 35 hostile primes judged the target person as more hostile than those who
received the 15 hostile primes. Thus, increasing the accessibility of a trait category in
memory increases the likelihood that the category will be used to interpret subsequent
related behavioural information. Moreover, the effect of the trait category on the
interpretation of information and on judgements appears to increase with the number
of behavioural exemplars of the trait that are activated.
In other instances, the priming procedure has been in the form of subliminal
presentations (Bargh & Pietromonaco, 1982; Devine, 1989; Lepore & Brown, 1997).
Bargh and Pietromonaco (1982) examined the possibility that information relevant to
21
a trait category that is presented outside of conscious awareness can temporarily
increase the accessibility of the category. In an initial vigilance task, subjects reacted
as quickly as possible to flashes on a screen by pressing a button upon their
appearance. The flashes were words, some related to and others unrelated to hostility.
The word flashes stayed on the screen for 100 milliseconds and were then masked.
Depending on the condition to which the subject had been assigned, either 0 percent,
20 percent, or 80 percent of the trials contained hostile words. Next, subjects read a
behavioural description of a target person that was ambiguous with respect to the trait
of hostility. Finally, they rated the target person on several trait rating scales, half of
which were related to hostility and half of which were not. The researchers found
that subjects in the 80 percent hostile-word group rated the target person as more
hostile than did subjects in the other two groups. For hostility-unrelated traits,
however, both the 80 percent and the 20 percent groups rated the target person more
negatively than the 0 percent group. These findings emphasise that people do not
have to be aware of the source of environmental information for it to influence
judgements of other people.
Stereotypes do not always affect the judgements that people make about other
individuals. For instance, the complexity of the judgement task affects peoples use
of stereotypes in making judgements. Bodenhausen and Lichtenstein (1987), for
example, found that stereotypes are more influential when judgements involve
complex and diverse information than when they involve simple trait inferences.
Thus, stereotypes influence the judgement process under complex and difficult
conditions (Hamilton et al., 1990). In addition, when a perceiver encounters an

22
individual group member, two kinds of information could be used when evaluating
that person. First, the perceiver could make use of the stereotype of the group to
which the individual belongs. Second, the perceiver could use specific
individuating information about the particular person (Hamilton et al., 1990). The
relative importance of these two kinds of information is dependent on the relation
between them. Specifically, judgements of an individual are influenced more by
stereotypes when the information describing the individual is ambiguous, consistent
with the stereotype, or uninformative. Alternatively, evaluations of the individual are
more likely to be based on individuating information when that information is
inconsistent with stereotypic beliefs (Fiske, Neuberg, Beattie, & M ilberg, 1987).
Overall, stereotypes can influence how information is interpreted. Those
influences are particularly strong when the information is ambiguous, and can occur
outside of awareness. The effects of stereotyping on information processing are not
limited to judgements or evaluations of individuals.
Self-fulfilling prophecies. When a person is categorised as a member of a
group, a stereotype about the group is activated. The stereotype can then serve as a
basis of expectancies about how that person is likely to behave, and as a guide to how
one should behave when interacting with that person. Those expectancies can elicit
stereotype-consistent behaviour from the holder of the stereotype. This in turn can
affect the behaviour of the stereotyped individual who reciprocates with stereotype-
consistent behaviour (Hamilton et al., 1994). In that way, stereotypes can lead to self-
fulfilling prophecies (M erton, 1948), expectancies for which behavioural

23
confirmation by the stereotyped group member is induced through the actions of the
holder of the stereotype (Hamilton et al., 1990).
Word et al. (1974) demonstrated the effect of racial stereotypes on perceivers
behaviour. White participants each interviewed a White and a Black job applicant,
who were confederates trained to respond in a standard manner. Nevertheless,
participants treated the White and Black applicants quite differently. When
interviewing Black applicants, White participants conducted shorter interviews, made
more speech errors, and made less eye contact. Given that the confederate applicants
were trained to behave in a uniform manner, the differences in perceivers behaviour
toward the Black and White confederates were due only to the perceivers stereotype-
based expectancies.
In a second study, Word et al. (1974) showed that perceivers behaviour can
elicit self-fulfilling prophecy effects. Confederates were trained to use the two
different interview styles that participants had exhibited in the first study. The first
style was the manner in which participants interviewed Black confederates and
conveyed a negative evaluation (short interview length, little eye contact, and more
speech errors). The second style was the way in which participants had interviewed
White confederates (increased interview length, more eye contact, and fewer speech
errors). The researchers found that participants who were interviewed by a
confederate using the negative interview style performed more poorly in the
interview, as rated by outside observers, than those who were interviewed with the
positive interview style; the positive or negative interview style produced differences
in interviewee performance. Such self-fulfilling prophecy effects have been seen in

24
several other experiments (Neuberg, 1989; Snyder & Swan, 1978; Snyder, Tanke, &
Berscheid, 1977).
Stereotypes that are activated outside of awareness can also produce
behavioural confirmation effects. In a study by Chen and Bargh (1997), White
participants were exposed subliminally to photographs of either White or African
American males. Then they were paired with a partner who had not been exposed to
any photographs. The pair of participants played a word-guessing game and their
interaction was recorded on separate channels of a tape recorder. Two judges, who
were unaware of the experimental hypotheses, listened to the audiotapes and rated
each participant for the degree of hostility that was displayed. Participants who had
been primed subliminally with photographs of African American males were rated as
more hostile than those who had been primed with photographs of White males. The
photographs had activated the African American stereotype, which includes the trait
hostility, and this affected their behaviour. M oreover, those who interacted with
participants who had been primed with the African American photographs exhibited
greater hostility than those who interacted with participants primed with the
photographs of White males. Thus, stereotypic beliefs can elicit self-fulfilling
prophecy effects without any intention or awareness on the part of the holders of
those beliefs. That is, perceivers may not even realise that their stereotypic beliefs
have been activated or that they are behaving in accordance with those beliefs.
This chapter has pointed thus far to the central issues that need to be
considered in any investigation of stereotypic beliefs. This review has highlighted the
different ways in which the content of stereotypic beliefs should be specified and the
25
need to explore both the sources and consequences of those beliefs. This chapter now
details our current knowledge of the content, sources, and consequences of
stereotypic beliefs about young people; in doing so, the chapter points to the
limitations of the existing research.
Current understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth
Only a handful of empirical studies has investigated stereotypic beliefs about
young people (Buchanan et al., 1990; Buchanan & Holmbeck, 1998; Holmbeck &
Hill, 1988; Offer et al., 1981; Stoller, Offer, Howard, & Koenig, 1996). Almost all of
these have addressed peoples endorsement of the notion of youth as problem and of
adolescence as a time of storm and stress (Arnett, 1999). Buchanan et al. (1990), for
example, assessed parents and teachers beliefs about adolescence. Participants were
asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with a series of statements such as
'Changes in hormones make early adolescence a difficult period of life' and 'There are
lots of things parents can do to make their relationship with their adolescents a good
one'. Buchanan et al. (1990) found that parents and teachers had both positive and
negative beliefs about adolescence. On the one hand, most participants believed
adolescence to be a difficult time of life. On the other hand, they indicated that
parents can do things to assist their relationship with their adolescents. Holmbeck
and Hill (1988) assessed the extent to which a sample of college students endorsed
the notion of adolescence as a time of storm and stress, and found that beliefs in
storm and stress notions were quite prevalent. For example, 72 percent gave the item
'Adolescence is a stormy and stressful time' a rating of 5 or higher on a 7-point scale.

26
Only one study has sought to assess the range of attributes that are assigned to
young people as a category. Buchanan and Holmbeck (1998) asked participants to
generate a list of descriptors to characterise both the stereotypical and average
young person. An independent sample of college students and parents of adolescents
then indicated the extent to which they believed the descriptors to be accurate. Those
responses were then entered into a factor analysis, the purpose of which was to
produce a measure to assess stereotypic beliefs about adolescence. The factor
analysis yielded nine subscales: Risk-taking/Rebellious, Friendly, Problem
Behaviours, Classic Adolescent Behaviours, Social, Internalising, Active,
Conforming, and Upstanding/Prosocial.
Buchanan and Holmbecks (1998) findings are important because they
revealed that stereotypic beliefs about youth include a range of traits and behaviours,
including positive as well as negative attributes. Their study, however, was limited to
personal beliefs about young people. Participants were asked to indicate the extent to
which they believed each descriptor to be characteristic of young people. This does
not provide information about the cultural stereotype of young people. Because a
person may have knowledge of the content of a stereotype without endorsing that
stereotype as his or her personal belief (Devine, 1989), it is important to specify both
the cultural stereotype of youth and personal endorsement of the stereotype. Further,
existing research has given no attention to young peoples perceptions of stereotypic
beliefs about themselves. Therefore, we have no knowledge of the extent to which
young people are aware of the nature and content of the youth-related stereotype.
Finally, Buchanan and Holmbecks (1998) research was limited in that they sought
27
participants personal beliefs about the typical teenager. As a result, we lack
information about the extent to which people have multiple stereotypes of youth.
Our current understanding of the content of stereotypic beliefs about young
people is limited to adults personal beliefs. Investigations of the cultural stereotype
of youth, young peoples knowledge of the stereotype, and multiple stereotypes of
youth are essential if we are to gain a comprehensive understanding of stereotypic
beliefs about young people. This thesis aims to provide that information.
Beliefs about young people as problems are assumed to originate in part from
media representations of young people (Bessant & Hil, 1997). In general, media
portrayals of youth are negative and often sensationalise a juvenile crime wave
(Buttrum, 1997), typically neglecting the positive and important contributions that
young people can make. A growing body of work has documented that the
Australian media is replete with bad news about young people (Australian Centre
for Independent Journalism, 1992; Hil, 1997; M cM ahon, 1997; Rendell, 1997;
Sercombe, 1997; Webber, 1998). Increasing drug problems, gang-related violence,
juvenile crime rates, and youth unemployment saturate media reports.
It has been claimed often that such reporting fosters negative community
beliefs about young people (Bessant & Hil, 1997; Omaji, 1997). Yet the empirical
evidence to support those claims is limited. Stereotypic beliefs about any group
develop either through interactions with members of the stereotyped group or through
learning about the group from other people and the media. Further, Sercombe (1997)
has claimed that many adults are separated from the experiences of young people due
to the general exclusion of young people from most aspects of society. M edia
28
portrayals of young people are therefore likely to be an important source of
stereotypic beliefs about youth. Thus, the relationship between media representations
and stereotypic beliefs about youth needs to be examined empirically. I do this in this
thesis.
There has been virtually no research directed toward understanding the
consequences of stereotypic beliefs about youth for information processing,
perception and behaviour. This thesis aims to provide information about those
consequences. The research conducted for this thesis examined the consequences of
stereotypic beliefs about youth for adults evaluations of young people and for self-
fulfilling prophecies
Some studies have investigated the consequences of young peoples
perceptions of others beliefs about them, or their reflected appraisals, for the
behaviour that they engage in (Bartusch & M atsueda, 1996; Heimer & Matsueda,
1994; M atsueda, 1992). Matsueda and his colleagues found that young peoples
perceptions that significant others perceive them to be problematic can increase the
likelihood that they will engage in problem behaviour. M atsueda (1992) hypothesised
that problem behaviour is largely a function of the meanings of self that are relevant
to problem behaviour. He further claimed that these meanings arise in part through
labeling. In other words, reflected appraisals of the self as problematic are affected by
the actual appraisals made by significant others, including parents, teachers, and
peers. Heimer and M atsueda (1994) found that reflected appraisals of the self as
problematic had a large effect on problem behaviour. Young people who saw
themselves from the standpoint of parents and peers as problematic were more likely
29
to engage in problem behaviour. Reflected appraisals, in turn, were determined by
parents actual appraisals. Bartusch and Matsueda (1996) confirmed those findings.
Thus, young peoples perceptions of others beliefs about them can elicit self-
fulfilling prophecy effects.
The research by Matsueda and his colleagues was limited to the reflected
appraisals of significant others. The sense of self, however, is more related to
peoples perceptions of how they are viewed by others in general (see DePaulo et al.,
1987). Thus, it is important to investigate the extent to which young peoples
perceptions of others beliefs in general contribute to their problem behaviour.
Further, young peoples engagement in problem behaviour is influenced by a range of
factors (Sullivan & Wilson, 1995). Recent research into the causes of problem
behaviour has been focused on theoretical integration and on the exploration of the
relationships between social structural, person-centred, and environmental factors that
are known to play significant roles (Jessor, Van Den Bos, Vanderryn, Costa, &
Turbin, 1995; ODonnell, Hawkins, & Abbott, 1995). Among such attempts,
Thornberry (1987) proposed an interactional theory of delinquency that examines
reciprocal causal structures. The theory proposes that human behaviour occurs in
social interaction and in order to provide a comprehensive explanation of delinquent
behaviour it is necessary to formulate models that focus on interactive processes.
Thus, rather than viewing delinquency simply as an outcome variable, predictor
variables are reciprocally related, with delinquent behaviour exerting a causal
influence over the other factors. Thornberry combined social control (Hirschi, 1969)
and social learning (Bandura, 1973; Akers, 1977) theories. He claimed that the
30
attenuation of social bonds to conventional society provides young people with
greater behavioural freedom, including the opportunity to engage in problem
behaviour. For that to occur, an environment is required in which delinquency is
learned and reinforced. Thornberry (1987) proposed that associations with delinquent
peers provide that environment. Most importantly, however, this entire process
develops over time, such that delinquency is not only affected by, but it also affects
the bonding and learning variables.
Thus integrated theories of delinquency, especially with an interactional
focus, acknowledge that there are multiple causal pathways to delinquency.
Surprisingly, however, among the many factors that have been implicated as exerting
an influence over delinquency involvement, the role of young peoples perceptions of
stereotypic beliefs about them has been neglected. Our current understanding of the
relationship between stereotypic beliefs and young peoples engagement in
delinquent behaviour is limited to the knowledge that young peoples perceptions that
significant others perceive them to be rule-violators increases their involvement in
problematic behaviour. The relative contribution of young peoples perceptions of
stereotypic beliefs about them to their engagement in problem behaviour therefore
needs to be determined. I examine this in this thesis.

31
Summary of aims
The research conducted for this thesis had four overriding aims. The first was
to specify the nature and content of stereotypic beliefs about youth using four
converging approaches: (a) examining adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype of
youth, (b) investigating adults personal beliefs, (c) exploring young peoples
perceptions of adults beliefs, and (d) investigating multiple stereotypes of youth. By
way of specifying stereotypic beliefs about young people, the first aim of the program
of research was also to develop two psychometrically sound measures to assess those
beliefs. One measure would assess adults personal beliefs about youth. Buchanan
and Holmbeck's (1998) measure was thought to be inadequate for two reasons. First,
their measure derives from a factor analysis in which the authors included all items,
regardless of the extent of endorsement among the sample of college students and
parents of adolescents. What makes stereotypes social, however, is that they are
widely shared, or consensual in nature (Haslam, 1997). An alternative approach is
therefore to include only those traits and behaviours that are widely held to be
characteristic of young people. Second, Buchanan and Holmbeck's measure derived
from the responses of college students and parents of adolescents. The overriding
question in the present research concerned the content of general stereotypic beliefs
about young people. For that reason, the goal was to develop a measure based on the
responses of a sample of adults who were drawn from the broader community. The
second measure to be derived from the program of research was to provide an index
of young peoples perceptions of stereotypic beliefs about them.

32
The second aim of the present program of research was to investigate the
media as a source of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Specifically, this research
sought to establish an empirical relationship between media representations and
stereotypic beliefs about youth. The third aim was to investigate the consequences of
stereotypic beliefs about youth for adults' evaluations of young people and for their
interactions with young people. A fourth and final aim of the program of research
was to explore the extent to which young people's perceptions of stereotypic beliefs
about them interact with established correlates of delinquency to influence the
propensity of young people to engage in problem behaviour. This was examined
within the context of Thornberrys (1987) interactional theory of delinquency.
The next four chapters of this thesis describe the studies that were carried out
to investigate the nature, sources, and consequences of stereotypic beliefs about
young people. Chapter 2 presents the studies that investigated the nature and content
of stereotypic beliefs about youth. The second chapter also presents the two measures
that were developed to assess adults stereotypic beliefs about youth and young
peoples perceptions of those beliefs. Chapter 3 presents the studies that investigated
media representations of young people as sources of stereotypic beliefs about youth.
The fourth chapter in this thesis presents the studies that investigated the
consequences of adults' stereotypic beliefs about youth for their evaluations of young
people and for self-fulfilling prophecies. Chapter 5 presents the final study that was
conducted for this program of research. It involved a more narrow focus on the
consequences of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Specifically, the culmination of the

33
research program was concerned with the effects of young peoples perceptions of
stereotypic beliefs about them on their engagement in problem behaviour.

34
CHAPTER 2
S TEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH
Page
INTRODUCTION 36
STUDY 1: Cultural stereotype of youth 37
Introduction 37
M ethod 38
Participants 38
Phase one: Content generation 39
Phase two: Knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth 40
Summary 42
STUDIES 2A & 2B: Personal beliefs about youth 43
Introduction 43
M ethod 44
Participants 44
Study 2A 46
Adults' personal beliefs about young people 46
Comparing the cultural stereotype and personal beliefs 50

35
Study 2B 51
Summary 55
STUDIES 3A & 3B: Young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about youth 56
Introduction 56
M ethod 57
Participants 57
Study 3A 58
Study 3B 63
Summary 66
STUDY 4: Investigating multiple stereotypes of youth 66
Introduction 66
M ethod 67
Participants 67
Summary 76
DISCUSSION 77
36
INTRODUCTION
Little attention has been afforded to investigating the range of community
beliefs about young people. M ost of the existing research has focused on beliefs of
adolescence as a time of storm and stress (Buchanan et al., 1990; Holmbeck & Hill,
1988; Offer et al., 1981). This chapter presents the studies that sought to specify the
breadth in the content of stereotypic beliefs about youth.
Stereotypic beliefs about youth refer to two separate, but related sets of beliefs
- knowledge of the cultural stereotype and endorsement of that stereotype. The first
study that was conducted for this thesis established adults knowledge of the cultural
stereotype of youth. Adults may have knowledge of the cultural stereotype without
endorsing that stereotype as their personal beliefs (Devine, 1989; Krueger, 1994).
Study 2A investigated adults personal beliefs about youth. In essence, an exploration
of the cultural stereotype asks participants to rate young people as society sees
them, while an investigation of personal beliefs requires participants to rate young
people as they personally see them. Study 2B sought to develop a measure to assess
adults' personal beliefs about youth.
Peoples sense of self, however, derives in part from their perceptions of how
they are viewed by others (Schwalbe & Staples, 1991). A related set of beliefs
therefore concerns young peoples reflected appraisals, or their perceptions of adults
beliefs about them. An examination of young peoples perceptions complement the
findings relating to adults actual beliefs, and help to establish whether young people
are aware of the nature and content of stereotypic beliefs about themselves. Thus,
37
Study 3A investigated young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about them.
Study 3B developed a measure to assess those perceptions.
Investigations of adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth, of
their personal beliefs, and of young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs require
people to think in terms of a typical teenager. As has already been discussed in
Chapter 1 of this thesis, stereotypes have been researched at both the global and
subcategory (multiple) levels. Researchers of multiple stereotypes claim that global
stereotypes, including age-based stereotypes, are often too broad to capture the
complexity of social groups. Empirically derived data indicate that social stereotypes
can be hierarchically organised, consisting of subcategories of group members
(Brewer et al., 1981; Devine & Baker, 1991; Hummert, 1990; Schmidt & Boland,
1986). An investigation of multiple stereotypes of youth was therefore important to
complete the inquiry into stereotypic beliefs about young people. This was carried
out in Study 4.
S TUDY 1
Cultural stereotype of youth
Introduction
Study 1 aimed to identify the cultural stereotype of young people. There were
two phases in this study. In the content generation phase, participants were asked to
produce a list of trait and behaviour descriptors that people use to characterise youth.
In phase two, an independent sample of participants rated those descriptors to indicate
their knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth. Essentially, this required that
participants respond to each item in the way they thought most adult members of the
38
community would respond if they were making judgements about the typical
teenager.
The notion of youth as problematic has been the prevailing representation of
youth (Willis, 1981). It was therefore expected that adults knowledge of the cultural
stereotype of youth would consist of negative traits and behaviours.
M ethod
Participants
Ninety-six adults took part in the content generation phase (Phase 1). There
were 46 young adults (ages 18-34, 23 males and 23 females) and 50 older adults (ages
35-75, 26 males and 24 females). The investigation of the cultural stereotype of
youth (Phase 2) involved 86 adults. Fifty-six of those were young adults (ages 18 to
34, 13 males and 43 females) and 30 were older adults (ages 35-75, 6 males and 24
females). In both phases, participants were recruited from undergraduate psychology
students at the University of New South Wales and from local community drop-in
and leisure centres.
M easures and Procedure
For content generation, participants were asked to write down all the words
and short phrases they could think of to describe the typical teenager of today. They
were told to include both favourable and unfavourable characteristics, which they
may or may not personally believe to be true. To assess knowledge of the cultural
stereotype of youth, a questionnaire was developed using the items derived from the
content generation phase. Participants rated each item twice. First, they were asked
to indicate the extent to which most adults in the community would judge each item
39
to be characteristic of a typical teenager. They were told that their ratings may or
may not correspond with their personal beliefs. They made their ratings on an 8-point
scale that ranged from 0 (Extremely uncharacteristic) to 7 (Extremely
characteristic). Second, participants rated the social desirability of each item on a
7-point scale that ranged from 0 (Very good) to 6 (Very bad). The order in which
the items were presented was different for the two questionnaires, and those orders
were reversed for half of the participants.
Results and Discussion
The findings are presented in two sections. The first details the content
generation phase. The second presents the results of the investigation of the nature
and content of adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth. All analyses
that were performed for this study (and for all of the studies presented in this chapter),
used SPSS for Windows (Norusis, 1993).
Phase one: Content generation
A total of 369 words and short phrases was provided by the participants in
Phase one. Those descriptors were examined for semantic similarities by three
independent judges. Wherever any two or more items were judged to be similar, a
single word or phrase was identified to characterise the set. When the judges did not
agree on similarity, or when they judged an item as having a distinct meaning, the
item was retained in its original wording. The final set was prepared only after
complete agreement had been reached. Items that were mentioned by at least three
participants were retained for Phase two. This reduced the total number of items to
be investigated in Phase two to 108. Those items included positive and negative
40
descriptors, and covered personality traits (e.g. selfish, competitive), behaviours (e.g.
uses alcohol, listens to loud music), and emotional states (e.g. happy, confused). The
108 descriptors, together with their mean social desirability ratings, are presented in
Appendix A.
Phase two: Knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth
Given that this research was concerned with the youth-related stereotype,
descriptors rated as extremely characteristic and extremely uncharacteristic were of
most interest. Descriptors thought to be neither characteristic nor uncharacteristic
have less relevance to an investigation of stereotypic beliefs. In addition, a defining
feature of a social stereotype is that the beliefs are held by a majority of people
(Haslam, 1997). For that reason, only those descriptors rated as extremely
characteristic or uncharacteristic by more than 50 percent of the sample were
examined.
When the 86 adults were asked to indicate their beliefs about the cultural
stereotype of youth, 61 of the 108 items were rated 5, 6, or 7 (extremely
characteristic) by more than 50 percent of the sample. Those 61 items are the basis
for the cultural stereotype of youth. No descriptor was given a rating of 0, 1, or 2 by
more than 50 percent of the sample. The 10 most widely endorsed descriptors,
together with the percentage of participants who endorsed them and their mean social
desirability ratings, are presented in Table 2.1. The complete list of 61 descriptors is
presented in Appendix A.
41
Table 2.1
The top ten descriptors of the cultural stereotype of youth
Percentage of Social desirability

Descriptor participants (N=86) M SD
Eats junk food 94.3 4.5 1.2
Listens to loud music 91.8 3.0 1.1
Wants freedom 91.3 2.0 1.2
Watches too much TV 89.6 4.5 1.0
Is boy-girl crazy 89.5 3.0 1.3
Uses alcohol 89.5 4.2 1.2
Is influenced by American culture 89.5 4.3 1.2
Is impulsive 89.5 4.9 1.1
Is computer literate 88.4 1.1 1.2
Stays out late 88.3 3.5 1.3
Note:
1. The percentage of participants refers to those who gave the descriptors ratings of 5, 6, or 7
(extremely characteristic) on the rating scale.
2. Social desirability ratings can range from 0 to 6. A higher rating indicates that the descriptor is
judged as more socially undesirable.
Table 2.1 shows that some of the most widely endorsed descriptors referred to
popular notions of adolescence, which Buchanan and Holmbeck (1998) have labelled
classic adolescent behaviours (e.g., listens to loud music, wants freedom). Other
descriptors most widely endorsed as belonging to the cultural stereotype of youth
included problematic behaviours and personality traits (e.g., uses alcohol, is
impulsive). Table 2.1 also lists the mean social desirability ratings for the top ten
42
descriptors of the cultural stereotype of youth. Participants rated the social
desirability of each descriptor on a scale that ranged from 0 (Very good) to 6 (Very
bad). Table 2.1 shows that five of the top ten descriptors have mean ratings of 4.2 or
higher. Those descriptors are clearly socially undesirable traits and behaviours. Only
two of the top ten descriptors are socially desirable (is computer literate and wants
freedom).
The 61 descriptors that comprised adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype
of youth were categorised according to their social desirability ratings. Descriptors
with a mean rating of less than 3.0 were classed as positive. Those with a mean
rating between 3.0 and 3.9 were classed as neutral, and descriptors with a mean rating
of 4.0 or more were classed as negative. Figure 2.1 shows the percentage of the 61
descriptors in the positive, neutral, and negative categories. Almost two thirds of
them (64%) were judged to be negative or undesirable, and many of those (e.g., is
violent, is lazy, is disrespectful, uses drugs) were judged to be very negative,
that is, with mean ratings of 5 or above. Items that were judged as positive (e.g., is
computer literate, is talkative) and as neutral (e.g., is fashion conscious, wants to
be popular) by the participants were fewer in number.
Summary
Adults beliefs about the components of the cultural stereotype of youth are,
for the most part, very negative. That is as was predicted. M ost items endorsed as
belonging to the cultural stereotype had been assigned very negative social
desirability ratings by the adult sample. Very few items that were afforded positive
43
social desirability ratings were found to comprise adults beliefs about the cultural
stereotype of youth.
100
% of Descriptors
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Negative Neutral Positive
Social Desirability
Figure 2.1
Percentage of descriptors endorsed as the cultural stereotype that were rated negative,
neutral, or positive in social desirability
S TUDIES 2A AND 2B
Personal beliefs about youth
Introduction
Study 2 had two parts. The first part (Study 2A) specified the nature and
content of adults personal beliefs about young people and compared those beliefs
with the knowledge of the cultural stereotype identified in Study 1. Study 2A
adopted the same approach as that used to specify the cultural stereotype. The
questionnaire that was used in Study 1 was also employed in the present study. This
time, however, participants were asked to provide their personal beliefs about youth.
44
Based on those responses, Study 2B aimed to develop a psychometrically sound
measure for assessing adults personal beliefs about youth. Although Buchanan and
Holmbecks (1998) measure was developed only recently, it has two limitations.
First, during the measure refinement, Buchanan and Holmbeck (1998) included all
items in their factor analysis, regardless of how strongly they were endorsed by the
sample. What makes stereotypes social, however, is that they are widely shared
(Haslam, 1997). For that reason, it was thought to be important to develop a measure
containing only items that are widely held to be characteristic of young people.
Second, Buchanan and Holmbecks (1998) measure derives from the responses of
college students and parents of adolescents. The overriding question in this research
concerned the nature and content of general community beliefs about young people.
Thus, the measure developed in this research derives from a sample adults who were
drawn from the broader community.
In Studies 2A and 2B, and consistent with the findings of Buchanan and
Holmbeck (1998), it was expected that participants would endorse both positive and
negative descriptors as their personal beliefs about youth. It was expected, however,
that participants would endorse more negative than positive descriptors as their
personal beliefs.
M ethod
Participants
Study 2A involved 382 adults: 176 were young adults (ages 18-34, 73 males
and 103 females) and 206 participants were older adults (ages 35-82, 100 males and
106 females). To allow a direct comparison of participants

45
beliefs about the cultural stereotype of youth and their own personal beliefs, the 86
participants in Study 1 also participated Study 2A. Participants were recruited from
undergraduate psychology students at the University of New South Wales, their
parents, and from local community centres.
In Study 2B, the responses of the participants of Study 2A were used to
develop a measure to assess adults personal beliefs about youth. An independent
sample of 30 undergraduate psychology students (ages 18-42, 15 males and 15
females) was used to estimate the test-retest reliability of the final measure. A
subgroup of 74 (ages 18-62, 18 males and 56 females) participants from Study 2A
was used to assess the convergent validity of the measure.
In Study 2A, participants completed the 108-item questionnaire that was used
in Study 1. They provided their personal beliefs about the average or typical
teenager, by rating each item on an 8-point scale where 0 was Extremely
characteristic and 7 was Extremely uncharacteristic. The order in which the items
appeared on the questionnaire was reversed for half of the participants. In Study 2B,
the descriptors that were endorsed as participants personal beliefs about youth were
entered into a factor analysis, the purpose of which was to produce a measure to
assess adults personal beliefs about youth. After the development of the measure,
test-retest reliability and convergent validity were assessed. To assess convergent
validity, the association between the measure and Holmbeck and Hills (1988) storm
and stress scale was examined.

46
Study 2A
The data that derive from this study are presented in two sections. The first
details the findings that relate to the nature and content of adults personal beliefs
about youth. The second presents the results of the comparison between adults
personal beliefs about youth and adults beliefs about the cultural stereotype that were
identified in Study 1.
Adults personal beliefs about young people
Using the same selection criterion as in Study 1, only items for which more
than 50 percent of the sample provided a rating of 5, 6, or 7 (Extremely
characteristic), or 0, 1, or 2 (Extremely uncharacteristic) were retained for further
examination. When participants were asked to indicate their personal beliefs about
youth, 35 of the 108 items were rated 5, 6, or 7 by more than 50 percent of the young
adult sample. Forty-nine items were rated 5, 6, or 7 by more than 50 percent of the
older adult sample. The 10 descriptors most widely endorsed by young adults and
those endorsed by older adults are presented in Table 2.2, together with the
percentage of participants who endorsed them and their mean social desirability
ratings. The complete list of descriptors that were rated as extremely characteristic of
youth by both adult samples is presented in Appendix A.

47
Table 2.2
The top ten descriptors endorsed as young and older adults personal beliefs about
youth
Percentage of adults Social desirability

Young Older
Descriptor (N=176) (N=206) M SD
Wants freedom 91.0 93.0 2.0 1.2
Wants to be popular 90.0 93.0 3.2 1.1
Listens to loud music 78.0 93.0 3.0 1.1
Is influenced by American culture 78.0 85.0 4.3 1.2
Watches too much TV 76.0 89.0 4.5 1.0
Is computer literate 76.0 80.0 1.1 1.2
Is boy-girl crazy 74.0 87.0 3.0 1.3
Is fashion conscious 83.0 --- 3.4 1.3
Swears 78.0 --- 4.7 1.1
Uses alcohol 76.0 --- 4.2 1.2
Stays out late --- 84.0 3.5 1.3
Is materialistic --- 82.0 4.4 1.5
Is under pressure --- 80.0 4.3 1.3
Note:
48
The descriptors in Table 2.2 include popular notions of adolescence (e.g.,
watches too much TV) as well as problematic behaviours (e.g., uses alcohol).
Thus, the descriptors that were most widely endorsed as adults personal beliefs about
youth are very similar to those most widely endorsed as belonging to the cultural
stereotype (see Table 2.1). Table 2.2 also shows that seven of the top ten descriptors
endorsed as young adults personal beliefs were also endorsed as older adults
personal beliefs. The social desirability ratings of the top ten descriptors reveal that
both young and older adults endorsed four negative descriptors, although only two of
those (is influenced by American culture and watches too much TV) were
common to both samples. Just two of the top ten descriptors endorsed by both
samples (wants freedom and is computer literate) were clearly socially desirable
traits or attributes.
The 35 descriptors that comprise young adults personal beliefs and the 49
that comprise older adults personal beliefs were categorised according to the social
desirability ratings that were provided by the participants in Study 1. Figure 2.2
shows the percentage of descriptors that were categorised as positive, neutral, or
negative according to the social desirability ratings. Both young and older adults
endorsed more negative than positive descriptors, although the older adults endorsed
almost twice as many positive descriptors as did the young adults. Some examples of
the negative traits and behaviours that were endorsed by both groups include is
rebellious, swears, and hates authority. All of those had mean social desirability
ratings of around 4.5 (on the scale that ranged from 0 to 6). Some examples of
49
positive items that were endorsed by the older, but not the young adults, include is
ambitious, is enthusiastic, and works hard to achieve goals.
Interestingly, both adult samples endorsed several very negative descriptors as
extremely uncharacteristic of young people (that is, ratings of 0, 1, or 2 on the 8-point
scale). Specifically, the descriptors steals, graffitis, becomes pregnant, and is a
drug addict were rated as extremely uncharacteristic of young people by more than
50 percent of both adult samples. Belongs to gangs was judged by the young adults,
and is dishonest by the older adults, as extremely uncharacteristic of youth. All of
those items were afforded mean social desirability ratings of 5 or above (on the scale
that ranged from 0 to 6).
young adults
100
% of Descriptors
90 older adults
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Social Desirability
Figure 2.2
Percentage of descriptors endorsed as young and older adults personal beliefs that
were rated negative, neutral, or positive in social desirability

50
Comparing the cultural stereotype and personal beliefs
To examine the correspondence in the cultural stereotype and personal beliefs,
the responses of the 86 participants who took part in both studies were recoded so that
ratings of 0, 1, or 2 were taken to indicate extremely uncharacteristic of youth,
ratings of 3 or 4 represented neither characteristic nor uncharacteristic, and
responses of 5, 6, or 7 were taken as extremely characteristic of youth. Personal
belief and cultural stereotype ratings were then cross-tabulated for each item.
Twenty-nine of the 108 items were rated as extremely characteristic of young
people according to participants personal beliefs and their beliefs about the cultural
stereotype. M ost of those items were popular notions of adolescence (e.g. wants to
be popular, is moody), although some were problem behaviours and traits (e.g.
uses alcohol, is sexually active). Twenty-eight of those 29 descriptors were either
neutral or slightly negative in social desirability. No descriptor was rated as
extremely uncharacteristic (rated 0, 1, or 2) according to both sets of beliefs. These
findings highlight the substantial overlap between the content of participants
personal beliefs and their beliefs about the cultural stereotype, at least for those traits
and behaviours that are neutral or slightly negative in social desirability.
In contrast, traits and behaviours that were rated as extremely socially
undesirable were endorsed as the cultural stereotype but not as personal beliefs. Ten
items were rated as extremely characteristic of youth according to participants
beliefs about the cultural stereotype, but were not endorsed by those participants as
personal beliefs. All 10 descriptors had been assigned extremely negative social
desirability ratings (e.g. is destructive, is irresponsible, is rude). In other words,

51
participants beliefs about the cultural stereotype of youth were more negative than
their personal beliefs.
Study 2A specified adults personal beliefs about youth and compared those
beliefs with what the same adults identified as belonging to the cultural stereotype.
This research sought to go beyond description and comparison. It aimed to develop a
psychometrically sound measure that would facilitate future investigations of the
predictors and consequences of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Study 2B details the
steps that were taken to produce a measure to assess adults personal beliefs about
young people, and then presents that measure.
Study 2B
The first step in developing a measure to assess adults personal beliefs about
young people was the selection of the items to be entered into the factor analysis. The
responses of the young and older adult samples in Study 2A were combined. The 39
items that were afforded ratings of 5, 6, or 7 (extremely characteristic) by more than
50 percent of the total sample of young and older participants were entered into the
factor analysis.
The factor analytic procedure followed the methodological guidelines of
Fabrigar, Wegener, M acCallum, and Strahan (1999), which focus on the type of
factor analysis to be conducted, the model-fitting procedure to be used, and the
rotation method to be employed. When there are no a priori hypotheses about the
number of factors expected to emerge, an exploratory factor analysis is appropriate.
Because there were no such expectations in the present study, an exploratory factor
52
analysis was chosen over a confirmatory factor analysis. In terms of the choice of the
model fitting procedure, maximum likelihood is the preferred method. Because this
method assumes multivariate normality, the variables in the present data set were
tested for normal distribution. All variables were found to be within the normal range
(skewness < 2, kurtosis < 7), and so maximum likelihood was chosen as the model
fitting procedure. Finally, Fabrigar et al. (1999) claim that oblique rotation should be
used over orthogonal rotation, especially when the factors are expected to be
correlated; oblique rotation was used.
The first maximum likelihood factor analysis failed to converge using oblique
rotation. An analysis using orthogonal rotation resulted in 11 factors that accounted
for 44.4 percent of the variance. The first five were easily interpretable, although the
remaining six consisted of small numbers of items (three or fewer) that were not
readily interpretable. In addition, the scree plot suggested that the optimal number of
factors was five. It was therefore decided that items that did not load above .40 on
any of the first five factors should be deleted (Stevens, 1986). Eighteen items were
eliminated in that process.
A second maximum likelihood factor analysis was conducted using the
remaining 21 items. This time the solution converged using oblique rotation. Five
factors were produced, which accounted for 41.1 percent of the variance. All items
except one (has poor communication with parents) loaded above .40 on one of the 5
factors and below .40 on all others. The item has poor communication with parents
was therefore dropped, bringing the final solution to 20 items. Table 2.3 presents the
items and their factor loadings. To facilitate interpretation, each factor has a label
53
that captures the main content of its items. Four of the five factors are similar to
those in Buchanan and Holmbecks (1998) Beliefs about Adolescent Personality and
Behaviour Scale. First, in their measure, the Conventionalism subscale (identified
in the present study) was labelled Upstanding/Prosocial. In the social psychological
literature the term prosocial refers to helping behaviour (Deaux & Wrightsman,
1988). Although the descriptor helpful appears on Buchanan and Holmbecks
factor, it was not present in this research. For that reason, the label
Conventionalism was thought to be more appropriate. Two additional factors were
produced in the present study that were similar to those produced in the Buchanan
and Holmbeck study, although were afforded different factor labels in the present
study. Specifically, Buchanan and Holmbeck referred to the factor that was labelled
(Seeking) Independence in the present study as Risk-taking/Rebellious. Similarly,
the Popular Notions factor was called Classic Adolescent Behaviours by
Buchanan and Holmbeck. The Problem Behaviours factor, produced in the present
study, was very similar to Buchanan and Holmbecks Problem Behaviours factor.
For that reason, the same factor label was used. The (Lack of) Discipline factor
produced in the present study was not present in Buchanan and Holmbecks scale.
The items that loaded on each factor were taken to suggest five subscales.
Together, those five subscales were labelled the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale.
Table 2.3 presents the Cronbach alpha coefficients of the resulting subscales. All
subscales have acceptable to high internal consistency reliability. For factors with
few items, values as low as .56 are acceptable (Kurdek & Fine, 1994), although the
lowest alpha coefficient in this study is .65.

54
Table 2.3
Factors and item loadings representing personal beliefs about youth
Factor 1: (Lack of) Discipline Factor 2: Conventionalism Factor 3: Problem Behaviours

( = .65) ( = .71) ( = .75)
Is unsupervised .53 Is educated .76 Stays out late .73

Is undisciplined .50 Is smart .63 Uses alcohol .73
Is noisy .45 Is competitive .53 Is sexually active .63

Is assertive .51
Is sporty .40
Factor 4: (Seeking)
Independence Factor 5: Popular Notions
( = .65) ( = .65)
Is testing limits .58 Eats a lot of junk food .66
Wants freedom .58 Watches too much TV .62

Is rebellious .48 Wants to be popular .41
Is risk-taking .45 Listens to loud music .40

Friends more important .40
than family
Correlations among the five factors ranged from -.19 to .41. Test-retest
reliability of the overall measure and its subscales was estimated over a 4-week
period with 30 undergraduate psychology students. The Pearson correlation
coefficient was .66 for the overall measure and ranged from a low of .61 for the
Problem Behaviours subscale to a high of .75 for the (Seeking) Independence
subscale. All correlations were significant (p< .01), indicating that the measure has
good temporal stability.

55
To establish the convergent validity of the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale, its
relationship with Holmbeck and Hills (1988) 9-item scale was examined. That scale
assesses peoples endorsement of the view that adolescence is a time of storm and
stress. A subgroup of adult participants (N=74) who completed the 108-item
questionnaire that was used to develop the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale, also
completed the storm and stress scale (Cronbach alpha = .70 in the present sample).
The storm and stress scale was found to correlate with the (Lack of) Discipline
(r=.29), (Seeking) Independence (r=.25), and Problem Behaviours subscales (r=.25).
All of those correlations were significant at the .05 level. The storm and stress scale
was negatively correlated with the Conventionalism subscale, although that
relationship was not significant. Finally, the storm and stress scale also was
uncorrelated with the Popular Notions subscale.
Summary
Study 2A gathered information about the nature and content of adults
personal beliefs about young people. As predicted, the young and older adults
endorsed both positive and negative descriptors as their personal beliefs. The young
adults endorsed more negative than positive traits and behaviours as extremely
characteristic of young people. Contrary to expectation, however, the older adults
rated more positive descriptors as characteristic of youth than did the young adults.
Thus, the older adults personal beliefs appear to be somewhat more favourable.
Neither of the adult samples endorsed extremely negative descriptors (e.g. 'uses
drugs', 'is violent') as characteristic of young people. Indeed, the adult participants
56
endorsed several very negative descriptors (e.g. 'steals', 'graffitis') as extremely
uncharacteristic of young people.
Study 2B developed the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale. It assesses the
extent to which members of the community believe the 20 traits and behaviours to be
characteristic of young people. The measure is multidimensional and includes both
positive and negative characteristics. It has satisfactory internal consistency
reliability, test-retest reliability, and good convergent validity.
S TUDIES 3A AND 3B
Young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about youth
Introduction
Study 3 consisted of two parts. The first part (Study 3A) investigated young
peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about them and compared those perceptions
with young peoples beliefs about themselves. Study 3A adopted the same approach
as that used to specify the cultural stereotype of youth and adults personal beliefs
about youth. A sample of adolescent participants completed the same questionnaire
as that completed by the adult participants in Studies 1 and 2A. Study 3B aimed to
develop a measure to assess young peoples perceptions of community beliefs about
them. Because peoples perceptions about how others view them can have severe
consequences (Horowitz, 1962; Schwalbe & Staples, 1991), young peoples
perceptions of adults beliefs were the focus of the measure.
In Studies 3A and 3B, and consistent with the findings of Study 1, it was
expected that young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs would consist of largely
negative traits and behaviours. Consistent with the findings of Study 2A, it was
57
expected that participants would endorse both positive and negative descriptors as
their personal beliefs about youth.
M ethod
Participants
Study 3A involved 102 young people (ages 12-17, 51 males and 51 females).
Participants were the relatives or family friends of first year psychology students.
The students administered the questionnaire to the young people in return for course
credit. In Study 3B, the responses of the participants in Study 3A were used to
develop the measure to assess young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about
them. An independent sample of 51 young people (ages 14-15, 24 males and 27
females) was used to estimate the test-retest reliability of the final measure. They
were recruited from a private fee-paying high school in Sydney.
Study 3A used the 108-item questionnaire that was used in Studies 1 and 2A.
The young people completed the measure twice. First, they responded to each item in
the way they thought an adult in our community would respond if they were making
judgements about the typical teenager of today. Second, they provided their
personal beliefs about the typical teenager of today. Each item was rated on the
same 8-point scale as in Studies 1 and 2A, which ranged from 0 (Extremely
uncharacteristic) to 7 (Extremely characteristic). The order in which the items were
presented was different for the two questionnaires, and those orders were reversed for
half of the participants. The responses that participants provided to indicate their
perceptions of adults beliefs about youth were entered into a factor analysis in Study
58
3B to develop the measure to assess young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs
about them.
Study 3A
As in Studies 1 and 2A, only items for which more than 50 percent of the
sample provided a rating of 5, 6, or 7 (extremely characteristic), or 0, 1, or 2
(extremely uncharacteristic) were retained. When young people were asked about
their perceptions of adults beliefs, 44 descriptors were rated 5, 6, or 7 by more than
50 percent of the sample. They gave similar ratings to 29 descriptors to indicate their
personal beliefs about young people. Table 2.4 shows the 10 traits and behaviours
most widely endorsed as young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about youth, as
well as young peoples beliefs about themselves, together with the percentage of
young people who endorsed the descriptors and their mean social desirability ratings.
The complete lists of descriptors endorsed as young people's perceptions of adults'
beliefs about them, and as young people's beliefs about themselves, are presented in
Appendix A.
59
Table 2.4
The top ten descriptors endorsed as young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs and
as young peoples personal beliefs about youth
Belief set Social desirability

Perceptions of Personal
Descriptor adults beliefs beliefs M SD
Watches too much TV 85.0 67.0 4.5 1.0
Wants freedom 85.3 87.0 2.0 1.2
Swears 81.3 78.0 4.7 1.1
Listens to loud music 80.5 69.0 3.0 1.1
Eats junk food 73.6 67.0 4.5 1.2
Hates authority 78.4 --- 4.6 1.1
Is moody 75.5 --- 4.5 0.9
Is noisy 74.6 --- 3.9 1.1
Stays out late 74.5 --- 3.5 1.3
Is impulsive 73.6 --- 4.9 1.1
Wants to be popular --- 79.0 3.2 1.1
Is fashion conscious --- 77.0 3.4 1.3
Hangs out in large groups --- 66.0 3.1 1.3
Is under pressure --- 65.0 4.3 1.3
Is boy-girl crazy --- 63.0 3.0 1.3
Note:
60
Table 2.4 shows that descriptors most widely endorsed as young peoples
perceptions of adults beliefs included many of the popular notions of adolescence
(e.g. is boy-girl crazy) that were also among those most widely endorsed as
belonging to the cultural stereotype (Study 1) and as adults personal beliefs (Study
2A). Several problem behaviours (e.g. uses alcohol) that were widely endorsed as
young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs were also widely endorsed by the adult
participants in Studies 1 and 2A. Table 2.4 also shows that five of the top ten
descriptors endorsed as young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs were endorsed
also as young peoples personal beliefs. Three of those were socially undesirable
behaviours (watches too much TV, swears, and eats junk food).
The descriptors that constituted young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs
and those as young peoples personal beliefs were categorised according to the social
desirability ratings that were provided by the participants of Study 1. The percentage
of descriptors that were categorised as positive, neutral, or negative according to the
social desirability ratings are presented in Figure 2.3. Young peoples perceptions of
adults beliefs were largely negative, and many of those were judged to be very
negative (e.g., is dishonest, is irresponsible, is disrespectful, doesnt care about
school), that is, with mean ratings of 5 or above (on the scale that ranged from 0 to
6). Far fewer positive traits and behaviours were shown to comprise young peoples
perceptions of adults beliefs (e.g., is sporty, is talkative). In contrast, young
peoples beliefs about themselves were distributed more equally across positive and
negative descriptors. It is important to note that the negative items endorsed as young
peoples personal beliefs (e.g., is moody, is materialistic) were rated lower in

61
negative social desirability (that is, mean ratings between 4.1 and 4.7) than those
endorsed as young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs. Some examples of positive
items that were endorsed as young peoples personal beliefs, but not as young
peoples perceptions of adults beliefs, include is educated and is keen to travel.
Young people's perceptions

100
% of Descriptors
90 Young people's beliefs

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Social Desirability
Figure 2.3
Percentage of descriptors endorsed as young people's perceptions of adults beliefs
and as their personal beliefs that were rated negative, neutral, or positive in social
desirability
When young people provided their perceptions of adults beliefs, no
descriptors were endorsed as extremely uncharacteristic (0, 1, or 2). Seven items
were, however, rated as extremely uncharacteristic of youth according to young
peoples beliefs about themselves. Five of those, steals, graffitis, becomes
pregnant, is a drug addict, and belongs to gangs, were among those rated as
62
extremely uncharacteristic of young people according to the personal beliefs of the
adult samples. The young people also rated is uneducated and is a dole bludger to
be extremely uncharacteristic of youth. All of those items were rated as extremely
socially undesirable.
Overall, young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs were more negative
than young peoples personal beliefs about themselves. A comparison of the results
of the present study with the findings of Studies 1 and 2A revealed that young
peoples perceptions of adults beliefs were very similar in content to the cultural
stereotype that was identified in Study 1. In other words, the extremely negative
content that comprises the youth-related stereotype was actually known to young
people themselves, although young people did not endorse the very negative
components as their personal beliefs.
Study 3A was concerned with specifying young peoples perceptions of
adults beliefs about them. Those perceptions were then compared with the actual
beliefs that were expressed by the adult participants (Studies 1 and 2A), and with
young peoples beliefs about themselves. Study 3B aimed to develop a measure to
assess young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about them. Such a measure is
essential in any investigation of the influence of young peoples perceptions of adults
beliefs about them on their behaviour.

63
Study 3B
In order to develop the measure to assess young peoples perceptions of
adults beliefs, the steps that were involved in the development of the Beliefs about
Adolescence Scale in Study 2B were also adopted in the present study. The first step
was therefore to select the items for entry into the factor analysis. Using as the
criterion, items for which more than 50 percent of the sample gave a rating of 5, 6, or
7 (Extremely characteristic) on the rating scale, 44 items were retained. The
remaining decisions related to the type of factor analysis to be conducted. As in the
development of the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale (Study 2B), the methodological
guidelines of Fabrigar et al. (1999) were followed. At first, the analysis using oblique
rotations failed to converge, although an analysis using orthogonal rotation did
converge, resulting in 9 factors that accounted for 62.3 percent of the variance. The
scree plot suggested that only the first three factors should be retained. In addition,
factors 4-9 were not readily interpretable, consisting of small numbers of mixed
loading items. It was therefore decided to drop all items that did not load above .40
on any of the first three factors and below .40 on the remaining factors (Stevens,
1986). That resulted in the elimination of 16 items. The second factor analysis
converged using oblique rotation, and three factors were produced that accounted for
56.7 percent of the variance. Two items is foolish and is impulsive had factor
loadings less than .40. This reduced the number of items to 26. Table 2.5 presents the
items and their factor loadings. To facilitate interpretation, each factor has a label
that captures the main content of its items. The first factor was interpreted as
64
Egocentrism, as the items that loaded on that factor clearly represent self-centred
traits and behaviours. The second factor was conceptually similar to the Problem
Behaviours factor in the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale that was developed in
Study 2B and was therefore afforded the same label. Although some of the items
(e.g. hangs around in large groups, listens to loud music) clearly do not represent
problem behaviours, it is widely acknowledged that the notion of, for example, young
people hanging around in groups is evidently considered to be problematic by many
adult members of the community (White, 1997). The third factor was similar to the
Popular Notions factor that was identified in the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale
and was therefore afforded that label.
Given that the factors clearly represented meaningful clusters of traits and
behaviours, the items that loaded on each factor were employed to form three
subscales. Those subscales comprise the Adolescents Perceptions of Adults Beliefs
Scale. Table 2.5 presents the Cronbach alpha coefficients of the resulting subscales.
All factors have very high Cronbach alpha coefficients, indicating that the subscales
have good internal consistency reliability.

65
Table 2.5
Factors and item loadings representing young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs
about youth
Factor 1: Egocentrism Factor 2: Problem Behaviours Factor 3: Popular notions

(=.95) (=.88) (=.84)
Selfish .87 Uses alcohol .95 Watches too much TV .83

Trouble-maker .85 Goes to dance parties .81 Eats a lot of junk food .75
Rude .81 Smokes .73 Easily led .60
Dishonest .78 Stays out late .70 Has too easy a life .60
Risk-taking .80 Hangs out in large groups .46 Materialistic .52
Wild .73 Listens to loud music .45 Fashion victim .43
Noisy .71 Wants to be popular .40
Disrespectful .66
Spoilt .65
Irresponsible .64
Rebellious .60
Hates authority .46

Swears .40
Correlations among the three subscales ranged from -.48 to .67. Tes t-retest
reliability of the overall measure and its subscales was estimated over a 4-week
period with 51 young people aged between 14 and 15 years. The Pearson correlation
coefficient was .88 for the overall measure, and ranged from .83 to .87 for the
subscales. All correlations were significant (p< .001), indicating that the measure has
good temporal stability.

66
Summary
Study 3A investigated the nature and content of young peoples perceptions of
adults beliefs about them and compared those with young peoples beliefs about
themselves, and with the actual beliefs that were expressed by the adult participants in
Studies 1 and 2A. As predicted, young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about
them were found to be extremely negative, and to be comparable with that identified
as adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth in Study 1. In contrast, and
consistent with expectations, young peoples beliefs about themselves were found to
be more positive. Study 3B developed the Adolescents Perceptions of Adults
Beliefs Scale. Two of its three subscales, Egocentrism and Problem Behaviours
are made up of extremely negative traits and behaviours. The measure was shown to
have very good internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability.
S TUDY 4
Investigating multiple stereotypes of youth
Introduction
Study 4 investigated the extent to which people hold multiple stereotypes of
youth. Several studies have confirmed the existence of multiple stereotypes of the
elderly. For instance, Schmidt and Boland (1986) and Hummert (1990) found that
young adults identified five negative (Severely Impaired, Shrew/Curmudgeon,
Recluse, Despondent, Vulnerable) and three positive (John Wayne
Conservative, Liberal M atriarch/Patriarch, Perfect Grandparent) elderly subtypes.
Hummert et al. (1994) extended those findings by showing that adults of different
67
ages (young, middle-aged, and elderly) had many of the same stereotypes of the
elderly, although the middle-aged and elderly adults had more complex stereotype
sets than did the young adults. This has been explained in terms of an
ingroup/outgroup phenomenon (Heckhausen, Dixon, & Baltes, 1989) whereby
individuals have more complex schemas for their own age group (or age groups close
to their own) than they do for members of an outgroup.
The methodology of the present study was similar to that used by Hummert et
al. (1994). Participants engaged in a sorting task that involved descriptors of youth.
They were asked to sort into different piles a total of 108 descriptors, where each pile
represented a different youth subcategory. The investigation was conducted with
young and older adult participants, as well as young people themselves.
It was expected that all age groups would have multiple representations of
youth. Consistent with the ingroup/outgroup phenomenon (Heckhausen et al., 1989),
it was further expected that the young adults and young people would have more
complex stereotype sets than the older adults.
M ethod
Participants
One hundred and sixty people took part in this study. There were 40 young
adults (ages 18-34, 19 males and 21 females), 80 older adults (ages 35-72, 40 males
and 40 females), and 40 young people (ages 12-17, 20 males and 20 females). The
young people were recruited from Police and Community Youth Clubs. The young
adults were first year psychology students, who participated in return for course
68
credit. The older adults were recruited from various community organisations and
clubs.
The 108 descriptors generated in Phase 1 of Study 1 were placed on separate
index cards. Each participant was given a set of the 108 cards, and an extra card
labelled miscellaneous. They were instructed to sort the descriptors into groups.
They were asked to do this by placing all descriptors of the same type of young
person into one group or pile. If they thought that a descriptor belonged to more than
one group, they were instructed to place it so that it touched both (or all) of those
groups. If they believed that a descriptor did not belong to any of the groups, they
were to place it with the card marked miscellaneous. Participants were allowed to
form as many groups as they wished. They were also permitted to rearrange the
groupings as they completed the task. No time limit was placed on completion of the
task, although most participants took between 30 and 45 minutes to form their groups.
Upon completion, participants were encouraged to think of a label that best described
each group of young people they had created.
The number of groups into which participants sorted the descriptors was
analysed in a one-way ANOVA with participant age (young people, young adults,
older adults) as the between-subjects factor. The analysis revealed that the number of
groups varied significantly with participant age [F (2, 157) = 10.11, p<.0001].
Scheffe post hoc contrasts showed that the young people (M =7.3) and young adults
(M =7.9) formed significantly more groups than the older adults (M =4.8).
69
There are three methodological stages involved in the identification of
multiple stereotypes (Hummert et al., 1994). First, the data from the sorting task are
placed into similarity matrices, one for each age group. A similarity matrix counts
the number of times the same two descriptors were sorted into the same group.
During the sorting task, if a participant felt that a particular descriptor did not belong
to any of the youth subcategories, they were instructed to place it in a pile labelled
miscellaneous. In developing the similarity matrices, each descriptor that was
sorted into the miscellaneous pile was scored as if it was grouped separately from all
other descriptors, including others in the miscellaneous pile. The second stage
involves transforming the similarity matrices into squared Euclidean distances
between each pair of descriptors. In the third stage, the resulting matrices are
analysed separately for each age group by hierarchical cluster analysis, using the
average linkage between groups criterion. This criterion combines descriptors into
clusters whereby the average distance between all pairs of descriptors in a cluster is
smaller than the average distance from each descriptor in the cluster to descriptors in
other clusters (Hummert et al., 1994).
The three 108 x 108 similarity matrices that were produced from the data
deriving from this study were subjected to 3 separate hierarchical cluster analyses.
The clusters that were produced by each age group are presented in Figures 2.4 to 2.6.
Those figures represent tree diagrams of each hierarchical cluster solution.
Descriptors joined at the lowest level are most similar. Only mid-level clusters are
considered as providing enough information to describe a subcategory or stereotype
(Hummert et al., 1994).

70
As shown in Figures 2.4 to 2.6, the older adult group formed 6 mid-level
clusters, the young adults formed 8, and the young people formed 7. Six of those
(and all of those formed by the older adult group) were similar across the age groups.
To provide labels for the clusters, the labels that participants had provided for their
subgroups were examined. Using those labels, the first cluster was interpreted as the
yuppies subtype; other labels that participants provided for that stereotype included
snobby and private school kids. The yuppies stereotype had a common core of
six descriptors, although the young and older adult groups had 8 common descriptors.
That is, six of the descriptors that were shown to comprise the stereotype were the
same across all three age groups. These were is skinny, is spoilt, is snobby, is a
fashion victim, is fashion conscious, and wants to be popular. The descriptors, is
boy-girl crazy and is under pressure were present in both the young and older
adults yuppies subtype, but not in that of the young people.
The second stereotype conceptualised by all three age groups was labelled the
lives for today and forget about the consequences young person. It was for this
stereotype, however, that there was least agreement among the three groups regarding
the actual characteristics comprising it. Other labels offered for that stereotype were
experimenters, risk-takers and fun loving. The third stereotype that was created
by all age groups was the depressed youth. It had a common core of 4 descriptors
(is depressed, is unhappy, has low self-esteem, lacks confidence), although the
young people and older adult groups shared an additional two descriptors (is
confused and is moody). Some adult participants also called those young people
introverts.
71
The fourth stereotype that was formed by all three age groups was the
problem kids stereotype (also called potential criminals, deviant, and trouble-
bound). It had a common core of 18 descriptors. There was greatest agreement
among the groups regarding the descriptors comprising this stereotype. The problem
kids stereotype also contained the greatest number of descriptors.
The fifth stereotype was the active youth, referring to physical (e.g. sporty)
and social (e.g. talkative) activity. The final stereotype that was formed by all three
age groups was labelled the conventional youth (also called achievers and well-
adjusted). It had a common core of 8 descriptors, although it was most similar
between the older adults and young people who shared 14 descriptors.
One stereotype, referred to as skaties, was common to only the young adults
and young people. M any of the descriptors that participants identified as
characteristic of skaties were among those mentioned by young people in a study by
Denholm, Horniblow, and Smalley (1992), for example, skates, listens to loud
music, watches too much TV, and uses marijuana. Finally, the stereotype drug
user was unique to the young adult group and appears to be a subcategory of the
broader problem kids and lives for today forget the consequences stereotypes held
by the other age groups.

72
Figure 2.4
Tree diagram of trait clusters produced by the older adult participants (Stereotypic
traits are between dashed lines and stereotype labels are at the left)
is skinny
is snobby
is spoilt
is under pressure
wants to be popular
explores new things
YUPPIES is boy-girl crazy
wants freedom
stays out late
becomes pregnant
listens to loud music
is sexually active
is fashion conscious
is a fashion victim
is dreamy
is adventure-seeking
is outspoken
eats junks food
watches too much TV
influenced by American culture
skates
LIVES FOR TODAY has too easy a life
FORGET THE smokes
CONSEQUENCES is selfish
uses alcohol
uses marijuana
is bored
is outrageous
shows off
is carefree
is layed back
has a bad attitude
has problems at home
poor parental communication
has behaviour problems
has low self-esteem
DEPRESSED is moody
lacks confidence
is confused
has a defeatist attitude
is depressed
is unhappy
lacks ambition
is lazy
friends more important than family
is scruffy
is unsupervised
is annoying
hangs around in large groups
is foolish
PROBLEM KIDS is easily led
surfs
swears
is noisy
is arrogant
is risk-taking
goes to raves
is nerdy
tests limits
is uneducated
is wild
is irresponsible
doesn't care about school
is rebellious
is undisciplined
is disrespectful
is rude
graffitis
hates authority
is a trouble-maker
belongs to gangs
is a dole bludger
is impulsive
bullies
uses drugs
is aggressive
steals
is a drug addict
is dishonest
is destructive
is violent
is an individual
is talkative
is materialistic
ACTIVE is attractive
is funny
is healthy
is keen to travel
is sporty
is environmentally minded
is computer literate
is caring
is independent
has casual jobs
is competitive
CONVENTIONAL is assertive
is well mannered
is happy
is helpful
is smart
is enthusiastic
is open minded
is confident
does the right thing
is ambitious
works hard to achieve goals
is educated
is studious
73
Figure 2.5
Tree diagram of trait clusters produced by the young adult participants (Stereotypic
traits are between dashed lines and stereotype labels are at the left)
is attractive
is boy-girl crazy
has too easy a life
is under pressure
is skinny
YUPPIES is arrogant
wants to be popular
is selfish
shows off
is a fashion victim
is materialistic
is spoilt
is snobby
wants freedom
stays out late
is risk-taking
is outspoken
is sexually active
LIVES FOR TODAY is outrageous
FORGET THE goes to raves
CONSEQUENCES tests limits
is dreamy
is funny
is an individual
is talkative
is carefree
explores new things
is easily led
DEPRESSED is unhappy
is depressed
lacks confidence
has low self-esteem
is ambitious
is competitive
is helpful
ACTIVE is confident
is open minded
is assertive
is healthy
is enthusiastic
is keen to travel
has casual jobs
is happy
is sporty
is independent

is well mannered
CONVENTIONAL is caring
isnerdy
is smart
is educated
is studious

smokes
uses alcohol
DRUG USERS uses drugs
is rebellious
is noisy
is wild
is layed back
surfs
uses marijuana
skates
SKATIES is lazy
is annoying
is moody
eats junk food
is bored
becomes pregnant
watches too much TV
is foolish
is confused
is dishonest
is a drug addict
is a dole bludger
is scruffy
is irresponsible
PROBLEM KIDS is uneducated
lacks ambition
poor parental communication
hates authority
steals
bullies
has a bad attitude
is rude
is unsupervised
is impulsive
is aggressive
is destructive
is disrespectful
is undisciplined
graffitis
is violent
belongs to gangs
is a trouble maker
swears
74
Figure 2.6
Tree diagram of trait clusters produced by the young people (Stereotypic traits are
between dashed lines and stereotype labels are at the left)

is skinny
is spoilt
is snobby
YUPPIES is a fashion victim
wants to be popular
eats a lot of junk food
surfs
is dreamy
watches too much TV
is enthusiastic
is independent
is nerdy
is an individual
ACTIVE is outspoken
is sporty
is talkative
is competitive
is attractive
is materialistic
is funny
is assertive
is keen to travel
explores new things

is caring
CONVENTIONAL is healthy
has casual jobs
is confident
is open minded
is ambitious
is helpful
is happy
is studious
is smart
is educated
is well mannered
is disrespectful
graffitis
is undisciplined
is a drug addict
PROBLEM KIDS uses alcohol
is rebellious
is wild
smokes
has a bad attitude
is dishonest
uses marijuana
swears
is unsupervised
is destructive
is rude
is aggressive
hates authority
uses drugs
is irresponsible
bullies
steals
belongs to gangs
is a trouble maker
is violent
is lazy
is moody
DEPRESSED is bored
has low self-esteem
is confused
is depressed
lacks confidence
is unhappy

skates
is annoying
is easily led
has too easy a life
SKATIES is boy-girl crazy
shows off
is under pressure
is arrogant
is selfish
is carefree
is sexually active
tests limits
stays out late

is risk-taking
LIVES FOR TODAY lacks ambition
FORGET THE poor parental communication
CONSEQUENCES is impulsive
is uneducated
becomes pregnant
is scruffy
is foolish
wants freedom
is layed back
is noisy
is outrageous
goes to raves
is a dole bludger
75
To test the correspondence of the clusters across the age groups, three
contingency tables were constructed. Each table contained rows corresponding to the
clusters of one age group, and columns corresponding to the clusters of another age
group. Table entries were the number of descriptors that fell into the same cluster for
the two age groups. Lambda coefficients were computed for each contingency table
as measures of predictive association (Hays, 1981). That is, lambda tested the degree
to which the cluster organisation of one age group predicted the cluster organisation
of another age group. Lambda ranges in value from 0 (no predictive relationship) to
1.00 (a perfect predictive relationship). As shown in Table 2.6, those analyses
revealed that the stereotype organisation of each age group provided a moderate to
good model of the organisation of the stereotypes in the other age groups. Predictive
accuracy ranged from a low of 34.6 percent when the older adults clusters were used
as a model for the young adults, to a high of 46.4 percent when the young peoples
cluster organisation was used as a model for the older adults. In other words, the
stereotype sets of young people held by the young and older adult groups, and by
young people themselves were largely similar.

76
Table 2.6
Predictive association (lambda) between cluster structures across age groups
Age group of criterion structure

_____________________________________________________
Age group of predictor structure Young person Young adult Older adult
Young person - .370* .464*
Young adult .432* - .450*
Older adult .420* .346* -
*p< .00001
Summary
As predicted, the findings from this study show that different age groups do
hold multiple stereotypes of youth. M oreover, the different age groups formed many
of the same subtypes of young people. Consistent with expectation, however, the
younger age groups had more complex stereotype sets than did the older adults. The
young people, young adult and older adult age groups formed six conceptually similar
subtypes of youth. They were yuppies, lives for today forget the consequences,
depressed, problem kids, active, and conventional. The younger age groups
also shared the skaties stereotype, while drug users was unique to the young
adults. The problem kids subtype had the greatest number of descriptors assigned to
it and the greatest agreement across groups regarding the constellation of traits and
behaviours comprising it. This could be taken as further evidence that stereotypic
beliefs about young people are largely negative.

77
DISCUS S ION
The studies in this chapter yielded several important findings regarding the
nature and content of stereotypic beliefs about young people. First, adults beliefs
about the cultural stereotype of youth contained, for the most part, very negative
content (Study 1), although their personal beliefs about youth were found to be both
positive and negative in content (Study 2A). Surprisingly, however, older adults'
personal beliefs were found to consist of more positive traits and behaviours than the
young adults. Second, young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about them were
found to be extremely negative, although young peoples beliefs about themselves
were somewhat more positive (Study 3A). Third, both adults and young people had
different subtypes of youth, although problem kids was the most salient, in terms of
both numbers of attributes assigned to it, and consensus regarding those attributes
(Study 4).
This first section of the program of research has also generated two measures
for assessing stereotypic beliefs about young people. The Beliefs about Adolescence
Scale measures adults personal beliefs about young people. The Adolescents
Perceptions of Adults Beliefs Scale assesses young peoples perceptions of adults
beliefs about them. Both have adequate internal consistency reliability and test-retest
reliability, and the Beliefs about Adolescence Scale was shown to have good
convergent validity. Both of those measures are employed in later stages of the
program of research.
The findings of the four studies go beyond those of previous research.
Buchanan and Holmbeck (1998) gathered adults personal beliefs. Those beliefs
78
were gathered in the present program of research, as was adults knowledge of the
cultural stereotype. Both are crucial given that cultural stereotypes and personal
beliefs are conceptually distinct (Devine, 1989). M oreover, acknowledging that
adults beliefs alone are insufficient, young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs
were also sought. Finally, the investigation of multiple stereotypes revealed that
people have rather sophisticated representations of young people. Thus, the four
studies in this chapter have provided a more comprehensive set of findings about the
nature and content of stereotypic beliefs about young people than in existing
literature.
Given the finding that people hold multiple stereotypes of youth (Study 4),
some might wish to argue that there is little or no need to gather peoples beliefs
about the typical teenager (Studies 1-3). It has been claimed, however, that
stereotyping occurs at both the superordinate (i.e. young person) and subcategory
levels. Taylor (1981) and Brewer et al. (1981) have suggested that stereotyping is
most likely to occur at the superordinate level when we describe individuals about
whom we have little information. Yet increasing contact with members of a social
group enables us to make finer discriminations within the group, which leads to the
more sophisticated subtyping of group members. Thus, the level of stereotyping
changes as a function of experience with a particular group.
In the case of stereotypes of young people, individuals who have regular
contact with young people (e.g., parents, teachers, young people themselves) will
most likely have multiple stereotypes of youth that have greater descriptive value than
the global youth-related stereotype. There are many adult members of the community
79
who have little or no regular contact with young people (Sercombe, 1997), and as a
result, are likely to conceive of a typical teenager. It then becomes important to
know which traits and behaviours comprise the global stereotype. Brewer et al.
(1981) claim that one or two subtypes within any superordinate category are likely to
be regarded as most salient or most typical of the general category. They further
claim that when individuals have little or no information about young people, those
subtypes serve as the default value for categorising young people. The findings
from Study 4 suggest that the problem kids subtype is the most salient of the youth
subtypes. Moreover, the findings of Studies 1 to 3 indicate that when people are
asked to describe the typical teenager, images of 'p roblem kids' predominate. It
would seem that the problem kids subtype serves as the default value for
categorising young people. The broader implications of the studies reported in this
chapter will be considered in more detail in Chapter 6.

80
CHAPTER 3
S OURCES OF S TEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH
Page
INTRODUCTION 81
STUDY 5: Newspaper reports of young people 84
Introduction 84
M ethod 85
Newspapers 85
Procedure 86
M ajor issues in newspaper reports of young people 88
Detailed examination of newspaper reports of young people 94
Summary 103
STUDY 6: Newspaper readership and stereotypic beliefs about youth 104
Introduction 104
M ethod 104
Participants 104
Predicting stereotypic beliefs from newspaper readership habits 106
Discriminating tabloid from broadsheet readers 107
Summary 109
DISCUSSION 110
81
INTRODUCTION
The two studies in this chapter focused on media representations of young
people, and on the relationship between those representations and stereotypic beliefs
about youth. The findings reported in Chapter 2 suggested that people have multiple
stereotypes of youth, one of which is the problem kids stereotype. It was further
revealed that when thinking in terms of typical teenagers, people rely heavily on the
problem kids subtype. Because that subtype appears to be the most salient of the
youth subtypes, it is important to establish a possible source of those stereotypic
beliefs. A major source of information is the media; public opinion is, to a large
extent, informed by media discourse (Howitt, 1982). For that reason, a widely held
view is that stereotypic beliefs about any social group evolve through the mass media
(Black & Bryant, 1995; McM ahon & Quin, 1987; Smith & M ackie, 1995). To date,
however, the relationship between media representations and stereotypic beliefs about
youth has not been examined empirically. In other words, the link between media
representations of youth and stereotypic beliefs about them has been assumed rather
than established. The first study in this chapter investigated media representations of
youth as they appear in newspaper reports. The second study sought to empirically
establish an association between those representations and stereotypic beliefs about
youth.
Four stages need to be undertaken to establish a link between newspaper
reports of young people and stereotypic beliefs. First, the nature and content of
newspaper reports of youth must be systematically documented. Because
newspapers can differ substantially in their coverage of a particular issue (OConnell,

82
Invernizzi, & Fuller, 1998), this study compared and contrasted the content of several
newspapers. The second stage involves a sampling of peoples stereotypic beliefs
about youth. For the third stage, the newspaper readership habits of the sample must
be determined. Finally, statistical tests need to demonstrate an association between
newspaper readership and stereotypic beliefs.
Only three studies have analysed the content of Australian newspaper reports
of young people. The Australian Centre for Independent Journalism (ACIJ, 1992)
analysed a sample of articles appearing in Sydney newspapers and magazines from
January 1988 to February 1992. The researchers found that both the newspapers and
magazines presented negative information about young people. Articles associating
young people with crime accounted for a major proportion of media coverage.
Sercombe (1997) analysed newspaper reports of young people that appeared in the
West Australian between 1990 and 1992. He found that 61.3 percent of articles
identified young people with criminal activity. Webber (1998) examined reports in
four Australian newspapers over a two-year period. Her analysis focused on reports
that portrayed young people as problematic, including those that depicted young
people as perpetrators of crime, victims of crime, or as victims of circumstances (that
is, harming themselves or being harmed by society). The major focus of Webbers
research was on the sources most frequently cited in newspaper reports of young
people. She found that police spokespersons were most frequently quoted in
newspaper reports, closely followed by members of Parliament and advocates
(including youth workers, psychologists and psychiatrists). In contrast, the views of
young people were cited less frequently. The ACIJ (1992) and Sercombe (1997)
83
identified the issues that receive the most media coverage, and Webbers (1998)
analysis was limited to youth as problem reports alone. None of the studies
acknowledged the existence of multiple stereotypes of youth. Moreover, although
ACIJ (1992) and Webber (1998) examined several newspapers (and magazines),
similarities and differences in their coverage of youth-related issues were not
highlighted. Study 5 in the present thesis involved a more detailed content analysis of
newspaper reports of young people than those previously conducted. The analysis
took as its starting point the multiple stereotypes of youth that people possess. Study
5 sought to establish whether three major daily Sydney newspapers differed in the
proportion of space that is allocated to the different stereotypes of youth.
Having established the nature and content of newspaper reports of young
people, it is then important to investigate the extent to which those reports are a
source of stereotypic beliefs about youth. A great deal of theoretical and research
attention has examined media influence on peoples beliefs, values and opinions (see
Davison, Boylan, & Yu, 1976; Heath & Petraitis, 1987; Morgan, 1982; O'Keefe &
Reid-Nash, 1987, Surette, 1990). Those investigations have revealed that the
relationship between the media and public opinion is a complex one. People's use of
media output, how they interpret a particular event, what they believe and do not
believe, depends on a range of factors (Sercombe, 1997). M edia representations have
been shown to exert the most powerful effects when they confirm the existing beliefs
of their audiences (Roshier, 1973).
Research within the social cognitive orientation has shown that people seek
information that is consistent with their beliefs and expectations, and they do so in
84
order to maintain their existing views of the world (see Kenrick, Neuberg, & Cialdini,
1999). Similarly, newspaper journalists and editors select news content that is
consistent with the beliefs and values of their readership, and they do so in order to
attract the same loyal and predictable audience (Windschuttle, 1988). In that way, the
media function to maintain or to reinforce existing beliefs, attitudes, and values
(Howitt, 1982). Thus, the nature of the relationship between media representations
and community beliefs is almost certainly bi-directional. Study 6 empirically tested
the association between newspaper reporting of young people and stereotypic beliefs
about youth. Specifically, Study 6 investigated the extent to which newspaper
readership predicts peoples stereotypic beliefs about youth. It also examined which
aspects of stereotypic beliefs about youth predict peoples choice of newspaper.
S TUDY 5
Newspaper reports of young people
Introduction
Study 5 specified the nature and content of reports of young people appearing
in three major daily Sydney newspapers. It involved a two-stage investigation. The
first stage aimed to capture the range of topics covered in newspaper reporting of
young people over a three-month period. This included an examination of the relative
space afforded to the different youth-related stereotypes. M ost importantly, the three
newspapers were compared and contrasted in terms of their coverage of young people
and youth-related issues. Based on previous research findings that media
representations of youth typically associate young people with crime (ACIJ, 1992;
85
Sercombe, 1997), it was predicted that a majority of the newspaper reports would
portray young people as problematic.
The second stage of the investigation aimed to examine in detail the content of
the newspaper reports. In contrast to the first stage that categorised the reports into
major topics, the second stage explored the content of the articles. Particular
attention was paid to the language used to describe young people, the sources that
were cited, and to recurring patterns and themes in the reports. By identifying
principal themes and key patterns underlying the newspaper reports, this stage of the
investigation sought to shed some light on how media representations of young
people are shaped and from whose perspective.
M ethod
Newspapers
A distinction is commonly drawn between 'tabloid' and 'broadsheet'
newspapers. Tabloid papers are mass market products whereas broadsheet papers
primarily target an upmarket readership. Broadsheet papers often have longer and
more in-depth articles and give some attention to minority interests (Bonney &
Wilson, 1983). In the present study, three major daily Sydney newspapers were
selected for analysis, as well as the Saturday editions of those papers. Two of those,
the Australian and the Sydney Morning Herald, are broadsheet papers, and the Daily
Telegraph, is a tabloid. From July to December 1999, circulations for the three
newspapers were: Australian, 129 494; Sydney Morning Herald, 226 315; Daily
Telegraph, 426 600 (Audit Bureau of Circulations, 2000).

86
Differences in the three newspaper readerships can be made on the basis of
sex, level of education, and socioeconomic status. First, 68.0 percent of Australian
readers are male. In contrast, males comprise 55.0 percent and 56.0 percent of Daily
Telegraph and Sydney Morning Herald readers respectively (Roy M organ Research,
2000). Second, 61.0 percent of Australian readers and 51.8 percent of Sydney
Morning Herald readers have a degree or diploma. In contrast, 19.8 percent of Daily
Telegraph readers have a degree or diploma (Roy Morgan Research, 2000).
Socioeconomic quintiles, based on income, education, and occupation, are a third
way in which the readerships are distinguished. The population is divided into five
categories; AB, C, D, E, and FG. AB people tend to be managerial and professional
people, whereas the FG group consists of the unemployed and pensioners (Bonney &
Wilson, 1983). A little over 61.0 percent of Australian readers and 46.7 percent of
Sydney Morning Herald readers are in the AB quintile. Just over 18.0 percent of
Daily Telegraph readers belong to the AB quintile (Roy Morgan Research, 2000).
Procedure
All articles about young people (aged 10-17) between July 1 and September
30, 1998 were collected for analysis. There were 660 reports with a primary focus on
young people: 157 appeared in the Australian, 218 were drawn from the Sydney
Morning Herald, and 285 reports were from the Daily Telegraph. Two major types
of reports were collected, case reports and commentary reports (cf. McConkey,
Roche, & Sheehan, 1989). The case reports, including local, world, and brief news
articles, presented details of particular incidents. Five hundred and twenty-two case
reports were gathered. Of those, 106 came from the Australian, 168 were drawn from
87
the Sydney Morning Herald, and 248 were from the Daily Telegraph. The
commentary reports provided an analysis of a particular incident involving a young
person or persons, or general commentary on young people or on youth-related
issues. Some of the commentary reports included information on specific cases to
illustrate a point. Commentary reports appeared in the form of feature and opinion
articles, editorials, and letters to the editor. One hundred and thirty-eight commentary
reports were gathered. Of those, 51 were from the Australian, 56 came from the
Sydney Morning Herald, and 37 were drawn from the Daily Telegraph.
All newspaper articles were entered into a data file to be analysed within the
qualitative data analysis package NUDIST (Non-numerical Unstructured Data
Indexing Searching and Theorising; Richards & Richards, 1994). The data analyses
involved two stages that corresponded to the two stages of investigation of the
newspaper reports. First, to identify the range of youth-related topics covered in the
reports, basic text and index searches were conducted that enabled the identification
of recurring issues. Those searches located occurrences of any of a range of words or
categories. The second stage of the investigation that sought to more closely examine
the content of the newspaper reports involved more sophisticated index searches.
Those searches gathered material on related topics, explored the overlap and
proximity of ideas, and teased apart and discovered patterns in the data. In that way,
the second stage of analyses permitted the asking of specific questions, theory
development and hypothesis testing, and the drawing of specific conclusions about
the shaping of media representations of youth.

88
section presents an account of the major issues dealt with in the newspaper reports of
young people. It highlights the similarities and differences among the three
newspapers in their representations of young people and draws attention to the
relative space afforded to the different youth-related stereotypes. The second section
provides a detailed analysis of the content of the newspaper reports. Particular
attention is given to the sources that are cited, the language that is used, and to the
recurring themes.
M ajor issues in newspaper reports of young people
Similarities and differences among the newspapers. A wide range of youth-
related issues was depicted in the newspaper reports. Table 3.1 gives a breakdown of
the topics covered in the newspapers. Crime was the most frequently occurring topic.
Of the three newspapers, however, the Daily Telegraph contained the majority of
reports of young people and crime, registering more than double the number of crime
reports as that in the Australian, and almost twice as many reports as the Sydney
Morning Herald.
Education was the second most frequently occurring issue, but only for the
Australian and the Sydney Morning Herald. Both papers contained more than twice
the number of education reports as that in the Daily Telegraph. High achievement
was the third most frequently mentioned issue for the Australian and the Sydney
Morning Herald, and the second most frequently mentioned issue for the Daily
89
Telegraph. Almost all of those related to high sporting achievement, although a few
reports concerned high achievement in the arts.
The examination of the topics covered in the reports shows that news
reporting of young people is relatively uninfluenced by official statistics and issues of
concern to young people. For instance, New South Wales Court statistics show that
less than 2 percent of 10-17 year olds appeared before the Childrens Courts between
July 1994 and June 1995 (Freeman, 1996). Yet reports on youth crime represented
approximately one fifth of Australian and Sydney Morning Herald reports and just
over two fifths of Daily Telegraph reports. In contrast, in November 1999, the
unemployment rate for young people aged between 15 and 19 years in New South
Wales was 20.7 percent (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2000). Yet unemployment
was an issue in just 1 percent of Australian and Daily Telegraph reports and in 6
percent of Sydney Morning Herald reports. Similarly, in 1996, suicide accounted for
22 percent of all deaths among 15-24 year olds Australia wide. M oreover, suicide is
known to be the second most common cause of death among 15-24 year olds, after
motor vehicle accidents (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1997). Despite the
seriousness of this, suicide was barely mentioned in newspaper reports over the
period of this study. Similar arguments could be made about mental illness and
homelessness, both acknowledged in less than 1 percent of the reports that appeared
in each of the three newspapers. Thus, the amount of news space devoted to a
particular issue does not correspond to the recorded occurrence of that issue.
90
Table 3.1
Number (N) and percent (%) of each topic in the newspaper reports of young people
Newspaper
Australian SMH T elegraph
N=157 N=218 N=285
T opic N % N % N %
Crime 31 19.7 46 21.1 117 41.1
Education 28 17.8 37 17.0 20 7.0
High achievement 21 13.4 26 11.9 46 16.1
General problems of youth 18 11.5 15 6.9 9 3.2

Demonstrations/protests 15 9.6 21 9.6 21 7.4
Alcohol/other drugs 11 7.0 12 5.5 6 2.1
Accidents 7 4.5 3 1.4 12 4.2

Public nuisance 4 2.5 2 0.0 11 3.9
Ill health/disability 3 1.9 2 0.0 4 1.4

Unemployment 2 1.3 13 6.0 4 1.4
Suicide 2 1.3 6 2.8 2 0.0
T eenage sex 2 1.3 2 0.0 4 1.4

Youth and technology 2 1.3 3 1.4 4 1.4
Intergenerational relations 2 1.3 4 1.8 0 0.0
Young people as soldiers 2 1.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Young people and the arts 2 1.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Missing young people 1 0.0 9 4.1 8 2.8
Mental illness 1 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.0
Homelessness 1 0.0 0 0.0 2 0.0
Cross-cultural comparisons 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 0.0
Policing practices 1 0.0 3 1.4 3 1.1
Abuse 0 0.0 2 0.0 5 1.8
School sport 0 0.0 11 5.0 5 1.8
91
Table 3.2 presents a breakdown of the reports that related to young people and
crime separately for each of the three newspapers. It can be seen that, despite the fact
that young people are more likely to be victims than perpetrators of crime (Cunneen
& White, 1995), they are depicted as perpetrators of crime far more frequently than
they are as victims, at least in the Australian and the Daily Telegraph. In contrast, the
Sydney Morning Herald focused more on young people as victims of crime than as
perpetrators. In addition, among the offences reported, murder was most frequently
cited. Official crime statistics indicate, however, that between January 1986 and
December 1994, fewer young people were arrested for murder than for any other
offence. Murders made up 0.1 percent of most serious offences at proven criminal
appearances during that period (Cain, 1996). Again, this finding reflects the fact that
the amount of news space devoted to a particular youth issue does not correspond to
the recorded occurrence of that issue. Finally, with respect to Table 3.2, it is
noteworthy that important issues, such as the causes of crime and the prevention of
crime, received much less news coverage than the offending behaviour of young
people.
92
Table 3.2
Number (N) and percent (%) of crime-related topics in the newspaper reports of
young people
Newspaper
Australian SMH T elegraph
N=31 1 N=46 N=117
T opic N % N % N %
Youth as perpetrator 20 64.5 16 34.7 73 62.4
Youth as victim 10 32.3 22 47.8 27 23.1
Murder 9 29.0 18 39.1 30 25.6
Miscellaneous crimes2 7 22.6 6 13.0 41 35.0
Sex crimes 6 19.4 10 21.7 6 5.1
Attempted murder 3 9.7 0 0.0 5 4.3
Manslaughter 2 6.5 3 6.5 9 7.7
Armed robbery 0 0.0 0 0.0 5 4.3
Robbery 0 0.0 0 0.0 5 4.3

Punishment 3 9.7 0 0.0 0 0.0
Crime prevention 2 6.5 7 15.2 9 7.7
Causes of crime 1 3.2 1 2.2 2 1.7

Rights of offenders 1 3.2 2 4.3 1 0.0
Rehabilitation 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 1.7

Note:
1. Articles were coded under more than one crime subcategory. F or example, a report ofayoung person charged
with m urder, where the victim was also a young person, was coded under three subcategories. For that
reason, the sum of the reports coded under the crim e subcategories is not equal to the number ofreports coded
under the general category of crim e.
2. Exam ples of offences coded under m iscellaneous crim es include theft, abduction, and concealing offences.
93
Relative space granted to the youth subtypes. In Study 4 of the research
program, six youth subtypes were documented by young and older adults, and by
young people themselves. They were labelled as yuppies, lives for today and forget
the consequences, depressed, problem kids, active, and conventional. The
problem kids subtype was, however, the most salient in terms of having the greatest
number of descriptors assigned to it, and the greatest agreement across the age groups
regarding the traits and behaviours comprising it. From a review of the topics listed
in Tables 3.1 and 3.2, it is apparent that the problem kids subtype is given the most
space in all three newspapers. This is evident, in part, by the fact that crime
dominated news reporting of young people. In addition, various other topics,
including general problems of youth, demonstrations/protests, alcohol/other
drugs and public nuisance also depicted young people as problematic. Indeed, by
summing the articles that reported on young people in relation to each of those topics,
it becomes apparent that young people are portrayed as problematic in over half of
Australian (53.3%) and Daily Telegraph (50.3%) reports, and in 44.1 percent of
Sydney Morning Herald reports. The remaining stereotypical images of youth were
granted comparatively less news space. The stereotype of young people as
conventional, conveyed in reports about education, young people and technology,
and the arts, was afforded less than half the amount of news space than that given to
the problem kids subtype. The subtype of the active youth was conveyed only in
reports of high sporting achievement and school sport. The remaining three youth
subtypes, yuppies, lives for today, forget the consequences, and depressed were
given either trivial amounts or no news space at all.

94
From an analysis of the proportion of news space afforded to each of the
youth subtypes, it is perhaps not surprising that in Study 4 problem kids was shown
to be the most salient of the youth subtypes. Young people were depicted in that way
in over half of news reports about them. Of course, in order to attribute peoples
stereotypic beliefs to their exposure to media representations about youth, a link must
be established between their newspaper readership habits and their stereotypic beliefs.
This is explored in Study 6. The remainder of the Results section of this study
presents the findings that derive from the detailed analyses of the content of the
newspaper reports of young people.
Detailed examination of newspaper reports of young people
The second stage of the analysis focused on the content of the newspaper
reports of young people. Given that the case reports presented details of particular
incidents, this section focused on commentary reports. At the broadest level, the
commentary reports could be divided into those that portrayed young people
negatively, and those that reflected positively on the youth of today. Three distinct
themes emerged from the analyses that were conducted on the negative reports.
Those include reports that conveyed young people as problems to society, reports that
depicted the institutional indifference that young people experience, and reports that
discounted young people as having a voice.
Young people as problems to society. Just over 20 percent of commentary
reports conveyed the notion that young people are problems to society. Of those,
14.5 percent were drawn from the Daily Telegraph, 3.6 percent came from the Sydney
Morning Herald, and 2.2 percent were from the Australian. Politicians, police, and
95
members of the general public were the major sources that were cited. Some of those
individuals revealed their beliefs that young people are problematic through their
support for the introduction of laws to allow police officers to intervene in the
activities of young people, even when they have not engaged in any wrongdoing. For
example, in commenting on the newly established powers enabling police to return
young people wandering the streets to their homes, a police spokesperson was
apparently unaware of the irony in his statement to the Daily Telegraph that as it
now stands, children have to be virtually committing a crime before the police can
intervene (September 21, p.19).
Other sources highlighted the tendency to view young people as problems to
society through their advocacy of more discipline for the youth of today. A feature
article in the Daily Telegraph presented new guidelines for London schoolteachers
enabling them to use reasonable force against unruly pupils. Under those
guidelines, teachers are permitted to push, pull, or hold classroom thugs and
potential absconders and they will be protected against accusations of assault if they
take limited action to prevent youngsters causing havoc(July 28, p.20).
The widespread belief that young people are problems to society is summed
up in the words of a Letter to the Editor of the Daily Telegraph. This letter writer
believes that he has the answer to the question of why we have a major problem with
todays youth.
Am I wrong to believe that all minors these days have far too many rights
and freedoms, and this is the main reason why so many of them are going
astray? (July 10, p.12).
96
Institutional indifference. Accounting for only 8.0 percent of reports overall,
some reports underscored the institutional indifference that is evident in the handling
of many youth-related issues. Just under 3.0 percent came from the Daily Telegraph,
2.2 percent were drawn from the Sydney Morning Herald, and 2.9 percent were from
the Australian. Almost always, the reports referred to the Governments indifference
toward young people. For example, a few articles highlighted the tendency for the
Government to cut back on funding for youth initiatives whenever they are in need of
money. One article by the Daily Telegraph reported on the imminent closing of a
program that teaches musical skills to disadvantaged youths (July 9, p.20). The
organisers were in danger of having to discontinue the program due to government
funding cut backs, despite the fact that more than 90 percent of young people who
had completed the course had gone on to find jobs.
Several members of the broader community also expressed concerns
regarding the Governments indifference toward its young people via Letters to the
Editor.
Young people get a horrid deal from all main parties. If Labor, Liberal, or
Nationals need money, they hit the kids. (September 17, Australian, p.8)
Year after year the political position of youth is compromised: homeless

youth with not enough accommodation become societys scapegoats, young
recipients of government benefits take further cuts to stop them being dole
bludgers and milking the system. (July 2, Sydney Morning Herald, p.16)
Perhaps of greatest concern, young people perceive the Government to be
indifferent to their needs, although this was evident in only one Sydney Morning
Herald report. In that article, it was reported that the results of the 1998 Youth Poll
revealed an overwhelming number of young people were frustrated with politicians

97
for trivialising youth interests and not taking them seriously. The comments made by
two 17-year-olds illustrate as examples.
M ake REAL policies to assist young people, not just shallow attempts to
appear caring.
Although the Government appears to be interested in what the youth of

Australia wants, their youth conventions dont make any difference and are
not benefitting us. (August 29, p.2)
Discounting the voice of young people. The third group of negative reports of
young people related to adults propensity to discount young people as having the
ability to form their own valuable opinions. Almost 15 percent of reports included
this theme (7.2 % from the Daily Telegraph, 4.3% from the Sydney Morning Herald,
and 3.0% from the Australian). At the time of collecting the newspaper articles, there
was widespread debate across Australia over student demonstrations that had taken
place against the racist views of the political party 'One Nation'. M any politicians and
journalists took the view that young people were too young to understand the issues
and therefore must have been pressured by adults into partaking in the protests.
It is no more paternalistic to claim that the young Germans were manipulated

than it is to note the same sort of manipulation at play in the phony
demonstration last week. (July 9, Daily Telegraph, p.11)
Similar views were expressed in several Letters to the Editor:
The children involved have all their adult lives to protest about things they
dont agree with. Until then, they should be busy learning of such things as the
art of manipulation and brain-washing used very skillfully by a lot of adults.
(July 10, Daily Telegraph, p.12).
So, the national co-ordinator of a socialist group had the recent

demonstrations against One Nation demanded of him by school kids. Sure.
The bold statements, clever placards and references to Facism, Racism
and occasionally Nazism could really only be foisted upon those too young
and innocent to know better. (August 12, Sydney Morning Herald, p.12).
98
Several young people expressed their disappointment regarding the
community reaction to their demonstrations against One Nation. In Letters to the
Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, two young people revealed their frustration
regarding the invalidation of their opinions.
So. One hundred lunatic school students, dangerously armed with schoolbags
and bicycles, descend in an uncontrollable pack upon Howards office. Hurry,
send in the riot squad and special operations, theyre a national security threat.
Pathetic. The actions of July 2 showed with absolute clarity the irrational,
prejudiced and moronic attitude the community, more specifically police and
government, have towards young people. Imagine the uproar if the voices of
the pensioner lobby, or the heritage groups, had been stifled in such a way,
and then trivialised and infantilised by various media. (July 7, p.12)
How reassuring it is to know that Australia is in the safe hands of a wise,

aged voting populace. Presumably, when I turn 18 in three months time, I,
too, will be imbued with a new wisdom, insight and understanding denied to
me so farage does not necessarily equate with greater knowledge, or a grasp
of what is right for the countryProtests are about the only means for young
people to get their views and feelings across in this democracy. When we
are given greater recognition, support and representation, then well calm
down. (August 17, p.14)
Adults tendency to discount the views of young people spread beyond the
student demonstrations. For instance, one journalist from the Sydney Morning Herald
claimed that young people rarely have anything worthy to say.
we never seem to be able to get away from teenagers and stories on what
young people really think. Yet no one seems to have noticed in this orgy of
interest in the opinions of adolescents that they rarely have anything
interesting to saytheyre kids in the grip of their hormones who spend their
day worrying about school assignments, pimples, and how many M accas
stores they can visit next weekend. (July 10, p.17)
A Sydney Morning Herald report presented the results of a research project
into child abuse (August 31, p.5). The findings indicated that, in the eyes of young
people, discounting their opinions is a form of abuse.

99
Children put less emphasis on physical beatings than on the experience of

being discounted by adults, of being let down, not listened to, and treated as
inferiors, a child abuse study has found.
According to one of the researchers:
There was recognition that being battered black and blue was wrong but these
children talked more about their feeling of (being) powerless and of not being
taken seriously.
The results suggested that narrow definitions of abuse, such as physical and sexual
abuse, might be incomplete.
The children felt abused by the unequal power relationship between adults
and children, and by adults tendency to patronise and treat them as less of a
person.
Below are some of the comments of the young people themselves.
Youre just a kid, you dont count.
Were similar to a minority group but we dont get as many rights.
The majority of young people are crying out for a say.
Not all adults, however, have negative beliefs about youth. Although
relatively few in number, the reports that reflected positively on young people could
also be grouped into three categories that represented the opposing categories of the
negative reports. First, some positive reports expressed support for young people, as
opposed to depicting young people as problems to society. Second, commitment to
the needs of young people was conveyed, as opposed to institutional indifference.
Third, rather than discounting the views of young people, some adults were of the
belief that young people can form valuable opinions.

100
Youth support: Young people are not problems to society. This category was
evident in 13.8 percent of reports overall. Among those, 6.5 percent were from the
Sydney Morning Herald and 5.8 percent were from the Australian. Only 1.5 percent
were drawn from the Daily Telegraph. Most of the support expressed for young
people was in the form of condemning the widened police powers for dealing with
young people. Some adults were of the belief that the police would abuse their new
powers. For example, in a Sydney Morning Herald feature article, a retired
Childrens Court Magistrate claimed that she has zero tolerance of zero tolerance,
particularly when applied to children.
Kids never let me downAdults, politicians, Magistrates, judges

schoolteachers, principals. They all let me down. (August 8, p.3)
In a Letter to the Editor, a Sydney Morning Herald reader expressed similar views
regarding the increased powers being afforded to police.
There is much potential to misuse police powers in dealing with young

people, particularly Aboriginal and migrant adolescentsIf M r Ryan wants
intolerant policing, then I want stronger, easier, independent complaints
handling. (August 6, p.14)
Commitment to the needs of young people. Only 2.2 percent of reports
illustrated that some individuals and community groups are committed to helping
young people in need. All of the reports in this category derived from the Australian.
For example, one feature article reported on a school that was set up as an alternative
for young people who are not fitting in to the mainstream education system. One of
the founders of the school commented on the typical progression of students who fall
behind in mainstream schools.

101
The children become uninterested and hide their inability in literacy by

disconnecting themselves from classroom activities and from their peers.
Teacher abuse and antisocial activity become a veil to cover ignorance and
this sort of behaviour has often led in the past to truancy and expulsion.
(August 17, p.17)
In this school, however, individual programs are written according to the needs of
students.
The students thrive in the non-institutionalised environmentIn a last-

chance situation, it is important the students dont experience the same sort
of competition and peer pressure which have led to earlier failures. The real
linchpin of the system is the approach of the teachers, the experience they
bring and the multiple roles they play in these small schools. The teachers are,
in effect, counsellors as well as teachers, without the students realising. This is
the key to the whole program.
Young people can form valuable opinions. In 12.3 percent of articles (6.5%
from the Sydney Morning Herald, 5.1 % from the Australian, and 0.7% from the
Daily Telegraph) various adult members of the community claimed that young people
are capable of forming their own worthwhile opinions and that they should not be
discounted. In a Sydney Morning Herald Opinion article, a lawyer expressed his
support for the students who took part in the protests against One Nation, and his
disapproval of those who condemned their actions.
The view that young minds are so malleable that the merest suggestion will
spur action is laughable. Young people are responsive to new ideas, and they
do have extraordinary levels of energy. This is one of the reasons why youth
can be such an exciting time. It is a period when people experiment, try new
things, test boundaries and form opinions. Some of those opinions will
become lifelong allegiances, others will fade quickly as more convincing
ideas take root. We should not be afraid of this dynamism; rather we should
celebrate ityoung people had something to say about intolerant politics and
their general exclusion from the community debate, and yet media reporting
focused on peripheral issues that trivialised their concerns. (August 18, p.13)
102
The writers of the following Letters to the Editor that appeared in the Sydney Morning
Herald were in agreement.
Surely the simplest among TV journalists can see that this is why young
people are protesting, to make their opinions heard when there are few other
avenues of communication. The opinions of all people are valid in our society,
and should be allowed to be expressedI would like to see a dialogue begin
on why we have constructed the young as such pariahs in our society, and
why the media find so much success in playing on those themes. (August 20,
p.14)
The generation that for so long has been accused to care little about anything
else than computer games and the latest trend in clothes and music has
showed all that there is an immense social awareness among themI think we
should be proud of our young people. (July 28, p.12)
Overall, a closer examination of the content of newspaper reports of young
people revealed that negative representations of youth far outweigh the positive
portrayals. Negative beliefs about young people were expressed by police,
journalists, and by members of the general public. Some of those beliefs highlighted
the negative views that the Government has regarding young people. Positive
sentiments were, for the most part, conveyed by members of the general public,
although two professionals (one lawyer and one magistrate) also expressed positive
feelings toward youth. Perhaps most importantly, young peoples own views
regarding issues that relate to them were acknowledged in only four reports. It is
revealing that all of those related to young peoples negative perceptions of their
position in society. Finally, it is important to point out that the views expressed in the
Daily Telegraph were far more negative than those portrayed in the Australian and
the Sydney Morning Herald. Most of the positive reports derived from the Australian
103
and the Sydney Morning Herald. In contrast, a majority of the negative reports were
drawn from the Daily Telegraph.
Summary
As predicted, an analysis of the major topics covered in newspaper reports of
young people revealed that they were typically depicted in a negative context. This is
particularly true of the Daily Telegraph reports. When young people were the subject
of positive news reporting, it was almost always in relation to high sporting
achievement. Across all three newspapers, however, the problem kids stereotype
was afforded the most news space. M ore detailed examination of the content of the
newspaper reports of young people revealed a similar pattern. The views portrayed
by the Daily Telegraph were considerably more negative than those revealed in the
other two papers. Further, young peoples opinions were noticeably absent from all
three newspapers.
The findings that news reporting of young people is largely negative and that
the problem kids stereotype is most frequently mentioned in those reports
corresponds to the findings of the studies that were presented in Chapter 2. In those
studies it was revealed that adults stereotypic beliefs about youth are largely
negative, and that the problem kids subtype is the most salient of the youth
subtypes.
104
S TUDY 6
Newspaper readership and stereotypic beliefs about youth
Introduction
Study 6 investigated the relationship between newspaper readership and
stereotypic beliefs about youth. A sample of adults first indicated their personal
beliefs about young people, and then nominated the newspaper they read most often.
Study 6 had two specific hypotheses. First, peoples newspaper readership habits
were expected to predict their beliefs about young people. Second, peoples beliefs
about youth were expected to determine their choice of newspaper.
M ethod
Participants
One hundred and nineteen adults (ages 18-76, 81 females and 38 males) took
part in this study. Participants were recruited from undergraduate psychology
students at the University of New South Wales and from local community drop-in
and leisure centres.
To indicate their personal beliefs about youth, participants completed the 20-
item Beliefs about Adolescence Scale that was developed in Study 2B. That measure
has five subscales - (Lack of) Discipline (consisting of items such as is
undisciplined, is unsupervised), Conventionalism (including items such as is
educated, is smart), Problem Behaviours (for example, uses alcohol, is sexually
active), (Seeking) Independence (for example, is risk-taking, is rebellious), and
Popular Notions (for example, watches too much TV, listens to loud music).
105
Participants were required to indicate the extent to which they believed each of the 20
traits and behaviours was characteristic of young people. They responded on an 8-
point scale that ranged from 0 (Extremely uncharacteristic) to 7 (Extremely
characteristic). Having done that, participants were then asked, Of the major
Sydney newspapers, which one do you read most frequently?
Of the 119 participants, 56 (47.0%) individuals indicated that their primary
newspaper was the Sydney Morning Herald, 42 (35.3%) revealed that they mainly
read the Daily Telegraph, and 3 (2.5%) read the Australian most often. Of the
remaining participants, 11 (9.2%) primarily read local newspapers, 1 (0.8%) person
read only the Australian Financial Review, and 6 (5.0%) respondents indicated that
they did not read any newspaper. Given that meaningful comparisons could be drawn
only between Daily Telegraph and Sydney Morning Herald readers, the responses of
only those participants are included in the analyses.
presents the findings from the analyses that sought to determine whether newspaper
readership habits predict stereotypic beliefs about young people. This was examined
via a series of regression analyses, with participants subscale scores on the Beliefs
about Adolescence Scale as the outcome variables. The second section details the
findings of the analyses that investigated the extent to which stereotypic beliefs about
youth predict newspaper readership habits. This was explored by a discriminant
function analysis, of which the major purpose is to predict group membership from a
set of predictors (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1989). Thus, the discriminant function
106
analysis tested which components of stereotypic beliefs about youth were able to
distinguish between tabloid (Daily Telegraph) and broadsheet (Sydney Morning
Herald) readers. All analyses were performed using SPSS for Windows (Norusis,
1993). Summaries of statistical analyses are presented in Appendix B.
Predicting stereotypic beliefs from newspaper readership habits
When newspaper readership (Daily Telegraph or Sydney Morning Herald)
was regressed against each of the five Beliefs about Adolescence subscale scores, it
was found to be predictive of beliefs that young people lack discipline, that they
adhere to popular notions of adolescence, and that they engage in problem behaviour.
Table 3.3 presents those findings.
It can be seen that Daily Telegraph readers reported stronger beliefs that
young people lack discipline ( = -.32) and that they adhere to popular notions of
adolescence ( = -.24) than did Sydney Morning Herald readers. Daily Telegraph
readers also reported stronger beliefs that young people engage in problem
behaviours than did Sydney Morning Herald readers ( = -.20). Those three sets of
beliefs are, for the most part, negative in content. Given that Study 5 determined that
the Daily Telegraph contains more negative representations of youth than does the
Sydney Morning Herald, it is perhaps not surprising that newspaper readership was
significantly associated with negative belief sets. Newspaper readership was not,
however, predictive of beliefs that young people are conventional or seeking
independence. The remainder of the Results section presents the findings from the
analyses that sought to determine the extent to which stereotypic beliefs about youth
are predictive of newspaper readership habits.

107
Table 3.3
Predicting stereotypic beliefs about young people from newspaper readership habits
2
Belief set Adj R F Sig. Beta t Sig.
(Lack of) Discipline .10 11.3 .01 -.32 -3.4 .01
Popular Notions .05 6.1 .05 -.24 -2.5 .05
Problem Behaviours .03 3.8 .05 -.20 -2.0 .05
(Seeking) Independence .01 1.9 ns -.14 -1.4 ns
Conventionalism -.01 0.3 ns .06 0.6 ns
Discriminating tabloid from broadsheet readers
A discriminant function analysis uses linear combinations of predictor
variables in order to describe major differences among groups (Stevens, 1986). In
any discriminant function analysis, two types of coefficients are produced.
Standardised coefficients are used to study the relative contribution of the variables to
the discrimination between the groups (Pedhazur, 1997). The larger the coefficient,
the greater the contribution of the variable. Standardised coefficients are, however,
problematic because they are affected by the variability of the variables with which
they are associated, and as a result, lack stability (Pedhazur, 1997). As an alternative,
structure coefficients are often used to interpret the nature of the dimension or
dimensions on which the groups are discriminated. As a rule of thumb, structure
coefficients that are greater than or equal to .30 are treated as meaningful (Pedhazur,
1997). Those coefficients are then used to interpret the discriminant function. That
108
interpretation is based upon an examination of the variables as is done in factor
analysis. Table 3.4 presents the results of the discriminant function analysis that was
carried out for the present study.
Table 3.4
Discriminant function analysis predicting newspaper readership habits
Group
Tabloid Broadsheet
Stand. Struct.
Belief set M SD M SD Coeff. Coeff.
(Lack of) Discipline 14.6** 3.1 12.5** 3.2 .94 .74
Popular Notions 22.7* 3.2 21.1* 3.4 .19 .55
Problem Behaviours 15.8* 2.5 14.8* 2.7 .33 .50
(Seeking) Independence 26.5 4.0 25.5 3.5 -.14 .32
Conventionalism 23.0 4.1 23.5 3.6 -.67 -.13
* p < .05 ** p < .01. Mean score for tabloid readers is significantly different from mean score for
broadsheet readers based on F ratio with dfs of 1 and 95. Wilkss = .83, canonical correlation = .42.
Table 3.4 shows that tabloid readers reported stronger beliefs that young
people lack discipline, that they adhere to popular notions of adolescence and that
they engage in problem behaviours than broadsheet readers. The function
significantly predicted group membership (Wilkss = .83, p < .00), and the
predictors accounted for 42 percent of the variance within the discriminant function
(as revealed by the canonical correlation). From the standardised coefficients, it
appears that beliefs that young people lack discipline and that they are conventional
made the greatest contributions to the discrimination between the two groups.
109
However, all of the belief sets except conventionalism had structure coefficients that
were greater than or equal to 3. All of those belief sets are largely negative in
content. Given that for two groups there can be only one discriminant function
(Stevens, 1986), the structure coefficients clearly show that this function is
interpretable as primarily a negative belief set function. In other words, the function
that discriminates between tabloid and broadsheet readers primarily reflects their
differences in negative beliefs about young people. Beliefs that young people lack
discipline, and to a lesser degree, beliefs that they adhere to popular notions of
adolescence and that they engage in problem behaviours, provided the most unique
contribution to this discriminatory power.
Summary
Study 6 sought to determine the nature of the relationship between newspaper
readership habits and stereotypic beliefs about youth. As predicted, newspaper
readership was predictive of stereotypic beliefs about adolescence. Subjects who
indicated that their primary newspaper was the Daily Telegraph reported stronger
beliefs that young people lack discipline, that they adhere to popular notions of
adolescence, and that they engage in problem behaviours than did subjects who
indicated that they primarily read the Sydney Morning Herald. Further, the five sets
of stereotypic beliefs about youth combined to discriminate between tabloid (Daily
Telegraph) and broadsheet (Sydney Morning Herald) readers. The major difference
between the two readership groups could be explained in terms of their negative
beliefs about young people. Beliefs that young people lack discipline, adhere to
110
popular notions of adolescence, engage in problem behaviours, and that they are
seeking independence was shown to predict tabloid readership.
DISCUS S ION
The studies that have been reported in this chapter investigated the content of
newspaper reports of young people and examined the relationship between newspaper
readership and stereotypic beliefs about youth. The findings of Study 5 revealed that
newspaper reports of young people are largely negative and that the problem kids
stereotype is afforded the most news space relative to the other youth-related
stereotypes. A closer examination of the content of the newspaper reports further
revealed that negative representations dominate media portrayals of youth. Those
representations were, for the most part, shaped by adult members of the community,
including journalists, police, and members of the general public. The views of young
people received comparatively fewer acknowledgements. Thus, the hypothesis that a
majority of newspaper reports would portray young people as problematic was
supported. It is important to note, however, that the reports that appeared in the Daily
Telegraph were substantially more negative than the reports from either the
Australian or the Sydney Morning Herald.
In Study 6, newspaper readership was shown to be predictive of three sets of
stereotypic beliefs about adolescence. Daily Telegraph readership was associated
with stronger beliefs that young people lack discipline, that they adhere to popular
notions of adolescence, and that they engage in problem behaviours. In addition,
stereotypic beliefs about adolescence were shown to discriminate between tabloid and
111
broadsheet readers. That discrimination was attributed to the more negative beliefs
that were held by tabloid readers (Daily Telegraph).
In drawing conclusions from these findings, two important limitations must be
noted. First, in relation to the content analysis of newspaper reports, the articles that
were analysed were collected over a three-month period. It cannot be said with
certainty that those three months are representative of all time periods. Sercombe
(1997), however, analysed the content of reports in the West Australian over a two-
year period, and found that crime was the major issue in over three fifths of reports.
In the present analysis, crime was the major issue in approximately one fifth of
Australian and Sydney Morning Herald reports and in just over two fifths of Daily
Telegraph reports. Thus, the findings from the present research program are more
likely to be an underestimate than an overestimate of the prevalence of news
reporting of young people as problematic.
The second limitation relates to the nature of the relationship between
newspaper readership and stereotypic beliefs about youth. In the Introduction to this
Chapter, it was suggested that that relationship is bi-directional, such that newspaper
readership shapes stereotypic beliefs, and that those beliefs in turn, predict newspaper
readership. It is acknowledged, however, that reciprocal relationships can only be
established with confidence through time-extended research. Thus, a longitudinal
study is required to clarify the nature of the relationship between media
representations and stereotypic beliefs about youth.
Nevertheless, the association between newspaper readership and stereotypic
beliefs about youth that was demonstrated in Study 6 is consistent with the social
112
cognitive perspective that people seek information that supports their beliefs and
values (Kenrick et al., 1999). Newspaper journalists and editors select news stories
that they know will attract their regular audiences (Windschuttle, 1988). In that way,
stereotypic beliefs are perpetuated, making them more resistant to change. The
broader implications of this will be considered in more detail in Chapter 6.

113
CHAPTER 4
CONS EQUENCES OF STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH
Page
INTRODUCTION 114
STUDY 7: Effects of stereotypic beliefs about youth on evaluations of youth 120
Introduction 120
M ethod 122
Participants 122
M aterials 122
Procedure 126
Summary 133
STUDY 8: Behavioural confirmation of stereotypic beliefs about youth 133
Introduction 133
M ethod 136
Participants 136
M aterials 137
Procedure 138
Observer ratings of the perceiver-target interaction 140
Outside observer ratings 141
Perceivers' and targets' ratings of each other 144
Summary 148
DISCUSSION 149
114
INTRODUCTION
The two studies in this chapter focused on the consequences of stereotypic
beliefs about youth. Stereotypic beliefs about specific groups have been shown to
influence peoples evaluations of those groups (Darley & Gross, 1983; Lepore &
Brown, 1997). Stereotypic beliefs can also affect peoples behaviour toward
members of a stereotyped group (Bargh, Chen, & Burrows, 1996). In many
instances, that behaviour can generate responses from stereotyped individuals that
validate peoples stereotypic beliefs (Chen & Bargh, 1997; Snyder et al., 1977). The
result is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The studies that are reported in this chapter had
two overriding aims. The first was to determine the extent to which stereotypic
beliefs about youth affect adults evaluations of young people. The second aim was
to establish whether stereotypic beliefs about young people result in self-fulfilling
prophecies.
M uch research evidence indicates that people use their stereotypic beliefs
about specific groups when making judgements about individual members of a group
(Banaji et al., 1993; Darley & Gross, 1983; Higgins et al., 1977). M oreover, the
stereotypical information is often used automatically, without peoples awareness of
its influence. For instance, in their pioneering experiment, Higgins et al. (1977)
demonstrated that the presentation of trait category information in one context
influences judgements of an ambiguously described target person in an unrelated
context. Participants were first unobtrusively primed with stimuli related to the traits
reckless or adventurous. In a seemingly unrelated task, participants read a story
that described a person who performed behaviours that were ambiguously relevant to
115
the primed trait (reckless or adventurous). Participants who had been primed with the
stimuli related to recklessness rated the target as more reckless, but those who had
been exposed to the traits related to adventurousness rated the target as more
adventurous. Banaji et al. (1993) extended those findings by showing that the
influence of a primed stereotype on subsequent judgement depends on the
relationship between a targets social category and the stereotype. They were able to
show that priming the trait 'dependent' has different effects on evaluations of male
and female targets. Subjects who were exposed to primes that described dependent
behaviours rated a female target as more dependent than did subjects who rated the
same target after exposure to neutral primes. Subjects exposed to the same
dependence primes, however, judged a male target as less dependent than did subjects
who rated the target after exposure to neutral primes. Further, based on the stereotype
that associates males with aggressiveness, Banaji et al. (1993) found that subjects
who were exposed to aggressive primes judged a male target as more aggressive than
subjects who rated the same target after exposure to neutral primes. Judgements of a
female target did not differ between subjects who were exposed to aggressive primes
and those exposed to neutral primes.
The findings of Higgins et al. (1977) and of Banaji et al. (1993) demonstrated
that stereotypic beliefs about social groups can influence judgements of group
members, without peoples awareness of such influence. Those findings have
potential implications for adult-youth relations. Adults are exposed to information
about young people in a variety of ways, including past experiences with young
people and through the media. If that information portrays certain young people as
116
problematic (as the findings from the previous chapter indicated), it may produce
negative evaluations of all young people. Study 7 in the program of research
therefore sought to determine the effects of exposure to stereotypic information about
youth on evaluations of young people. More specifically, Study 7 investigated
whether the activation of traits comprising the problem kids stereotype in one
context influences the judgements that adults make about young people in an
unrelated context.
The effects of stereotypic beliefs are not limited to judgements or evaluations
of stereotyped group members. Several research findings indicate that stereotypic
beliefs can also affect behaviour toward members of the stereotyped group. For
instance, Bargh et al. (1996) found that participants who had been subliminally
exposed to faces of African American males subsequently reacted with greater
hostility to a request of the experimenter to redo a tedious experimental task,
compared to participants in a control group. Thus, the activation of stereotypic
beliefs can produce stereotype-consistent behaviour in the holders of those beliefs.
Furthermore, perceivers' stereotype-consistent behaviour can cause members of the
stereotyped group to reciprocate with the same stereotype-consistent behaviour,
thereby confirming perceivers' stereotypic beliefs about the group. In such instances,
stereotypes create self-fulfilling prophecies (M erton, 1948) or behavioural
confirmation of perceiver expectancies (Snyder, 1992).
There are three stages involved in the behavioural confirmation process. First,
expectancies about a member of a stereotyped group must be activated in the
perceiver. Second, the activation of the stereotype-based expectancies must affect the
117
perceivers behaviour toward the member of the stereotyped group. The final step in
the self-fulfilling process is that the perceivers behaviour causes the member of the
stereotyped group to reciprocate with stereotype-consistent behaviour (Hamilton et
al., 1990). For example, in an early and now classic experiment, Snyder et al. (1977)
led male perceivers to believe that they would be engaging in a telephone
conversation with either an attractive or an unattractive female target. After engaging
in a getting acquainted conversation, males tended to rate their interaction partners
as attractive, warm, and sociable when they had initially believed them to be
attractive. Furthermore, independent raters, blind to the experimental hypotheses also
rated those females, and their perceiver partners, as more warm and sociable. The
stereotypic information therefore affected the behaviour of the perceivers, which
influenced the actual behaviour of the targets so that perceivers expectancies were
confirmed.
Several researchers have questioned the validity of the behavioural
confirmation effect. According to M iller and Turnbull (1986), laboratory
experiments have been designed to maximise the likelihood of finding self-fulfilling
prophecies. Targets are never informed about perceivers expectancies toward them,
which has been shown to increase the effect (Hilton & Darley, 1985). M iller and
Turnbull (1986) further argued that self-disconfirming prophecies are just as likely as
self-fulfilling ones to develop. If we expect someone to behave in a hostile manner
toward us, we may behave in a friendlier manner so as to prevent a negative
interaction. Jussim (1990) has also criticised the traditional behavioural confirmation
methodology by claiming that nearly all of the experimental studies showing

118
behavioural confirmation effects are flawed because they have given perceivers false
expectancies. In other words, we do not know the extent to which naturally occurring
expectations produce behavioural confirmation effects.
In an attempt to deal with those limitations, Chen and Bargh (1997) proposed
a nonconscious model of behavioural confirmation. They suggested that the mere
presence of an individual member of a stereotyped group can cause the automatic
activation of that stereotype. The activation of that stereotype is then hypothesised to
lead the perceiver to behave in accordance with the activated stereotype. Finally, by
acting in line with the stereotype, but without realising he or she is doing so, the
perceiver elicits similar behaviour from the stereotyped group member in response.
Chen and Bargh (1997) obtained support for their nonconscious model of
behavioural confirmation by showing that the automatic activation of the African
American stereotype produces automatic behavioural confirmation effects. In their
experiment, pairs of participants first worked separately on an identical computer
task. One participant was assigned the role of perceiver and the other participant
was assigned the role of target. In the course of the computer task, perceiver
participants were subliminally presented with photographs of either male African
American faces or male Caucasian faces. Target participants were not presented with
any subliminal photographs in the course of the task. In the next phase, the two
participants (placed in separate rooms) engaged in a verbal game via headphones.
The object of the game was for one individual, the clue-giver, to elicit a series of
words from the other individual, the guesser. After the game, the two participants
gave their impressions of each other on a series of trait rating scales, some related to,
119
and others unrelated to the trait of hostility. They found that target participants who
interacted with perceivers in the African American priming condition were rated as
more hostile than were targets who interacted with perceivers in the Caucasian
priming condition. The hostility ratings were made by perceivers themselves, and by
outside judges who were blind to the experimental hypotheses. M oreover,
mediational analyses showed that the increase in target participants' hostility was due
to increases in perceivers' hostility, thereby confirming the nonconscious behavioural
confirmation model. Study 8 in the present program of research sought to re-examine
Chen and Bargh's (1997) nonconscious behavioural confirmation model with
stereotypic beliefs that young people are problematic. Study 8 investigated the extent
to which automatic activation of the problem kids stereotype can result in
behavioural confirmation of perceivers' expectancies.
Thus, the two studies presented in this chapter addressed two specific
questions. The first determined the extent to which stereotypic beliefs about youth
influence the judgements that adults make about young people (Study 7). The second
question was concerned with the effects of stereotypic beliefs about youth on adults'
interactions with young people (Study 8). The focus was on the problem kids
subtype, given the earlier findings of this research program that indicate it is the most
salient of the youth subtypes.

120
S TUDY 7
Effects of stereotypic beliefs about youth on evaluations of youth
Introduction
Study 7 examined the extent to which peoples implicit stereotypic beliefs
about youth influence their evaluations of young people. The study adopted the
methodology employed by Banaji et al. (1993) in their examination of the influence
of implicit gender stereotypes on evaluations of male and female targets. In their
study, subjects took part in two seemingly unrelated studies. During the first study,
subjects unscrambled sentences that were neutral or that described behaviours
stereotypical of dependence or aggression. In the second study, subjects formed
impressions of a target person as part of a reading comprehension task. The target
paragraphs described a male or female target who performed behaviours weakly
related to the primed traits (dependent or aggressive). They found that although
ratings of female and male targets did not differ after exposure to neutral primes,
subjects who were exposed to dependence primes rated the female target as more
dependent than the male target who performed identical behaviours. Similarly,
subjects rated a male, but not a female, target as more aggressive after exposure to
aggression primes compared with neutral primes.
The present study sought to replicate the findings of Banaji et al. (1993) with
implicit stereotypic beliefs about youth. Adult subjects performed two seemingly
unrelated tasks. First, they were required to unscramble a series of sentences that
were neutral or that described irresponsible and disrespectful behaviours. Earlier
findings of the program of research established that the traits irresponsible and
121
disrespectful are stereotypically associated with youth. Both were rated as
extremely characteristic of young people according to adults knowledge of the
cultural stereotype (Study 1), and the examination of multiple stereotypes of youth
(Study 4) showed that the traits irresponsible and disrespectful were identified as
belonging to the problem kids subtype. For that reason, the unscrambling of
sentences that described irresponsible and disrespectful behaviours in the first task
were used to activate the stereotype of young people as problem kids.
After they had completed the scrambled sentence task, subjects were
presented with an impression formation task. For that task, subjects read a paragraph
that described a youth or an adult target who performed behaviours weakly related to
the traits irresponsible and disrespectful. After reading the paragraph, subjects rated
the target on a series of trait rating scales that were semantically related to either
irresponsible or disrespectful, or were semantically unrelated to those traits, but
evaluatively negative.
Banaji et al. (1993) determined that the influence of a primed stereotype on a
subsequent target evaluation is dependent on the relationship between a targets social
category and the stereotype. That is, incidentally exposed stereotype information is
used only if the social category of the target is relevant to that information. Based on
those findings, Study 7 had two specific hypotheses. First, it was predicted that the
youth target would be rated as more irresponsible and disrespectful by subjects who
were exposed to irresponsible and disrespectful primes than by subjects who were
exposed to neutral primes. Alternatively, because the traits irresponsible and
disrespectful are not stereotypical of adulthood, it was predicted that there would be
122
no effect of prior exposure to the primes on subjects ratings of the adult target. That
is, ratings of the adult target on irresponsibility and disrespectfulness would be lower
than ratings of the youth target on those traits, and should not differ between subjects
who were exposed to the irresponsible and disrespectful primes and those exposed to
neutral primes.
M ethod
Participants
Sixty undergraduate psychology students (ages 18-30, 35 females and 25
males) at the University of New South Wales took part in the study. They
participated either individually or in groups of two or three.
M aterials
Scrambled sentence task. Two sets of scrambled sentences served as the
youth and neutral prime conditions. The sentences comprising the neutral prime
condition were taken from those used by Banaji et al. (1993) in their study of the
effect of gender stereotypes on evaluations of males and females. Ten adults
generated two lists of behaviours to obtain an initial pool of irresponsible and
disrespectful behaviours that would comprise the scrambled sentences for youth
prime condition. The first was characteristic of irresponsibility in young people,
while the second described disrespectfulness in young people (see Appendix C for
the instructions). The adult sample produced 61 irresponsible and disrespectful
behaviours. Each was modified to form a three-word phrase (for example, has bad
manners, leaves electricity running). An independent sample of 10 adults rated
how typical each behaviour was of youth to ensure that the phrases were describing
123
behaviours that were stereotypical of youth. They made their ratings on a scale that
ranged from 1 (Completely describes adults) to 7 (Completely describes youth).
On that scale, a rating of 4 indicated that the behaviour was equally characteristic of
adults and young people (the measure is included in Appendix C). Items with mean
ratings of greater than or equal to 5 were selected for inclusion in the final measure.
To create the scrambled sentences for the priming task, a fourth word was
added to each three-word phrase, and the order of the four words was scrambled. For
all sentences the fourth word was grammatically incorrect. In other words, in order
for subjects to unscramble the words to form a meaningful sentence, they had to
eliminate the incorrect fourth word. Each set of scrambled words began with the
word he. Some examples of sentences in their scrambled form are He the an
answered phone and He uses drugs a illegal. The task required subjects to number,
in their correct order, the three words (excluding the word he as it appeared in all
sentences) that formed a complete sentence. The youth and neutral prime conditions
were created by varying the content of the scrambled sentences. The youth prime
condition consisted of 11 disrespectful behaviours (for example, vandalises public
property, is never grateful), 8 irresponsible behaviours (such as, leaves electricity
running, has unprotected sex), and 9 neutral behaviours (for example, prepared for
it, read the book). The neutral prime condition consisted of 28 neutral behaviours.
The complete sets of youth and neutral primes are presented in Appendix C.
Target paragraph. The target paragraph described a series of activities
involving the target person to be judged. The paragraph was designed to convey the
target person as ambiguously irresponsible and disrespectful. The individual

124
behaviours comprising the paragraph (6 disrespectful and 4 irresponsible) were
pretested with 10 subjects for degree of representativeness of the target traits. Ratings
were made on a 7-point scale that ranged from 1 (Not at all disrespectful or
irresponsible) to 7 (Extremely disrespectful or irresponsible). Only behaviours that
were afforded mean ratings of between 4 and 5 were retained in the paragraph. This
ensured the inclusion of behaviours that were ambiguously related to the relevant
trait. The irresponsible and disrespectful behaviours were embedded in the paragraph
among neutral behaviours. As a final pretest, 10 subjects read the entire paragraph
and rated the target on disrespectfulness and irresponsibility. Ratings were made on
the same 7-point scale as that used to pretest the individual behaviours comprising the
paragraph. The obtained mean ratings were 5.1 and 5.3 for disrespectfulness and
irresponsibility, respectively. Two versions of the target paragraph were created. The
content was identical, however, in one version the target was a young person and in
the other version he was an adult (the final adult and youth versions of the paragraph
are included in Appendix C).
Trait ratings. Subjects rated the target on 14 trait rating scales. The primary
traits of interest were irresponsible and disrespectful. In addition, four traits were
semantically related to the trait disrespectful (rude, insulting, offensive, insolent).
Another four were semantically related to the trait irresponsible (unreliable, selfish,
thoughtless, distrustful). All traits were first pretested for their relatedness to the
relevant trait (that is, disrespectful or irresponsible). Ten subjects rated the extent to
which each was related to either disrespectful or irresponsible. Ratings were made on
a 5-point scale that ranged from 1 (Not at all related) to 5 (Extremely related). All
125
traits were afforded mean ratings of 3.7 or above. The final four traits were
semantically unrelated to the traits disrespectful and irresponsible, although
evaluatively negative (boring, superficial, greedy, narrow-minded). All 14 traits were
equated on ratings of likeability (Anderson, 1968). Subjects made their ratings on a
10-point scale that ranged from 1 (Not at all) to 10 (Extremely). The scales are
included in Appendix C.
Filler task. After reading the target paragraph and before rating the target on
the trait rating scales, subjects were required to complete a filler task that lasted for 6
minutes. The task was a speed and accuracy number checking test. Subjects were
presented with 100 pairs of numerical strings. In each pair, the strings were either
exactly the same or different. Their task was to indicate whether each pair was
exactly the same or different by writing the letter S or D alongside the pair. They
were instructed to complete as many pairs as they could in the allocated time, and
were told to work as quickly as possible, but to be as accurate as possible (the task is
included in Appendix C).
M emory for primes. Banaji et al. (1993) note that it is crucial that subjects are
unaware that the priming stimulus is related to the evaluation of the target. For that
reason, a check was incorporated to ensure that subjects' ratings of the target were not
influenced by their explicit memory for the priming stimuli (that is, the scrambled
sentences). At the end of the experiment, subjects were asked to recall the sentences
that they had unscrambled at the beginning of the session. They were asked to write
down any sentence or part of a sentence, even single words that they could recall
from the unscrambling task.

126
Procedure
Subjects were informed that they would be taking part in a study that was
concerned with individual differences in language and numerical ability. Their
participation required that they complete four separate tasks. First, they were
presented with the scrambled sentence task. Upon completion, the target paragraph
was introduced. Subjects were told that the experimenter was interested in how
people form impressions of others. They were then given 5 minutes to read the target
paragraph. After completing the 6-minute filler task, subjects rated the target on the
14 trait rating scales. Finally, subjects were asked to recall as many sentences as they
could from the scrambled sentences task. They were then screened for an awareness
of the relationship between the scrambled sentence task and the target paragraph and
fully debriefed.
None of the subjects indicated that they were aware of the connection between
the priming and the evaluation tasks. Responses from all 60 subjects were therefore
included in the analyses. Subjects ratings on the two target traits, irresponsible and
disrespectful, were analysed separately. Ratings on the remaining 12 traits were
analysed by the following categories semantically related to irresponsible,
semantically related to disrespectful, and semantically unrelated evaluatively
negative. Ratings on the four traits within each of those categories were summed to
compute a total score. Each data set was then analysed as a two-way, between-
subjects analysis of variance (Prime type: youth or neutral 2 Target age: youth or
adult), with subject age entered as a covariate. All analyses were performed using
127
SPSS for Windows (Norusis, 1993). Summaries of statistical analyses are presented
in Appendix C.
Analyses of target ratings on the trait irresponsible revealed no main effects of
Prime type or of Target age. The predicted Prime type Target age interaction was
not obtained, t (58) = 1.73, p=.09. Table 4.1 shows, however, that subjects in the
youth prime condition rated the youth target as slightly more irresponsible than did
subjects in the neutral prime condition. Although that difference was expected, it was
not significant. As predicted, however, ratings of the adult target on irresponsible did
not differ between subjects in the youth and neutral priming conditions. Table 4.1
also shows an unexpected trend toward subjects in the neutral prime condition rating
the adult target as more irresponsible than the youth target. Finally, although
unpredicted, a significant effect was obtained for the covariate, subject age,
t (58) = -3.41, p<.01. Higher ratings of the target on irresponsible were associated
with younger subjects.
Table 4.1
M ean ratings of irresponsibility as a function of Prime type and Target age
Prime type
Target age Youth Neutral
M SD M SD
Youth 7.47 1.5 6.53 1.8
Adult 7.00 2.1 7.20 2.0
Note:
Means should be compared horizontally and vertically. A higher mean score reflects greater
irresponsibility.
128
There were no main effects of Prime type or Target age on disrespectful. The
predicted Prime type Target age interaction was not obtained t (58) = 1.47, p=.15.
In accordance with predictions, however, ratings of the youth target were higher on
disrespectfulness for subjects in the youth prime condition than for subjects in the
neutral prime condition, t (28) = 2.33, p<.05. Further, ratings of the adult target on
disrespectfulness were statistically equivalent for subjects in the youth and neutral
prime conditions. Contrary to expectation, however, for subjects in the neutral prime
condition, ratings of the adult target on disrespectfulness were marginally, but not
significantly, higher than were ratings of the youth target. For subjects in the youth
prime condition, ratings of the youth target on disrespectfulness were only slightly
higher than ratings of the adult target. The pattern of means is presented in Table 4.2.
Consistent with the findings of the first analysis, a significant main effect of subject
age on disrespectful was obtained t (58) = -3.52, p<.01. Younger subjects gave
higher target ratings of disrespectfulness than did older subjects.
Table 4.2
M ean disrespectfulness ratings as a function of Prime type and Target age
Prime type
Target age Youth Neutral
M SD M SD
Youth 7.60a 1.3 6.20b 1.8
Adult 7.27a 2.0 7.07a,b 2.0
Note:
Means should be compared horizontally and vertically. Means that differ significantly have different
subscripts. A higher mean score reflects greater disrespectfulness.
129
Ratings of the target on the traits that were semantically related to
irresponsible and disrespectful were consistent with the findings from the first two
analyses. No main effects of Prime type or Target age were obtained. In addition,
the Prime type Target age interaction was not significant in either analysis. For the
analysis of target ratings on traits that were semantically related to disrespectful, no
trends in the pattern of means were obtained. However, for the analysis of traits that
were semantically related to irresponsible, ratings of the youth target on traits that
were semantically related to irresponsible were significantly higher for subjects in the
youth prime condition than subjects in the neutral prime condition, t (28) = 2.01,
p=.05. Ratings of the adult target were also in accordance with predictions. Those
ratings were almost identical for subjects in the youth prime and neutral prime
conditions. There was a trend towards subjects in the youth prime condition rating
youth targets (M = 7.57) marginally higher than adult targets (M = 7.08). Further,
subjects in the neutral prime condition rated the adult target (M = 7.15) slightly
higher than the youth target (M = 6.28) on traits that were semantically related to
irresponsible, although once again, that difference was not significant. Finally,
significant effects for subject age were obtained (t (58) = -3.46, p<.01 and
t (58) = -2.99, p<.01, for traits that were semantically related to irresponsible and
disrespectful, respectively). Younger subjects gave higher ratings of the target on
traits that were semantically related to irresponsible and disrespectful than did older
subjects.
The final analysis was performed using the ratings of the target on traits that
were evaluatively negative, but semantically unrelated to irresponsible and

130
disrespectful. No significant main effects for Prime type or Target age were obtained.
The effect for subject age was significant, t (58) = -1.98, p=.05. Once again, younger
subjects gave higher target ratings on traits that were evaluatively negative but
semantically unrelated to irresponsible and disrespectful than did older subjects. No
other significant results or trends were obtained.
Taken together, the findings of the present study provide partial support for
the experimental hypotheses. It was predicted that a youth target but not an adult
target would be evaluated as more irresponsible and disrespectful after exposure to
irresponsible and disrespectful primes than after exposure to neutral primes. In all
analyses, a youth target was judged to be more irresponsible and disrespectful by
subjects who were exposed to irresponsible and disrespectful primes than by subjects
who were exposed to neutral primes. Significant differences were only obtained,
however, for target ratings on the trait disrespectful and on traits that were
semantically related to irresponsible. Contrary to expectation, however, for subjects
exposed to irresponsible and disrespectful primes, ratings of the youth target were
never statistically different from ratings of the adult target, although they were always
marginally higher. There are at least two plausible explanations for this finding.
First, the increased ratings of the adult target on disrespectful and irresponsible might
have been due to subjects superior explicit memory for the primes in the adult target
condition. If subjects who rated the adult target recalled more of the irresponsible
and disrespectful primes than subjects who rated the youth target, that could account
for their higher than expected target ratings on irresponsible and disrespectful. To
explore this possibility, subjects' memory for the primes was examined.
131
Two coders independently rated each subject's recall of the priming sentences.
The responses of subjects in the youth prime condition only were coded, given that
the neutral primes could not have influenced target ratings. The 5-point scoring
system that was employed by Banaji et al. (1993) was used in the present study. For
each sentence, the coders assigned one of five possible scores: 1 (perfect recall), 2
(conceptually identical recall), 3 (at least one key word recalled), 4 (at least one key
word recalled, but with altered meaning), or 5 (incorrect recall). Ninety-four percent
of independent codings were in agreement. The remainder was resolved by
discussion. Following Banaji et al. (1993), a subject was considered to have recalled
a prime if the sentence was coded as belonging to any one of the first three categories
in the scoring scheme. The total number of irresponsible and disrespectful primes
recalled was computed for each subject. Memory for the primes was then compared
between subjects in the youth and adult target conditions. Subjects who rated the
adult target did not recall significantly more youth primes (M = 3.40) than did
subjects who judged the youth target (M =2.27), t (28) = -1.59, p=.12. Thus, the
higher than expected disrespectful and irresponsible ratings of the adult target could
not be explained in terms of explicit memory for the primes.
There is an alternative explanation for the increased irresponsible and
disrespectful ratings of the adult target. Judgements of the adult target by subjects in
both the youth and neutral prime conditions may have approached the ratings of the
youth target by subjects in the youth prime condition because adults, in general, are
expected to behave in a responsible and respectful way. Given that we expect adults
to be responsible and respectful, it is possible that when an adult behaves in an

132
irresponsible and disrespectful manner we might judge him or her as negatively as we
would a teenager.
To pursue this possibility, 40 adults (mean age = 42.3, SD = 17.2) read the
target paragraph that was used in this study. This time, however, any identifying
information regarding the age of the target was omitted. After reading the paragraph,
subjects were required to indicate whether they would judge an adult or a teenager
more harshly for engaging in those behaviours. Thirty-four of 40 subjects indicated
that they would judge an adult more harshly than they would a teenager. In addition,
an independent sample of 30 adults (mean age = 37.5, SD = 11.5) read the target
paragraph and indicated whether they thought that the target was more likely to be a
teenager or an adult. Twenty-eight of 30 subjects revealed that the target was most
likely a teenager. Taken together, those findings suggest that the behaviours engaged
in by the target were stereotypical of adolescence, although because adults are not
expected to engage in those behaviours, they are evaluated more negatively than a
teenager for doing so. Future investigations should therefore employ a different
comparison group. Buchanan and Holmbeck (1998) compared beliefs about
adolescents with the same peoples beliefs about primary school children. They
found that adolescents were rated more negatively than were primary school children.
Adolescents were, for example, judged as more risk-taking and rebellious and as
more involved in problem behaviours than were primary school children. In addition,
due to their age, primary school children are likely to be judged more leniently than
teenagers for irresponsible or disrespectful behaviour. Primary school children may

133
therefore serve as a more appropriate comparison group in future investigations of
stereotypic beliefs about adolescence.
Summary
Contrary to expectation, subjects in the present study did not rate a youth
target as more irresponsible and disrespectful than an adult target following exposure
to irresponsible and disrespectful primes. As predicted, however, subjects who were
exposed to irresponsible and disrespectful primes did rate a youth target as more
irresponsible and disrespectful than did subjects who were exposed to neutral primes.
This suggests that implicit stereotypic beliefs about youth do have an effect on the
judgements that adults make about young people.
S TUDY 8
Behavioural confirmation of stereotypic beliefs about youth
Introduction
Study 8 investigated the extent to which stereotypic beliefs about young
people contribute to self-fulfilling prophecies, or the behavioural confirmation of
perceiver expectancies. There were two overriding goals. The first was to determine
whether the automatic activation of stereotypic beliefs about youth can cause the
holders of those beliefs to act in stereotype-consistent ways. The second goal was to
examine whether perceivers' stereotype-consistent behaviour can cause members of
the stereotyped group to reciprocate with stereotype-consistent behaviour, thereby
confirming perceivers' stereotypic beliefs. Chen and Bargh (1997) examined the
automatic behavioural confirmation of the African American stereotype. That
methodology, which has already been described in the Introduction to this chapter,
134
was modified for use in the present investigation. In the present study, pairs of
participants first engaged in a word guessing game, where one participant (the target)
tried to guess a series of words based on clues given by the other participant (the
perceiver). After three minutes, they switched roles so that the target became the clue
giver and the perceiver became the word guesser. Their interaction was recorded on
separate channels of a tape recorder. On completion of the game, the two participants
gave their initial impressions of one another on a series of trait rating scales, some
related to and others unrelated to the trait 'rude'. This was done in order to obtain
baseline ratings of rudeness for both participants. The trait rude was chosen as a
result of earlier findings of the research program. Rude was rated as extremely
characteristic of youth according to adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype
(Study 1) and it was identified as belonging to the problem kids youth subtype
(Study 4).
After indicating their initial impressions of each other, participants worked
separately on a computer-based reaction time task. For that task, a series of animate
and inanimate objects appeared one at a time on the centre of the screen. Immediately
after an object disappeared from the screen, participants were required to report as
quickly and as accurately as possible whether the object was animate or inanimate.
For half of the perceivers, the animate objects were pictures of teenage male faces.
The youth photographs were selected to activate participants' implicit stereotypic
beliefs that young people are problematic. For the remaining perceivers, and for all
of the targets, the animate stimuli were adult male faces.

135
After they had completed the computer task, participants engaged in a second
round of the word-guessing game. Once again, the perceiver began as the clue giver
and the target as the word guesser. After three minutes, they switched roles and
continued to play for a further three minutes. Finally, they rated each other on the
same trait rating scales as those used to indicate their initial impressions of one
another. The purpose in doing so was to establish whether their impressions had
changed as a result of their second interaction, or had remained the same.
The experimental design that was employed in the present study improves on
that used by Chen and Bargh (1997) in their investigation of automatic behavioural
confirmation of the African American stereotype. In their study, perceiver-target
partners gave their impressions of one another only after the perceivers received the
priming stimuli. Given that no baseline ratings of the trait of interest (hostile) were
gathered, it is not possible to conclude that priming of the African American
stereotype produced differences in hostility between the experimental conditions. In
other words, perceivers who received the prime could have, as a group, been more
hostile than perceivers who did not receive the prime. For that reason, perceivers and
targets in the present study gave their impressions of one another both before and
after the priming manipulation.
In this study it was predicted that, compared to their initial ratings of each
other, target participants who interacted with perceiver participants who had been
primed with youth faces would exhibit greater rudeness after perceivers exposure to
the youth faces. The increase in rudeness would be rated by their perceiver-
participant partners, and by outside observers listening to tape recordings of the

136
interactions. Targets in the adult prime condition, however, were not expected to
exhibit an increase in rudeness from before and after the priming manipulation. It
was further predicted that the increased rudeness of the target participants in the
youth prime condition would be mediated by the increased rudeness of the perceiver
participants, as a consequence of the automatic activation of the youth stereotype.
M ethod
Participants
Sixty (ages 18-34, 30 males and 30 females) undergraduate psychology
students at the University of New South Wales took part in the study. Participants
were scheduled in pairs. For each pair, the two participants were of the same sex and
were previously unacquainted.
M aterials
Interaction task. Two microphones and two headphones were connected to a
tape recorder. By wearing the headphones and speaking into the microphones, each
pair of participants could converse with one another from different rooms and without
any visual contact. Each participants part of the conversation was recorded on a
separate channel of the tape recorder. This allowed the outside observers to listen to
the tapes later on and to judge each participant for degree of rudeness, in isolation
from the other participants part of the conversation.
The word game Taboo by M ilton Bradley was used for the interaction task.
Players were given a pile of cards and on each card was a target word. Below the
target word were a series of taboo words that were related to the target word. For
example, one target word was marriage, and the taboo words below were wedding,
137
husband, wife, ceremony, and vows. The object of the game was for one player to
give his or her partner clues to guess the target word at the top of each card. In giving
clues, however, the player could not say any of the taboo words that were on the card.
Nor could the player spell the word, or use any derivatives of the word. Each player
was given 3 minutes to help his or her partner to guess as many words as possible.
Priming task. Two IBM compatible computers were used to present the
priming stimuli. The priming procedure employed was that of M acrae, Bodenhausen,
M ilne, Thorn, and Castelli (1997). Participants were presented with 30 stimuli, 15 of
which were photographs of inanimate objects (for example, a chair, a watch, a kettle).
For half of the perceivers, the remaining 15 stimuli were photographs of male
teenagers that were taken from popular youth magazines. The youth photographs
were selected to activate the problem kids subtype of youth that was identified in
Study 4 of the research program. For the remaining perceivers, and for all of the
targets, the 15 animate stimuli were photographs of male adults that were taken from
business-related magazines. Each stimulus was presented in the centre of the screen,
one at a time. Given that the study was concerned with automatic stereotype
activation, each priming stimulus was presented to subjects for only 255 milliseconds
(M acrae et al., 1997). This was done to prevent subjects from engaging in any
controlled processing of the stimuli. Immediately after a stimulus disappeared from
the screen, subjects had to report, by pressing the appropriate key, whether the
stimulus represented an animate or inanimate object. If the object was animate, they
pressed the A key. If it was inanimate, they pressed the 5 key on the right side
numeric keypad.
138
Impression formation questionnaire. After both rounds of the word guessing
game, participants gave their impressions of one another on a series of trait rating
scales. The primary trait of interest was rude. Five additional traits were
semantically related to the trait rude (arrogant, insulting, offensive, impolite, and
courteous [reverse scored]). In order to establish whether priming of the youth
stereotype results in increased rudeness specifically or an increase in negative
behaviour in general, participants also rated each other on 5 traits semantically
unrelated to rude, but evaluatively negative (boring, superficial, narrow-minded,
humourless, incompetent). The 5 traits that were semantically related to the trait rude
had been afforded mean ratings of 3.8 and above on a 5-point scale that ranged from
1 (Not at all related to rude) to 5 (Extremely related to rude) by a group of 10
pretest subjects. The semantically unrelated evaluatively negative traits were equated
with the trait rude on ratings of likeability (Anderson, 1968). To indicate their
impressions of one another, participants rated their interaction partner on the 11 traits
on scales that ranged from 1 (Not at all) to 10 (Extremely). The scales are
included in Appendix C.
Procedure
To ensure that participants did not see each other prior to the start of the
experiment, they were told to arrive at separate rooms on separate floors. The
experimenter brought them separately to their respective rooms, which were
interconnecting. The experimenter then stood in the doorway between the two rooms
and explained that the research was investigating whether individuals work
differently when alone versus with others. They would therefore first work on a
139
verbal task together and then work on a computer task by themselves. The
experimenter then explained the word guessing game to the participants and gave
each of them a pile of cards. The perceiver participant then began as clue giver.
Three minutes later, they switched roles. After a further 3 minutes, the experimenter
informed the participants (separately, in their own rooms) that the next task was to
indicate their initial impressions of their interaction partner. They were told that their
responses would remain confidential and that their partner would not see them.
After they had indicated their initial impressions of one another, they
completed the computer-based reaction time task. As part of this task, perceiver
participants were presented with faces of male teenagers or adults. All targets were
presented with faces of male adults. Upon completion of the computer task,
participants engaged in a second round of the word guessing game. Once again, the
perceiver began as the clue giver and the target as the word guesser. After three
minutes, they switched roles. Finally, the experimenter told the participants (again,
separately in their own rooms) that now that they had interacted with their partner a
second time, it was possible that their impressions of one another may have changed.
For that reason, the last task would be to complete the impression formation task
again, only taking into account their second interaction. They were told that it was of
interest to see whether their impressions had changed since their initial ratings, or
whether they had stayed the same. Finally, participants were probed for an awareness
of the connection between the computer task and the word guessing game and then
fully debriefed.
140
Observer ratings of the perceiver-target interaction
Two judges, blind to the experimental hypotheses, listened to the tape
recordings of each of the 60 participants. Their task was to rate participants for the
degree of rudeness that was displayed. Perceiver and target participants had been
recorded on separate channels of the tape recorder, and so only one individual
participant could be heard on a given channel. Tape recordings were therefore
presented to the judges in a randomised order, and ratings were made of individual
participants, rather than of perceiver-target pairs. The rating scale was adapted from
Chen and Barghs (1997) hostility rating scale. Essentially, the scale that was used in
the present study ranged from 1 (Not at all rude) to 7 (Extremely rude). For each
point on the scale, however, detailed descriptions were given to indicate the type of
behaviour that would warrant the affording of that score to a participant. The
complete scale is included in Appendix C. Reliability analyses revealed a Cronbachs
alpha of .82 for this scoring method. It was therefore possible to use the mean of the
two sets of ratings in order to assign a single rudeness rating to each participant.
The findings are presented in two sections. First, the results from the
analyses of the outside observer ratings are detailed. The second section presents the
findings from the perceiver and target ratings of one another. All analyses were
performed using SPSS for Windows (Norusis, 1993). Summaries of statistical
analyses are presented in Appendix C.

141
Outside observer ratings
Judges who were blind to the experimental hypotheses rated the verbal
behaviour of each participant for the degree of rudeness. Those ratings were entered
into a repeated measures analysis of variance, with Prime (youth or adult) as the
between subjects factor and Role (perceiver or target) and Time (before prime or after
1
prime) as the within subjects factors . The main effect of Prime was significant, with
greater verbal rudeness for both perceiver and target participants in the youth than in
the adult priming condition (F (1, 25) = 6.77, p<.05). In addition, a significant Prime
Time interaction was obtained (F (1, 25) = 9.30, p<.05). That interaction is
illustrated graphically in Figure 4.1. Before the prime was introduced, observer
ratings of rudeness were similar for participants in the youth and adult prime
conditions. After the priming manipulation, however, observer ratings of rudeness
increased for participants in the youth prime condition only. Rudeness ratings of
participants in the adult prime condition changed only slightly.
1
Three pairs of subjects were excluded from all analyses because their mean rudeness ratings
identified them as outliers (2 SD + M). Analyses were therefore performed on 27 pairs of participants.
142
4
Mean rudeness rating
youth prime
3.5
adult prime
3
2.5
2
before prime after prime
Time
Figure 4.1
The interaction between Time (before or after prime) and Prime (youth or adult) on
observer ratings of participant rudeness
Evidence of a self-fulfilling prophecy effect requires that there should be an
increase in rudeness specifically for target participants (Chen & Bargh, 1997). For
that reason, a one way analysis of variance was conducted for the influence of the
priming manipulation on targets' rudeness. Before the introduction of the prime,
targets in the youth prime condition did not differ from targets in the adult prime
condition in their displayed levels of rudeness (F (1, 25) = 1.12, p=.30). After the
prime was introduced, however, targets in the youth prime condition exhibited greater
behavioural rudeness than did targets in the adult prime condition (F (1, 25) = 6.98,
p<.05). Similarly, perceivers in the youth prime condition were not rated by the
observers as ruder than perceivers in the adult prime condition before introduction of
143
the prime (F (1, 25) = 0.10, p=.95). Following the priming manipulation, however,
perceivers in the youth prime condition were judged as ruder than were perceivers in
the adult prime condition (F (1, 25) = 4.53, p<.05). The prediction that perceivers
and targets in the youth prime condition would exhibit greater rudeness than
perceivers and targets in the adult prime condition was therefore supported.
A further prediction was that the increased rudeness of the target participants
in the youth prime condition would be mediated by the increased rudeness of their
perceiver partners. Regression analyses were performed to determine whether the
effect of prime type (youth or adult) on target rudeness was entirely mediated by
perceiver rudeness. First, prime type was found to have a direct effect on target
rudeness ( = .47, p<.05). The effect of prime type on perceiver rudeness was also
significant ( = .39, p<.05), as was the effect of perceiver rudeness on target rudeness
( = .51, p<.05). The criteria that must be met to test for mediation were thus
satisfied (Baron & Kenny, 1986). It was possible to test for the effect of prime type
on target rudeness, mediated by perceiver rudeness. The results of those analyses are
presented in Figure 4.2. The effect of prime type on target rudeness was entirely
mediated by perceiver rudeness, as the direct effect of prime type on target rudeness
became non-significant when all three variables were entered into the analysis. Prime
type, however, remained a significant predictor of perceiver rudeness.

144
Perceiver
rudeness
.51*
.39*
Prime Target
type rudeness
.32 (.47*)
Figure 4.2
Target rudeness ratings as a function of prime type, mediated via perceiver rudeness
ratings
Taken together, the analyses that were conducted on the observer ratings of
participants' rudeness supported all the predictions regarding the automatic
behavioural confirmation of stereotypic beliefs about youth. The remainder of the
Results section presents the findings of the analyses that were conducted on
perceivers' and targets' ratings of each other.
Perceivers' and targets' ratings of each other
In order for the behavioural confirmation of stereotypic beliefs to be
demonstrated, the perceivers for whom the particular stereotype has been activated
must leave the interaction believing that the targets with whom they interacted
behaved in a stereotype-consistent way, compared to the impressions formed of
targets by perceivers whose stereotypic beliefs were not activated (Chen & Bargh,
1997). In the present study, therefore, participants gave their impressions of one
another on a series of trait rating scales, some related to and other unrelated to the
trait rude. They rated their partner twice, once before and once after the priming
145
manipulation. Four total scores were therefore computed for each participant. The
first two were total scores for the ratings of the traits that were semantically related to
rude, before and after the prime was introduced. The other two total scores were for
the ratings of the traits that were semantically unrelated to rude but evaluatively
negative, before and after the priming manipulation. Those scores were then
subjected to two repeated measures analyses of variance with Prime (youth or adult)
and Role (perceiver or target) as the between subjects factors and Time (before or
after prime) as the within subjects factor. The first analysis used the total rating
scores for the traits that were semantically related to rude, while the second used the
total rating scores for the traits that were semantically unrelated to rude but
evaluatively negative.
When the two analyses were carried out, none of the effects were found to be
significant, all Fs < 2.79 (Fc = 4.03). In other words, perceivers in the youth prime
condition did not rate their target partners as ruder, or even more negative generally,
than perceivers in the adult prime condition. There are at least two plausible
explanations for this finding. First, in the present study, perceivers and targets rated
each other both before and after the priming manipulation. Previous researchers of
self-fulfilling prophecies have failed to incorporate a pre/post prime factor. This
means that researchers cannot be sure that the priming manipulation was responsible
for producing any differences between conditions. It is possible, however, that the
incorporation of the pre/post prime factor introduced a perseverance bias. That bias
refers to the persistence of ones initial impressions, even when the basis for those
impressions has been discredited (M yers, 1999). This is, in part, due to the fact that
146
our initial impressions alter the interpretation of later information (Smith & M ackie,
1995). There is substantial empirical evidence documenting that initial impressions
are resistant to change (Davies, 1997; Gilbert, Krull, & Malone, 1990; Kulik, 1983;
Thompson, Fong, & Rosenhan, 1981). It is therefore possible that because subjects in
the youth prime condition had initially formed a positive impression of their
interaction partner, they were reluctant to alter that impression despite changes in the
behaviour of their partner.
There are two problems with this explanation. First, positive first impressions
are more easily altered than negative first impressions (Forgas, 1992). It is therefore
unlikely that, following the second interaction, participants rude behaviour would
have been ignored so as to maintain the initial positive impression. The second
limitation of the perseverance bias relates to the finding that asking subjects to
consider alternative explanations of the same event can eliminate perseverance effects
(Hirt & M arkman, 1995). In the present study, before participants rated their partner
for the second time, they were explicitly informed that it is likely that their
impressions of their partner may have changed since their initial interaction. The
instructions on the questionnaire stated that now that you have interacted with your
partner a second time, your impressions of him or her might well have changed. It is
therefore unlikely that the pre/post prime design would have introduced a
perseverance bias.
There is an alternative explanation for the failure of perceivers in the present
study to have their stereotypes confirmed. Participants in the youth prime condition
may have been reluctant to rate each other as rude because of impression
147
management or self-presentational factors. Social desirability is a response set
characterised by answering questions in the direction that is most socially accepted
regardless of whether the answer is actually correct for the respondent (Neale &
Liebert, 1986). In other words, in an attempt to create a favourable impression of
themselves to the experimenter, participants in the youth prime condition could have
deliberately provided socially desirable ratings of their interaction partner. To further
pursue that explanation, participants ratings of their interaction partner on the trait
rude were compared to the rudeness ratings of participants that were provided by the
outside observers. Given that participants and observers made their ratings on
different scales, it was first necessary to transform both sets of ratings to z scores. The
two sets of ratings that were made after the priming manipulation were compared
using paired samples t tests. It was found that outside observers ratings of the targets
were higher than perceivers ratings of targets, t (26) = 11.27, p = 0.0. Similarly,
outside observers rudeness ratings of perceivers were higher than targets ratings of
perceivers, t (26) = 9.39, p = 0.0. M oreover, outside observers ratings of target
rudeness prior to the priming manipulation were higher than the perceivers rudeness
ratings of their target partners, t (26) = 10.85, p = 0.0. Likewise, outside observers
ratings of perceivers rudeness prior to the priming manipulation were higher than
targets ratings of perceivers, t (26) = 12.59, p = 0.0. Thus, participants ratings of
each other were always more positive than the ratings afforded by outside observers,
regardless of the prime condition or whether it had been introduced. This supports
the proposal that the failure of perceiver participants to have their stereotypes
confirmed can be attributed to social desirability. Self-presentation is therefore the

148
more plausible explanation for the failure to detect a significant difference in
participants ratings of each other between the priming conditions.
Summary
Study 8 investigated whether stereotypic beliefs about youth can elicit self-
fulfilling prophecies. Those effects were witnessed in the ratings that were made by
outside observers. Observers who were blind to the experimental hypotheses
considered target participants in the youth prime condition to have behaved with
greater rudeness than those in the adult prime condition. Those targets did not
themselves receive the youth prime, but interacted with perceivers who were exposed
to faces of young people. Further, the increase in targets rudeness was brought about
by an increase in the perceivers own rudeness which was, in turn, caused by the
priming manipulation. Perceiver participants in the youth prime condition did not,
however, rate their target partners as ruder than did perceiver participants in the adult
prime condition. The failure of perceivers in the youth prime condition to have their
stereotypes 'confirmed' was most likely due to self-presentational factors.
Nevertheless, the fact that outside observers detected greater rudeness from
perceivers and targets in the youth prime condition than from perceivers and targets
in the adult prime condition indicates that stereotypic beliefs about youth can elicit
self-fulfilling prophecies. Study 8 has demonstrated the powerful influence of
stereotypic beliefs about youth to create actual confirming evidence in young
peoples behaviour, via the effect of stereotypic beliefs on the behaviour of the holder
of those beliefs.
149
DISCUS S ION
The studies reported in this chapter investigated the extent to which
stereotypic beliefs about youth affect adults' evaluations of young people, and their
interactions with young people. Consistent with earlier findings of the research
program, both investigations focused on the problem kids subtype. The findings
from Study 7 showed that stereotypic beliefs about youth do influence evaluations of
young people. Adults who were presented with traits belonging to the problem kids
subtype evaluated a young male as more irresponsible and disrespectful than did
adults who were not previously exposed to those traits. Social behaviour is often
ambiguous, and so much of what we learn about other people is open to interpretation
(Hamilton et al., 1990). The findings from Study 7 revealed that adults stereotypic
beliefs that young people are problematic can affect their interpretation of such
ambiguous behaviour in young people. In Study 8, it was shown that adults
stereotyped expectancies that young people are problem kids can influence their
behaviour toward young people in such a way that stereotype-consistent behaviour is
actually elicited from young people.
In both studies, the activation of the youth stereotype in one context produced
effects in an unrelated context. Incidental exposure to stereotyped information
influenced judgements and behaviours without participants awareness of that
influence. That effect was demonstrated most powerfully in Study 8 when exposure
to faces of young people elicited automatic behavioural confirmation of stereotyped
expectancies. M ere exposure to a young person is sufficient to activate stereotypic
beliefs about young people and to influence behaviour.

150
That the judgements and behaviours of adult participants were influenced
without their knowledge has important implications for the perseverance of
stereotypic beliefs about youth. Because stereotypic beliefs are used automatically in
judgements about young people and in behaviour toward them, adults are unable to
prevent that usage (cf. Banaji et al., 1993). Thus, each judgement of a young person
as irresponsible, disrespectful, or rude, reinforces the association between the social
category of youth and those characteristics. In that way, stereotypic beliefs about
youth are perpetuated. The broader implications of these findings are considered in
more detail in Chapter 6.

151
CHAPTER 5
A STRUCTURAL MODEL OF PROBLEM BEHAVIOUR:
THE ROLE OF YOUNG PEOPLES PERCEPTIONS OF ADULTS BELIEFS
Page
INTRODUCTION 152
STUDY 9: Evaluating a model of problem behaviour 161
Introduction 161
M ethod 162
Participants 162
M aterials 162
Procedure 167
Characteristics of the sample 168
Evaluating the model of problem behaviour 171
Subsidiary path analyses 186
Summary 195
152
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents Study 9. Its focus was on young peoples perceptions of
adults beliefs about them. The study examined the way those beliefs influence
young peoples engagement in problem behaviour, in interaction with established
correlates of problem behaviour. Recent research into the causes of problem
behaviour has demonstrated greater theoretical integration of the relationships among
social structural, person-centred, and environmental factors that are known to play
important roles (Sullivan & Wilson, 1995). Surprisingly, however, community-based
factors have been largely neglected. Study 9 investigated the role of young peoples
perceptions of community beliefs in their engagement in problematic behaviour. This
was explored via the testing of a structural model of problem behaviour.
The model that was formulated for this program of research took as its starting
point Thornberrys (1987) interactional theory of delinquency. Thornberry suggested
that the fundamental cause of delinquency lies in the weakening of social restraints.
The attenuation of those restraints, however, does not lead directly to delinquency.
Rather, for delinquency to occur, it must be learned and performed in situations that
provide reinforcement. Most importantly, Thornberry views delinquency as part of
an ongoing social process, rather than simply as an outcome of other social factors.
In that way, the variables in the model are reciprocally interrelated, mutually affecting
one another over time.
The model that was formulated for this research moves beyond interactional
theory in three important ways. First, the model proposes that young peoples
perceptions of adults beliefs about them contribute to engagement in problem

153
behaviour. Second, the model that was formulated for the present study includes two
personal control variables. Finally, in the present model, alienation or normlessness
is proposed to mediate the relationships among the social and personal control factors
and problem behaviour.
Interactional theory combines social control (Hirschi, 1969) and social
learning (Akers, 1977; Bandura, 1973) theories. According to social control theorists,
the weakening of social bonds to conventional society is the fundamental cause of
problem behaviour. There are two primary mechanisms by which young people are
bonded to conventional society, parental attachment and commitment to school.
Parental attachment is widely held to be a crucial determinant of adolescent
adjustment (Fergusson & Horwood, 1999; Noller & Patton, 1990; Peterson, 1990). It
has two core components, parental care and overprotection. Both of those are further
broken down into maternal and paternal care, and maternal and paternal
overprotection (Parker, Tupling & Brown, 1979). Low levels of parental (especially
maternal) care, characterised by emotional coldness or indifference, and high levels
of overprotection, identified by intrusion and the prevention of independent
behaviour, have been linked to a range of negative outcomes for young people,
including self-reported delinquency (M ak, 1994) and alcohol use (M ak & Kinsella,
1996).
Commitment to school is a second important mechanism by which young
people are bonded to conventional society. It is through the school environment that
the behaviour and value patterns that regulate social life are transferred (Scholte,
1992). School failure, suspension and marginalisation can lead young people to
154
disengage themselves from the conventional ties of school life. That in turn,
heightens their propensity for engagement in problem behaviour (Knight, 1997).
Poor commitment to school, identified by poor relationships with teachers and peers,
difficulty with school discipline, curriculum and workload, and a failure to recognise
the relevance to future employment, has been shown to be related to higher levels of
self-reported delinquency (M ak, 1990).
A central prediction of this study was that young peoples negative
perceptions of adults beliefs about them are a third mechanism by which young
people can become disengaged from conventional society. The principle of reflected
appraisals has already been discussed in Chapters 1 and 2 of this thesis. It derives
from symbolic interactionist theory and refers to the idea that peoples self-concepts
are a reflection of how they appear to others. M atsueda (1992) drew on symbolic
interactionist theory to explain delinquent behaviour. He claimed that young peoples
reflected appraisals of themselves as bad kids or rule violators increase the
likelihood that they will engage in delinquent behaviour. Delinquent labels are most
likely to be applied to young people who engage in rule-violating behaviours.
M atsueda asserted, however, that because the community tends to act on stereotypical
images of delinquency, some young people, including the disadvantaged and the
powerless, are likely to be labelled that way, irrespective of their behaviour.
Delinquent labels, in turn, influence the self images of young people. They come to
view themselves from the standpoint of others as delinquent, which increases the
likelihood of their engagement in problem behaviour. M atsueda has obtained some
empirical support for his theory. In a two-year longitudinal study of delinquency,

155
parental appraisals were found to have strong effects on young peoples reflected
appraisals of the self as rule violator. Reflected appraisals, in turn, significantly
affected engagement in problem behaviour (Bartusch & Matsueda, 1996).
In accordance with social control theory, it has been argued thus far that
individuals who are attached to their parents, committed to school, and have positive
perceptions of adults beliefs about them are unlikely to engage in delinquent
behaviour. A major criticism of social control theory, however, is its neglect of
person-centred factors in the explanation of delinquency (M ak, 1990). Research on
adolescence has increasingly focused on the importance of the social context, on the
individuality of persons, and on the person-context interaction (Jessor, 1993).
Consistent with that view, any comprehensive account of problem behaviour should
include both social context and individual difference variables. Reiss (1951)
distinguished between social and personal control variables in the aetiology of
problem behaviour. Social control refers to the ability of social groups (characterised
in this study as the family, school, and broader community) to make social norms
effective. In contrast, personal control refers to the ability of the individual to refrain
from meeting needs in ways that conflict with social rules (M ak, 1990). The model
that was formulated for this study therefore extended social control theory, and
Thornberrys (1987) interactional theory, by incorporating two personal control
variables, impulsiveness and venturesomeness.
Impulsive individuals act on the spur of the moment, due to a non-evaluation
of the situation and a lack of awareness of the risks involved (Eysenck & Eysenck,
1978; M ak, 1990). Venturesome individuals are aware of the risks involved in
156
certain actions but are prepared to chance it (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1978; Eysenck &
M cGurk, 1980). Several studies document a relationship between venturesomeness
and delinquent behaviour (Heaven, 1993,1994a; Rigby & Slee, 1987). Similarly,
impulsiveness has also been associated with problem behaviour (Eysenck & M cGurk,
1980; Luengo, Carrillo-de-la-Pena, Otero, & Romero, 1994; M ak, 1990). M oreover,
it has been shown that that impulsiveness differentiates serious from other delinquent
individuals in early adolescence. It also predisposes individuals to develop long-
term, recidivistic antisocial behaviour (White, M offitt, Caspi, Bartusch, Needles &
Stouthamer-Loeber, 1994).
Taken together, poor parental attachment and commitment to school, negative
perceptions of adults beliefs about them, as well as high levels of impulsiveness and
venturesomeness, all reduce young peoples bonding to conventional society.
Alienation-as-normlessness refers to the psychological state whereby the norms
governing conventional behaviour have broken down (Dean, 1961; Roberts, 1987;
Seeman, 1959). An important prediction of this study was that the weakening of
social and personal control bonds leads to feelings of alienation or normlessness. That
prediction has been supported, in part, by previous research in which negative school-
related experiences were found to be associated with higher levels of alienation-as-
normlessness (Sankey & Huon, 1999). Those authors also obtained empirical support
for an association between normlessness and problem behaviour. Higher levels of
normlessness were associated with greater involvement in problem behaviour.
According to Interactional theory (Thornberry, 1987), the alleviation of bonds
to conventional society provides young people with greater behavioural freedom. For
157
problem behaviour to occur, an environment is required in which that behaviour is
learned, performed, and reinforced. Thornberry (1987) claims that associations with
delinquent peers and the learning environment that they provide are the primary
mechanisms for engagement in problem behaviour.
Finally, an important strength of interactional theory is its incorporation of
social structural variables in the explanation of engagement in problem behaviour.
Thornberry (1987) asserts that variables such as sex, ethnicity, and socio-economic
status, affect the initial values of the control variables. There is some empirical
support for the view that males and females differ in their levels of bonding. For
instance, boys and girls have been found to differ in their school-related experiences,
with girls reporting more positive attitudes to school than boys (Collins, Batten,
Ainley & Getty, 1996; Heaven, 1994b). Gender differences in parental attachment
and in person-centred variables have also been documented. Females are subjected to
higher levels of parental control and supervision than are males (Cernkovich and
Giordano, 1987), and males experience higher levels of impulsiveness (Gladue, 1991)
and of venturesomeness (Clift, Wilkins and Davidson, 1993).
So, in sum, a weakening of the social and personal control bonds to
conventional society, represented by poor parental attachment and commitment to
school, negative perceptions of adults beliefs about them, as well as high levels of
impulsiveness and venturesomeness, are expected to result in feelings of alienation or
normlessness. Once the rules for conventional behaviour become ineffective, the
alienated young person is afforded greater behavioural freedom to deviate. For that
freedom to be expressed as problem behaviour, a social setting is required in which

158
delinquency is learned and reinforced. Associations with delinquent peers provide
that setting. Finally, males and females are expected to differ in their initial levels of
bonding to conventional society, and subsequently in their exposure to the world of
problem behaviour.
The proposed relationships among the predictors of problem behaviour are
presented graphically in Figure 5.1a. The causal arrows in the diagram assume that
change in the variable at the tail of the arrow results in change in the variable at its
head, all other things being equal (Loehlin, 1992). The relationships among the
variables in Figure 5.1a represent specific testable hypotheses. First, poor
commitment to school, low levels of parental care and high levels of parental
overprotection, as well as high levels of impulsiveness and venturesomeness, are
expected to be associated with increased levels of alienation. Second, high levels of
alienation are expected to increase associations with problem peers and engagement
in problem behaviour. Third, and perhaps most importantly, negative perceptions of
adults beliefs are expected to be associated with higher levels of alienation which, in
turn, increase involvement in problem behaviour (associations with problem peers
and engagement in problem behaviour). Finally, it is hypothesised that gender
influences young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs, their commitment to school,
their levels of parental care and overprotection, impulsiveness, and venturesomeness.

Perceptions of
adults beliefs
Commitment
to school
Parental care Problem peers

Gender Alienation
and behaviour
Parental
overprotection
Impulsiveness
Venturesomeness
Figure 5.1a
Predicted (structural) model of problem behaviour
160
The proposed relationships in Figure 5.1a represent direct and indirect (or
mediated) effects. The personal and social control variables, for example, were
expected to have indirect effects on problem behaviour involvement, mediated by
alienation.
It was further predicted, however, that impulsiveness and venturesomeness
(the personal control variables) would moderate the relationships between
commitment to school, negative perceptions of adults' beliefs, and parental control
and overprotection, and problem behaviour involvement. M oderation is tested via
interaction. A significant interaction tells us that that relationship between two
variables (that is, a social control factor and problem behaviour involvement) is
different for differences in a third variable (that is, high and low levels of the personal
control variables). An example of one hypothesised moderating effect is illustrated
graphically in Figure 5.1b.
Impulsive ne
I ss
Proble m pee rs
Commitment and be haviour
To school
Figure 5.1b
Hypothesised moderating effect of impulsiveness on commitment to school and
Problem behaviour involvement
161
S TUDY 9
Evaluating a model of problem behaviour
Introduction
This study evaluated the model of problem behaviour that was described in
the Introduction to this chapter. Young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about
them are a core component of the model. Study 9 aimed to determine the ways in
which young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about them interact with
established correlates of problem behaviour to influence their involvement in such
behaviour.
A large sample of adolescent males and females completed a battery of self-
report questionnaires. Questions were included to assess the different components of
the model. Two statistical approaches were employed to test the independent and
interactive contributions of the multiple components of the model. Structural
equations modelling was used to evaluate the extent to which the relationships among
the variables in the model are consistent with the way in which those variables
interact to contribute to problem behaviour. Structural equations modelling estimates
the relationships among the variables in a proposed model using correlational
analyses, and those analyses provide information about the extent to which the
proposed model is consistent with a set of data (Breckler, 1990). Path analyses via
regression were used for subsidiary analyses because they allow a more detailed
examination of the relationships among the variables in the model (Biddle & M artin,
1987).
162
M ethod
Participants
A total of 577 adolescents participated in the study. Of those, 296 were
males, 271 were females; 10 participants did not provide information to identify their
sex. For the males, ages ranged from 10 to 18, with a mean of 14.5 years
(SD = 1.2). Females ages ranged from 11 to 18, with a mean of 14.8 years
(SD = 1.6). Participants were recruited from four government high schools in
Sydney, deliberately selected to cover the range of socio-economic backgrounds
(Congalton, 1961), and to include young people living in areas identified as high,
medium, and low risk areas for juvenile crime (NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and
Research, 1990). Permission was first obtained from the NSW Department of
Education and Training and from the school principals. Three of the seven principals
who were initially contacted chose not to be involved. For the schools whose
students did take part, permission was also obtained from parents, and all young
people's participation was voluntary.
M aterials
A battery of questionnaires was developed to assess all the variables in the
model. These are in Appendix D.
Parental care and overprotection was assessed by a brief form of the Parental
Bonding Instrument (PBI-BC; Klimidis, M inas, & Ata, 1992). That measure was
developed originally by Parker et al. (1979). It assesses two important aspects of the
parent-child relationship, maternal and paternal care and maternal and paternal
overprotection. The PBI-BC consists of 8 items. Four of those measure perceived

163
parental care, for example, M y mother/father seems emotionally cold to me. The
remaining 4 items assess perceived parental overprotection, for example, My
mother/father likes me to make my own decisions. Participants are required to
respond to each item twice, once for each parent. Ratings are made on a 3-point scale
(Never, Sometimes, Usually). Low scores on the maternal/paternal care scales
reflect perceptions of parental neglect, while high scores indicate perceptions of
parents as warm and understanding. High scores on the maternal/paternal
overprotection scales reflect excessive parental control and intrusion, whereas low
scores suggest parental autonomy and independence. The four scales of the PBI-BC
were shown to be internally consistent, with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging
from .72 to .80 (Klimidis et al., 1992).
Commitment to school was measured by the Liking for School Scale
developed by M ak (1987; cited in M ak, 1990). The measure consists of 20 items that
assess adolescents liking for various aspects of school life including their
relationships with teachers and peers, discipline, curriculum, workload and
extracurricular activities. Subjects respond on a 5-point scale ranging from Strongly
agree to Strongly disagree. This scale has been shown to possess good internal
consistency reliability (alpha = .79), as well as test-retest reliability over a one-month
period (r = .82; M ak, 1987; cited in M ak, 1990).
Young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs. This was assessed via the
Adolescents Perceptions of Adults Beliefs Scale that was developed specifically for
this program of research. The development of that measure was described in

164
Chapter 2. It consists of three subscales, Egocentrism (13 items, for example, is
selfish), Problem Behaviours (6 items, for example, uses alcohol), and Popular
Notions (7 items, for example, watches too much TV). Participants respond to each
item in the way they think that most adults in the community would respond if they
were making judgements about the typical teenager. Ratings are made on an 8-
point scale that ranges from 0 (Extremely uncharacteristic) to 7 (Extremely
characteristic). It was reported in Chapter 2 that the measure has very high internal
consistency reliability and good test-retest reliability.
Impulsiveness. The scale that was employed to measure impulsive behaviour
was an 8-item abbreviated version of that originally developed by Eysenck, Easting,
and Pearson (1984). The modified scale was developed by Heaven (1989) and has
been found suitable for use in Australia. It consists of two factors, cognitive
impulsiveness (with items such as Do you mostly speak without thinking things
out?) and impulsiveness narrowly defined (with items such as Do you often do
things on the spur of the moment?). Cronbachs alpha for the first factor was shown
to be .78, and .65 for the second factor, so that this measure possesses adequate
internal consistency reliability. Subjects respond by circling either No (0) or
Yes (1).
Venturesomeness. To assess venturesome behaviour, a 9-item shortened
version of Eysenck et al.s (1984) Venturesomeness Scale was employed. Like the
Impulsiveness Scale, it has been found suitable for use in Australia (Heaven, 1989).
This measure comprises of two factors, sensation-seeking (alpha = 0.69) consisting of
items such as Would you enjoy parachute jumping? as well as risk-taking

165
(alpha = 0.62) with such items as Do you quite enjoy taking risks? Like the
impulsiveness scale, subjects respond by circling either No (0) or Yes (1).
Alienation, operationalised as normlessness , was assessed via Kohn and
Schoolers (1983) 4-item measure. They based their index on Seemans (1959)
conceptualisation of normlessness as a state in which the social norms regulating
individual conduct have broken down or are no longer effective as rules for
behaviour (p.787). Subjects respond to three of the four items by circling either
Agree (0) or Disagree (1). For the fourth item, Do you believe that its all right
to do whatever the law allows, or are there some things that are wrong even if they
are legal?, subjects respond either Whatever the law allows (0), or Some things
are wrong even if legal (1).
Involvement in problem behaviour was assessed via two measures. The first
was a measure of association with problem peers. For that measure, 9 items were
selected from M aks (1993) Australian Self-Reported Delinquency Scale, each being
the item that loaded highest on each of the 9 factors that M ak (1993) claimed for her
measure. Subjects were asked to indicate how many of their friends had engaged in
any of the 9 behaviours, with responses ranging on a 4-point scale from, None of
them (0) to All of them (3). Some examples of behaviours making up the 9 items
included weapon fight, buying alcohol, and stealing. The second measure developed
as a direct assessment of engagement in problem behaviour was M aks (1993)

166
40-item Australian Self-Reported Delinquency Scale. It measures individual
differences in engagement in a list of 34 types of delinquent activity2. Having been
developed in Australia, its main value is that it is a culturally relevant measure of
problem behaviour among Australian youth. Subjects indicate how many of each of
the behaviours they have engaged in during the previous year, by circling either No
(0) or Yes (1) for each behaviour. Another 4 items have been embedded in the
scale to detect high levels of social desirability. Two additional items survey
respondents contact with law enforcement officials. Good internal consistency
reliability has been demonstrated with a coefficient alpha of .88. Satisfactory
construct and concurrent validity has also been demonstrated (Mak, 1993).
Finally, participants were asked their age, whether they were male or female,
their identification with an ethnic group (if any), and parents occupation (as an
indicator of socioeconomic status; Daniel, 1983).
2
The NSW Department of Education and Training requires that individuals with knowledge that a
young person is at risk of some form of abuse be drawn to their attention. In the present study,
however, the young people were assured that their participation would remain anonymous. Granted
the conflict between the Department's duty of care and the duty to preserve confidentiality, it was
decided that one item needed to be removed from Maks (1993) delinquency scale. The item Have
you in the past 12 months forced someone to do sexual things with you when that person did not want
to? was deleted from the present study. The final measure therefore consisted of 33 delinquent acts.
167
Procedure
The participants completed the questionnaire during regular class time in the
3
presence of the researcher and their teacher. The questionnaire took approximately
20 minutes to complete. They were assured that their individual responses would be
confidential and that the information they provided would be used only for research
purposes in the form of group responses. Care was taken to ensure that participants
completed the questionnaire conscientiously, and did not converse with one another
throughout the testing period. They were also urged to ask questions if they were
unsure of the meaning of any items.
Three sections of results are reported. The first details important
characteristics of the sample. Descriptive analyses were conducted in order to obtain
demographic information about the participants, and also to determine participants
patterns of responses for the measures of involvement in problem behaviour, the two
outcome measures. The second section details the steps that were taken in the
evaluation of the model of problem behaviour, using structural equations modelling.
Given that the pathways to problem behaviour were expected to be different for males
and females, the model was tested separately for the two sexes. Section three
3
It is important to point out that the original intention was for this study to be time-extended across 18
months. A major strength of Thornberrys (1987) interactional theory is that it does not assume
unidirectional causal structures. Rather, variables are reciprocally related, and in that way, problem
behaviour is not only affected by, but over time, it also affects the other variables. A time-extended
study would have enabled an investigation of the reciprocal and dynamic relationships among the
variables in the model. Unfortunately, however, approval to conduct this study in NSW secondary
schools from the NSW Department of Education and Training required that the study be cross-
sectional.
168
presents the findings of the subsidiary regression analyses that were performed.
Again, analyses were carried out separately for males and females.
Characteristics of the sample
Demographics. Table 5.1 contains the demographic characteristics of the
participants whose data were to be included in all subsequent analyses. It is
important to point out that, given the purpose of the major analyses was to examine
the interrelationships among the variables, stringent criteria were adopted for missing
data. Wherever more than one quarter of the items for any measure was missing, the
subject was excluded from the analyses. This resulted in 34 participants having to be
eliminated, so that the sample became 543. In addition, following M ak (1993), 47
respondents answering No to more than two of the four lie items on the Australian
Self-Reported Delinquency Scale were excluded, as their high tendency towards
social desirability casts doubt on the validity of their responses. The final sample was
therefore 496 adolescents, 259 males and 237 females. Their mean ages were 14.7
(SD = 1.6) and 14.5 (SD = 1.2), respectively.
As shown in Table 5.1, more than half of the male and female samples came
from low to middle class backgrounds, as indicated by fathers socioeconomic status.
When mothers socioeconomic status is used as an indicator of social class, the
rankings follow a similar pattern. That is, most males and females came from a
middle class background. Those from a lower class formed the next largest group.
The percentages of males and females who fall into each group are somewhat smaller
than those deriving from fathers socioeconomic status. This is most likely due to the
fact that a substantial proportion of mothers fell into the category of housewife.
169
Table 5.1
Number (& %) of subjects belonging to each of the demographic categories, for
males and females separately
M ales Females
Demographic N % N %
Fathers SES1
Low 43 16.6 58 24.5
M iddle 108 41.7 80 33.8
High 40 15.4 20 8.4
Unemployed 7 2.7 10 4.2
Retired 4 1.5 4 1.7
Pensioner 2 0.9 2 0.8
M issing 55 21.2 63 26.6
M others SES2
Low 38 14.7 35 14.8
M iddle 71 27.4 57 24.1
High 19 7.3 20 8.4
Unemployed 30 11.6 18 7.6
Retired 1 0.4 0 0.0
Pensioner 2 0.9 3 1.3
Housewife 48 18.4 53 22.4
M issing 50 19.3 51 21.4
Ethnicity
Asian 32 12.4 51 21.5
M iddle East 14 5.4 9 3.8
European 12 4.6 15 6.3
Indian 4 1.5 7 3.0
South Pacific Islander 3 1.2 5 2.1
Aboriginal 2 0.9 7 3.0
Other 20 7.7 18 7.6
Not specified 172 66.3 125 52.7
Note:
1. Based on fathers occupational status. Rankings are derived from Daniels (1983) scale of
occupational prestige.
2. Based on mothers occupational status. Rankings are derived from Daniels (1983) scale of
occupational prestige.
The finding that most participants came from a middle class background is of
particular interest, as prior research suggests that delinquency tends to peak in the
170
lower class (Rutter & Giller, 1983; Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985). Thus the sample, as a
whole, was not at great risk for involvement in problem behaviour. Finally, more
than half of the female sample, and two thirds of the male sample, indicated that they
did not identify with any specific ethnic group.
Distribution of problem behaviour scores. Table 5.2 shows the descriptive
statistics for the two outcome measures, for males and females separately. M ales and
females did not show different levels of engagement in problem behaviour. The
mean levels of engagement in problem behaviour for the male and female samples
were only slightly lower than that reported by Mak (1993) when she administered her
measure to a large sample of high school students (M = 6.19, SD = 4.47). The male
sample did, however, report significantly higher levels of associations with problem
peers than did the female sample, as Table 5.2 shows.
Table 5.2
M eans (& SD) of the participants scores on the measures of engagement in problem
behaviour and association with problem peers, presented for males and females
separately
Males Females
M easure M SD M SD t
Engagement in problem behaviour 5.49 6.5 5.09 5.4 0.76
Association with problem peers 6.09 5.5 4.99 4.8 2.38*
*p<.05
Note:
For the measure of engagement in problem behaviour, scores can range from 0 to 33. A higher score
reflects higher levels of involvement in problem behaviour. For the measure of association with
problem peers, scores can range from 0 to 27. A higher score reflects higher levels of association with
problem peers.
171
Evaluating the model of problem behaviour
In principle, the testing of a model using structural equations modelling
involves four stages. First, decisions need to be made concerning the most
appropriate procedure for estimating the values of the parameters of the model, and
the optimal way to deal with missing data. Second, values within the model that can
be determined prior to the testing of the model must be calculated. In the third stage,
the data are analysed in PRELIS (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1996a), which generates a
matrix of correlations. Those correlations form the data for the fourth stage of the
analysis, in which the model is tested for its goodness of fit with the data set using
LISREL (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1996b). This section of the Results details the
findings that relate to each of the four stages involved in the evaluation of the model
of problem behaviour.
Stage 1: Estimation procedure and treatment of missing data. The choice of
the most appropriate procedure for estimating the values of the parameters of the
model depends on the distributions of the measured variables that are included in the
model. For instance, the maximum likelihood (ML) and generalised least squares
(GLS) procedures assume multivariate normality of the observed variables, and that
all variables are continuous (Boomsma, 1983). Violation of those assumptions can
result in biased estimations. Further, the chi-square goodness of fit statistic and the
tests of statistical significance may be affected (Bollen, 1989). Browne (1984)
developed the asymptotic distribution free (ADF) estimator, also known as the
weighted least squares estimation procedure, to overcome the problems associated
with the use of the M L and GLS estimation procedures. The ADF estimation
172
procedure is therefore preferable when observed data are categorical in nature or
when the distribution of those data are skewed (Holmes-Smith, 1998).
When the distributions of the variables from the model in this study were
subjected to a test of multivariate normality, a significant effect was obtained for both
males (z = 15.67, p < .000) and females (z = 16.23, p < .000). This suggested that the
data sets contained variables that were not normally distributed. For that reason, the
ADF estimation procedure was chosen for the present model analyses.
There are several options for dealing with missing data. Of those, listwise
deletion, pairwise deletion, and missing value replacements are the most widely used
(Bollen, 1989). Listwise deletion removes all observations that have missing
information for any of the variables (Roth, 1994). This can result in a substantial
reduction in sample size, particularly if the number of observed variables is large
(Little & Rubin, 1987). Pairwise deletion removes variables with missing data only
from those analyses that need the variable (Roth, 1994). This approach can result in
mathematically inconsistent correlations (M alhotra, 1987), and can therefore lead to
serious estimation problems with structural equation analyses (Roth, 1994). The third
option involves the replacement of missing values. There are two ways in which this
can be done. The first involves replacing the missing value by the sample mean of
the observed variable. The second method involves the use of a statistical program to
estimate missing values (Roth, 1994). While this procedure preserves data, a
limitation is that the imputed values can be outside the normal range of the values for
the variable (Bollen, 1989). Data imputation can also underestimate variance
statistics (Little & Rubin, 1987).

173
For the analyses of the model in this study, listwise deletion was considered to
be the optimal way to deal with missing data. This resulted in a reduction in the
sample size from 496 to 357 (179 males and 178 females). It is important to note,
however, that the participants who were retained for the analyses did not differ
significantly in the mean scores on any of the model variables from those who were
eliminated because of missing data (see Appendix D for the results of t tests). The
remaining sample was therefore truly representative of the original sample.
Stage 2: Preliminary estimation of model parameters. In any structural model,
the numbers of parameters to be estimated has important implications for the required
sample size. The more parameters to be estimated, the larger the size of the sample
that is required (Holmes-Smith, 1998). Some parameters can be estimated, however,
prior to the LISREL analysis. First, the reliability of the measure that is being used to
assess the relevant latent variable is estimated. The amount of error associated with
the measurement of the latent variable can then be calculated and built into the model
(Schumaker & Lomax, 1996). Finally, using the information about a measures
reliability, Munck (1979) showed that it is possible to calculate and then fix the
regression coefficients ( = r), which reflect the regression of a measured variable
onto its latent variable, and the measurement error variances
( = 1-r) associated with each measured variable.
In the present study, it was possible to calculate error variances and regression
coefficients for the variables that had been used to assess four of the latent variables
in the model of problem behaviour. The internal consistency reliabilities of the
measures assessing liking for school, normlessness, and problem behaviour were
174
estimated. The three scales that were used to assess young peoples perceptions of
adults beliefs (Egocentrism, Problem Behaviours, Popular Notions) were summed to
create a composite total score, and the reliability of that composite measure of
perceptions of adults beliefs was estimated. The reliabilities were found to be .79
(for liking for school), .90 (for normlessness), .88 (for problem behaviour), and .94
(for the composite perceptions of adults beliefs score). Using Muncks (1979)
formulae, the regression coefficients and error variances were estimated to be = .89,
= .21 (for liking for school), = .95, = .10 (for normlessness), = .94,
= .12 (for problem behaviour), and = .97, = .06 (for the composite perceptions
of adults beliefs score). Those values were able to be fixed in the analysis of the
model.
Stage 3: PRELIS analysis. PRELIS is used to convert the raw data into a
matrix of polychoric correlations for analysis in LISREL. It also produces a weighted
matrix of asymptotic covariances of the estimated correlations, which is required for
use with the weighted least squares estimation procedure. The commands that were
used in the PRELIS analyses for the model of problem behaviour are included in
Appendix D, for males and females separately. The table of correlations, and the
means and standard deviations that were generated by PRELIS are also included in
Appendix D, separately for males and females.
Stage 4: LISREL analysis. In the fourth and final stage in the analysis of any
model, the correlation matrix that is obtained from a PRELIS analysis is entered into
LISREL, which tests the correspondence between the model and the data from the
sample. The indices that show the extent to which the structural model is consistent
175
with the sample data are referred to as model fit indices. Proper assessment of the fit
of a model involves the evaluation of the entire model, as well as of each equation
within the model, and of the individual parameter estimates (Breckler, 1990).
Numerous indices are available for testing the overall fit of the model. Researchers
are advised to examine multiple fit criteria rather than rely on any single statistic
(Schumaker & Lomax, 1996). The most commonly reported fit index is the chi-
square statistic. Well-fitting models produce a small chi-square (Breckler, 1990). A
nonsignificant chi-square value indicates that the model-implied correlation matrix is
not significantly different from the observed or original matrix. As a more specific
rule, Carmines and M cIver (1981; cited in Hayduk, 1987) claim that acceptable fit is
apparent when the chi-square divided by the degrees of freedom of the model is less
than three. Two additional indices, the Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), and the
Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), which takes sample size into account, can
both range between 0 and 1. Values greater than 0.9 indicate good model fit.
Further, the AGFI should be similar to the GFI (Schumaker & Lomax, 1996). An
additional index, the non-normed fit index (NNFI; Bentler & Bonnett, 1980), which
provides a correction in the test statistic for nonnormality in the data, should be
greater than 0.95 (Breckler, 1990). Together, these goodness of fit statistics provide
information about how closely the model fits the population covariance matrix.
It has been argued that it is more meaningful to test the lack of fit of a model
(Browne & Cudeck, 1993). An appropriate statistic is the root mean square residual
(RMR), which ranges from 0 to 1, and is below 0.1 for well-fitting models. In
addition, the root mean square error of approximation (RM SEA; Steiger, 1990; cited
176
in Browne & Cudeck, 1993) represents the discrepancy per degrees of freedom. The
RMSEA is zero for perfect fit, and less than 0.05 for close fit. Further, the fit is also
said to be good if the 90% upper confidence interval for the RM SEA does not exceed
0.08. In the present study, all indices were calculated in order to assess the global fit
of the model of problem behaviour.
In addition to testing the global fit of a model, it is important to evaluate the
fit of individual equations within the model (Breckler, 1990). To do that, a squared
multiple correlation can be computed for each structural equation in the model.
These values indicate the proportion of variance in each latent variable that is
accounted for by the equation (Breckler, 1990). Finally, the parsimony of a model is
determined by evaluating whether all of its paths are significant. The reliability of
individual parameter estimates is therefore of critical importance. Their significance
can be tested by examining their t-values. This is crucial, given that the global fit of a
model may be very good even when one or more individual parameters is not reliably
different from zero (Breckler, 1990). Insignificant parameters should be removed one
at a time because the nonsignificant coefficients may become significant when the
other parameters are removed (Saris & Stronkhorst, 1984). In the present study,
therefore, the fit of the structural equations and the significance of individual
parameter estimates were also examined.
The remainder of this section of the Results presents the findings of the
LISREL analyses that were conducted on males' and females' responses. The list of
LISREL commands that were used to analyse the model of problem behaviour is
included in Appendix D, separately for males and females. The parameters for the
177
initial model for males (including those that were fixed prior to the model testing and
those that were estimated by LISREL), and the associated indices of global model fit
are shown in Figure 5.2.
The numbers next to the arrows joining the latent variables in Figure 5.2 are
standardised regression coefficients. They show the direct effect of the variable at the
tail of the arrow on the variable at its head. As can be seen in Figure 5.2, only two
control variables, commitment to school and impulsiveness were shown to have
significant effects on alienation. Specifically, less commitment to school was
associated with higher levels of alienation ( = -0.24), and high impulsiveness was
predictive of greater alienation ( = 0.25). Contrary to expectation, however,
alienation did not significantly predict involvement in problem behaviour. With the
exception of parental overprotection, however, all of the control variables were
shown to have significant direct effects on involvement in problem behaviour.
Greater adolescent perceptions that adults beliefs about them are negative were
associated with greater involvement in problem behaviour ( = 0.17). Less
commitment to school ( = -0.33) and less parental care ( = -0.30) were also
predictive of greater involvement in problem behaviour. In addition, both personal
control variables, impulsiveness and venturesomeness had direct effects on problem
behaviour. Specifically, high levels of impulsiveness ( = 0.39) and high levels of
venturesomeness ( = 0.31) were related to greater involvement in problem
behaviour.
Total 0.97a Perceptions
perceptions of adults
of adults beliefs
beliefs
0.17*
0.89a
Liking for Commitment
school to school -0.33*
Father care 0.89 -0.24* Problem

Parental -0.30* peers
care 0.71
Mother care 1b
0.95a Problem
Alienation
Normlessness 0.04 behaviour
Father 1.14 0.03 =.85 0.94a

overprot ection Parental
overprot ection Problem
1b 0.25* behaviour
Mother
0.39* involvement
overprot ection
=.53
Impulsive 1b 0.31*
Impulsiveness
behaviour
Venturesom e 0.84a Venturesom eness

behaviour Model goodness-of-fit indices
2 26.26
df 26
GFI 0.97
AGFI 0.93
NNFI 0.98
RMR 0.03
RMSEA 0.03
90% CI for RMSEA (0.00; 0.07)
Figure 5.2
Standardised structural model showing factor loadings, path coeffi cients and disturbance
terms fo r the initial model for males
Note:
* p < .05
a These parameters were fixed befo re the LISREL analysis as they were estimated from the
reliability of the measures.
b These parameters were fixed at 1 in order to provide a scale for the latent vari ables.
179
According to the indices of global fit that are reported in Figure 5.2, the model
provides an acceptable fit to the data. The chi-square is nonsignificant, and the chi-
square divided by the degrees of freedom equals 1.13. The GFI and the AGFI had
very similar values, and they were both greater than the recommended 0.90, and the
NNFI was also greater than 0.95. The RMR was less than 0.1, the RMSEA was less
than 0.05, and its upper confidence interval did not exceed 0.08.
The proportion of variance of the latent variables accounted for by the
structural equations was examined next. The squared multiple correlations for those
equations indicated that that they accounted for a substantial proportion of the
variance in problem behaviour involvement (47%), but only 15 percent of the
variance in alienation. Although the model accounted for a considerable amount of
the variance in involvement in problem behaviour, it was not necessarily the most
parsimonious given the proposed set of predictors.
To examine the parsimony of the model, the significance of the individual
parameter estimates was examined. Figure 5.2 shows that parental overprotection did
not significantly predict either alienation or problem behaviour involvement, and the
path between alienation and involvement in problem behaviour was also
nonsignificant. The parsimony of the model of problem behaviour could therefore be
improved by the removal of those insignificant paths. Given that alienation was of
greater importance theoretically, parental overprotection was removed first, and the
model for the male participants was tested a second time. The list of LISREL
commands for that analysis is included in Appendix D. The findings that derive from
that analysis are presented in Figure 5.3.

of adults beliefs
beliefs
0.16*
0.89a
Father care 0.78 -0.24*

Problem
Parental -0.28* peers
care 0.71
Mother care 1b
0.95a Problem
Alienation
Normlessness 0.05 behaviour
=.85
0.25* 0.39*
1b 0.94a
Impulsive
Impulsiveness
behaviour
Problem
behaviour
0.32* involvement
=.53
0.84a
Venturesom e
Venturesom eness
behaviour
Model goodness-of-fit indices

2 10.00
df 15
GFI 0.99
AGFI 0.96
NNFI 1.04
RMR 0.03
RMSEA 0.00
90% CI for RMSEA (0.00; 0.04)
Figure 5.3
Standardised structural model showing factor loadings, path coefficients and disturbance
terms for the model for males, excluding parent al overprotection
Note:
* p < .05
181
The removal of parental overprotection from the model did not alter the nature
of the relationships among the model variables when compared with the results from
the initial model analysis that were shown in Figure 5.2. The pathways that were
shown to be significant in the initial model testing remained significant. All of the
goodness of fit indices once again showed there was an acceptable fit for the data.
The modified model accounted for exactly the same proportion of the variance in
problem behaviour involvement, as did the initial model (47%). As was the case in
the initial model testing, however, alienation did not significantly predict involvement
in problem behaviour. The model was therefore tested a third time, excluding
alienation from the analyses. The list of LISREL commands is presented in
Appendix D. The findings that derive from that analysis are presented in Figure 5.4.
Once again, the model provided a good fit to the data according to the goodness of fit
indices. The direct effects of the variables in the model on problem behaviour
involvement did not change when alienation was excluded from the model. Stronger
perceptions of negative adult beliefs ( = 0.16) was predictive of greater involvement
in problem behaviour, as was poorer commitment to school ( = -0.33), and poorer
parental care ( = -0.29). Higher levels of impulsiveness ( = 0.40) and
venturesomeness ( = 0.32) were also associated with greater involvement in problem
behaviour. Finally, the model continued to account for 47 percent of the variance in
problem behaviour involvement.

of adults beliefs
beliefs
0.16*
0.89a
Father care 0.78 Problem

Parental peers
-0.29*
care 0.71
Mother care 1b
Problem
0.40* behaviour
Impulsive 1b
behaviour Impulsiveness
0.94a
0.32*
Problem
a behaviour
Venturesom e 0.84
Venturesom eness involvement
behaviour =.53
Model goodness-of-fit indices

2 6.38
df 10
GFI 0.99
AGFI 0.97
NNFI 1.04
RMR 0.02
RMSEA 0.00
90% CI for RMSEA (0.00; 0.06)
Figure 5.4
terms for the model for males, excluding alienation and parent al overprotection
Note:
* p < .05
183
Overall then, the results from the testing of the model for male adolescents
involvement in problem behaviour show that the model provides a good explanation
of why young males become involved in problematic behaviour. Contrary to
expectation, however, alienation was not shown to contribute to that explanation.
The next task was to evaluate the structural model involving female adolescents
involvement in problem behaviour. The parameters for the model (including those
that were fixed prior to the model testing and those that were estimated by LISREL),
and the associated indices of global model fit are shown in Figure 5.5.
The total effect of any variable on participants' involvement in problem
behaviour can be calculated by multiplying the regression coefficients along the path
by which it is proposed to affect problem behaviour involvement. It was possible to
calculate the total effects of two of the social control variables on problem behaviour
involvement. First, poor parental care was predictive of greater involvement in
problem behaviour, with a total effect of = -0.15. In addition, its effect on problem
behaviour was mediated via its significant effect on alienation ( = -0.81), which, in
turn, contributed to greater involvement in problem behaviour ( = 0.18). In addition
more parental overprotection was predictive of greater involvement in problem
behaviour, with a total effect of = 0.07. The effect of parental overprotection on
problem behaviour was mediated by alienation ( = 0.41). That is, more parental
overprotection was predictive of higher levels of alienation. High alienation, in turn,
was associated with greater involvement in problem behaviour.

of adults beliefs
beliefs
0.26*
0.89a
Father care 0.99 Problem

Parental peers
-0.81*
1b care 0.72
Mother care
0.95a Problem
0.42 Alienation
Normlessness 0.18* behaviour
Father 0.55 0.41* =.74 0.94a

overprot ection Parental
overprot ection
1b Problem
Mother behaviour
0.27*
overprot ection involvement
=.55
0.21*
Impulsive 1b
Impulsiveness
behaviour
0.84a
Venturesom e Venturesom eness
behaviour Model goodness-of-fit indices
2 40.06
df 28
GFI 0.96
AGFI 0.91
NNFI 0.93
RMR 0.04
RMSEA 0.04
90% CI for RMSEA (0.00; 0.08)
Figure 5.5
terms fo r the model for fem ales
Note:
* p < .05
185
Thus, the hypothesis that alienation would mediate the effects of the control variables
on involvement in problem behaviour was partially supported. Stronger perceptions
of negative adult beliefs were directly associated with greater involvement in problem
behaviour ( = 0.26), while less commitment to school was predictive of more
involvement in problem behaviour ( = -0.25). Finally, high levels of impulsiveness
( = 0.27) and venturesomeness ( = 0.21) were both related to greater involvement
in problem behaviour.
The indices of global fit suggested that the model provides an acceptable fit to
the data. Chi-square is non-significant, and chi-square divided by degrees from
freedom equals 1.43. The GFI and AGFI were both greater than 0.90, while the
RMSEA was less than 0.05 and its upper confidence interval was equal to 0.08. The
NNFI was the only index that did not suggest good model fit because it was less than
0.95.
The squared multiple correlations for the structural equations were examined
next in order to determine the proportion of variance of the latent variables accounted
for by the equations. The structural equations were shown to account for 26 percent
of the variance of alienation and 45 percent of the variance of problem behaviour
involvement. Similar to the male model, the female model accounts for a substantial
proportion of the variance of involvement problem behaviour.
In summary, the results from the testing of the structural models show that the
separate models provide good explanations of why male and female adolescents
become involved in problem behaviour. Two principal sets of findings emphasise
that the pathways to problem behaviour are different for males and females. First,
186
alienation is an important factor for females, but not for males. Alienation was shown
to have a direct effect on females involvement in problem behaviour, and to entirely
mediate the effects of parental care (or lack of it) and overprotection on problem
behaviour involvement. Second, the personal and social control variables were
shown to differ in the strength of their effects for male and female problem behaviour
involvement. Although impulsiveness had the largest effect on problem behaviour
involvement for both males and females, the size of the effect was much larger for
males ( = 0.40) than it was for females ( = 0.27). Also, perceptions that adult
beliefs about them are negative was shown to have the second largest effect on
females involvement in problem behaviour ( = 0.26), although it made the smallest
contribution to the explanation of males problem behaviour ( = 0.16). The
remainder of the Results section presents the findings from the subsidiary analyses.
Those analyses were carried out to examine the relationships among the variables in
the model in more detail.
Subsidiary path analyses
Structural equations modelling provides information about the relationships
among latent variables. More detailed information about the predictors of
involvement in problem behaviour can be derived from examining the relationships
among the observed variables in the model. It was established through structural
equations modelling that perceptions of negative adult beliefs make an important
contribution to the explanation of involvement in problem behaviour. The measure
that was used to assess those perceptions consists of three subscales, Egocentrism,
Problem Behaviours, and Popular Notions. The three subscales were summed to
187
create a total composite score for the structural modelling analyses. Regression
analyses were therefore required to determine whether the effect of perceptions of
negative adult beliefs on problem behaviour is due to perceptions that young people
are egocentric, that they engage in problem behaviours, or that they adhere to popular
notions of adolescence. In addition, both personal and social control variables were
shown to predict involvement in problem behaviour. Structural equations modelling
did not, however, enable the determination of whether impulsiveness and
venturesomeness (the personal control variables) moderate the relationship between
commitment to school, perceptions of negative adult beliefs, and parental care and
overprotection (the social control variables), and problem behaviour involvement.
Thus, additional regression analyses were performed to test whether impulsiveness or
venturesomeness moderates the relationship between each of the social control
variables and involvement in problem behaviour.
Thus, two sets of subsidiary analyses were conducted. The first examined
which components of adolescents perceptions of adults beliefs are the most
important predictors of involvement in problem behaviour. The second set of
analyses investigated whether impulsiveness or venturesomeness moderates the
relationship between the social control variables and problem behaviour involvement.
All analyses were performed separately for males and females.
Specifying predictive adolescent perceptions of adults beliefs. The three
components of adolescents perceptions of adults beliefs were regressed
simultaneously against association with problem peers, and then engagement in
problem behaviour (the two outcome measures). This was done separately for males
188
and females. The results of those analyses are presented in Table 5.3. It can be seen
that for males, the perception that adults believe them to engage in problem behaviour
was a significant predictor of both association with problem peers ( = 0.32) and
engagement in problem behaviour ( = 0.24). For females, however, the perception
that adults believe them to engage in problem behaviour was a significant predictor of
only association with problem peers ( = 0.46). Perceptions that adults believe them
to be egocentric or to adhere to popular notions of adolescence were not predictive of
involvement in problem behaviour for either males or females.
Table 5.3
Predicting association with problem peers and engagement in problem behaviour
from adolescents perceptions of adults beliefs about them
Males Females
Problem peers
Overall equation Adj R2 F Sig. Adj R 2 F Sig.
.05 4.14 .01 .16 12.34 .00
Predictor Beta t Sig. Beta t Sig.

Problem behaviour .32 2.87 .01 .46 3.86 .00
Egocentrism -.09 -0.72 ns -.08 -0.66 ns
Popular notions -.00 -0.03 ns .03 0.32 ns
Problem behaviour
.04 3.12 .03 .10 7.70 .00

Problem behaviour .24 2.11 .04 .21 1.67 ns
Egocentrism -.04 -0.31 ns .17 1.36 ns
Popular notions .03 0.25 ns -.02 -0.20 ns
189
Having established that adults believe them to engage in problem behaviour
was a significant predictor of problem behaviour involvement for both males and
females, the next step was to determine the relative contribution of those perceptions,
taking into account all other significant predictors of involvement in problem
behaviour. Thus, all variables that were shown to be significant predictors of
problem behaviour involvement were entered into two regression analyses. For the
first, association with problem peers was the outcome variable, while engagement in
problem behaviour was the outcome for the second analysis. Granted, however, that
perceptions that adults believe them to engage in problem behaviour did not
significantly predict engagement in problem behaviour for the female sample, only
the regression analysis with problem peer associations was performed on their
responses. The results that derived from those analyses are presented in Table 5.4. For
ease of reading, from hereon, young peoples perceptions that adults believe them to
engage in problem behaviour is referred to as perceptions of problem behaviour
involvement.
When all of the significant predictors were regressed against association with
problem peers, perceptions of problem behaviour involvement remained a significant
predictor for both the male and female samples. Moreover, those perceptions made
the second largest contribution to males association with problem peers ( = 0.20),
and the largest contribution to females association with problem peers ( = 0.35). In
addition, perceptions of problem behaviour involvement remained a significant
predictor of males engagement in problem behaviour, when all other variables were
190
taken into account. However, those perceptions had the smallest effect on their
engagement in problem behaviour ( = 0.17).
Table 5.4
Relative contribution of predictors of association with problem peers and engagement
in problem behaviour
Males Females
Problem peers
.19 5.90 .00 .30 9.38 .00

Impulsiveness .32 4.34 .00 .22 3.12 .00
Problem behaviour .20 2.92 .00 .35 5.38 .00
Venturesomeness .15 2.13 .04 .02 0.29 ns
Liking for school -.15 -2.08 .04 -.04 -0.59 ns
Mother care -.07 -0.89 ns -.01 -0.19 ns
Father care -.04 -0.52 ns -.11 -1.53 ns
Mother overprot.1 - - - .21 2.73 .01
Father overprot.2 - - - .24 3.14 .00
Normlessness3 - - - .07 1.03 ns
Problem behaviour4
Overall equation Adj R2 F Sig.
.33 10.53 .00
Predictor Beta t Sig.

Impulsiveness .40 5.86 .00
Liking for school -.22 -3.24 .00
Venturesomeness .19 2.89 .00
Problem behaviour .17 2.70 .01
Mother care -.14 -1.79 ns
Father care -.01 -0.17 ns
Note:
1. Mother overprotection was not identified as a significant predictor ofmales problem behaviour involvement in
the structural m odelling analyses and was therefore om itted from all subsidiary analyses for m ales.
2. F ather overprotection was not identified as a significant predictor of m ales problem behaviour involvement in
the structural m odelling analyses and was therefore om itted from all subsidiary analyses for m ales.
3. Norm lessness was not identified as a significant predictor of m ales problem behaviour involvement in the
structural m odelling analyses and was therefore omitted from all subsidiary analyses for m ales.
4. None of the com ponents of perceptions of adults beliefs was identified as a significant predictoroffemales
engagem ent in problem behaviour. For that reason, no further subsidiary analyses were conducted.
191
Overall then, perceptions of problem behaviour involvement play an
important role in both males and females associations with problem peers, and to a
lesser extent, males engagement in problem behaviour. The second set of subsidiary
analyses examined the extent to which impulsiveness and venturesomeness interact
with social control factors (including liking for school, perceptions of problem
behaviour involvement, and parental care and overprotection) to influence problem
behaviour involvement.
The interaction between personal and social control variables. The analyses
that were carried out on the responses of the female sample revealed no significant
interaction effects. Thus, the effects of the social control variables on problem
behaviour involvement were not found to be moderated by either impulsiveness or
venturesomeness. The analyses that were performed on the male sample, however,
yielded four significant interaction effects.
First, impulsiveness was found to moderate the effect of males perceptions of
problem behaviour involvement on both association with problem peers and
engagement in problem behaviour. Figure 5.6 shows that the difference in problem
peer associations between males with high and low levels of impulsiveness is
different for high and low perceptions of problem behaviour involvement. With low
perceptions of problem behaviour involvement, levels of problem peer associations
are similar for males with high and low levels of impulsiveness. However, with
higher perceptions of problem behaviour involvement, highly impulsive males have
more association with problem peers than do males with lower levels of
impulsiveness. In other words, strong perceptions of problem behaviour involvement

192
appear to place highly impulsive male adolescents at greater risk for problem peer
associations than less impulsive males.
12 low
Problem peer association
impulsiveness
10
high
8
impulsivenss
6
2
low high
Perceptions of problem behaviour involvement
Figure 5.6
Interaction between impulsiveness and perceptions of problem behaviour
involvement on males association with problem peers
Impulsiveness was also found to moderate the effect of males perceptions of
problem behaviour involvement on their actual engagement in problem behaviour.
Figure 5.7 shows that with low levels of impulsiveness, levels of engagement in
problem behaviour do not differ between males who have high perceptions of
problem behaviour involvement and those with low perceptions. However, with
higher impulsiveness levels, males who have high perceptions of problem behaviour
involvement actually engage in more problem behaviour than males who have low
perceptions of problem behaviour involvement.

193
Engagement in problem behavio
12 low
impulsiveness
10
8 high
impulsivenss
6
2
low high
Perceptions of problem behaviour involvement
Figure 5.7
Interaction between impulsiveness and perceptions of problem behaviour
involvement on males engagement in problem behaviour
Impulsiveness was also found to moderate the effect of liking for school on
engagement in problem behaviour. Figure 5.8 shows that with low levels of
impulsiveness, engagement in problem behaviour was similar for males with high and
low levels of liking for school. With high impulsiveness levels, however, males who
showed less liking for school engaged in more problem behaviour than males who
showed more liking for school. Finally, venturesomeness was also found to have one
significant moderating effect. Figure 5.9 shows that venturesomeness moderated the
relationship between liking for school and association with problem peers. With high
levels of liking for school, the level of problem peer associations was similar for
males with high and low levels of venturesomeness. With less liking for school,
194
however, males with high levels of venturesomeness had more problem peer
associations than did males with low venturesomeness levels.
12 low
Engagement in problem behavio
impulsiveness
10
8 high
impulsivenss
6
2
low high
Liking for school
Figure 5.8
Interaction between impulsiveness and liking for school on males engagement in
problem behaviour
195
12 low
Problem peer association
venturesomeness
10
8 high
venturesomeness
6
2
low high
Liking for school
Figure 5.9
Interaction between venturesomeness and liking for school on males association with
problem peers
Summary
The findings from Study 9 extend our understanding of the factors that
influence involvement in problem behaviour. The structural model of problem
behaviour accounted for 47 percent of the variance of males problem behaviour, and
45 percent of the variance of females problem behaviour. The hypothesised model
of problem behaviour was partially supported by the model analyses. The first
prediction that the effect of the social and personal control variables on problem
behaviour would be mediated via alienation was not supported for the male sample,
and supported only in part for the female sample. Alienation was found to entirely
mediate the effect of parental care and overprotection on females involvement in

196
problem behaviour. The remaining predictor variables were all shown to have direct
effects on females problem behaviour. For the males, all the control variables, with
the exception of parental overprotection, had direct effects on problem behaviour
involvement. Perhaps most importantly, however, Study 9 has identified a new
predictor of involvement in problem behaviour. Adolescents perceptions of negative
community beliefs about them made an important contribution to the explanation of
problem behaviour involvement. Subsidiary analyses established that perceptions
that adults believe them to engage in problem behaviour was the active ingredient of
that construct. Finally, the prediction that the pathways to problem behaviour would
be different for males and females was supported. Alienation had an important
mediating effect on females involvement in problem behaviour, while impulsiveness,
and to a lesser extent, venturesomeness, had significant moderating effects on males
problem behaviour. Longitudinal tests of the male and female models are important
tasks for future research. Those tests will enable the determination of the causal links
between each of the control variables and involvement in problem behaviour. In
other words, a time-extended or longitudinal study will allow for tests of the
reciprocal and dynamic relationships among the variables in the model. The broader
implications of this study, and of all the studies that were conducted for the program
of research, are considered in the General Discussion presented in Chapter 6, to
which this thesis now turns.

197
CHAPTER 6
GENERAL DIS CUS S ION
Page
Introduction 198
Understanding stereotypic beliefs about youth 200
Nature of stereotypic beliefs 200
Limitations of current research and future directions 208
Improving adult-youth relations and preventing adolescent problem behaviour 209

198
Introduction
The program of research conducted for this thesis examined the nature,
sources, and consequences of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Studies 1 to 4
investigated the nature of stereotypic beliefs using four converging approaches.
These studies specified the cultural stereotype, adults' personal beliefs, young
people's perceptions of adults' beliefs, and the nature of multiple stereotypes. The
findings indicated that adults' beliefs about the cultural stereotype of youth contained,
for the most part, very negative content, although their personal beliefs were found to
contain both positive and negative content. Further, young people's perceptions of
adults' beliefs about youth were very similar in content to adults' beliefs about the
cultural stereotype; their personal beliefs were, however, much more positive. The
investigation of multiple stereotypes of youth showed that adults and young people
conceive of different subtypes of youth. The 'problem kids' subtype was the most
salient, both in terms of the numbers of descriptors assigned to it, and the consensus
that was associated with those descriptors.
Studies 5 and 6 focused on the media as a source of stereotypic beliefs about
youth. The analyses of the content of newspaper reports about young people
indicated that news reporting of young people was largely negative. The 'problem
kids' subtype was given the most news space. Moreover, the analyses of the
association between newspaper readership and stereotypic beliefs suggested that
newspaper readership is predictive of stereotypic beliefs. Further, stereotypic beliefs
about youth combined to discriminate between readers of tabloid and broadsheet
papers. This suggests that the nature of the relationship between newspaper
199
readership and stereotypic beliefs about youth is bi-directional, although longitudinal
tests are required to allow the nature of that relationship to be established more
confidently.
Studies 7 and 8 investigated the consequences of stereotypic beliefs about
youth for adults' evaluations of young people and for self-fulfilling prophecies, within
the context of laboratory-based experiments. The findings indicated that adults'
stereotypic beliefs that young people are 'problem kids' can influence their subsequent
evaluations of young people. Further, the findings underscored how stereotypic
beliefs that young people are problematic can influence adults' behaviour toward
young people in such a way that stereotype-consistent behaviour is elicited from
young people. Study 9 extended this and investigated the consequences of
stereotypic beliefs about youth in a field-based study. It examined the extent to
which young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about youth interact with
established correlates of delinquency to influence young people's involvement in
problematic or delinquent behaviour. Young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs
about youth interacted with demonstrated correlates of delinquency to influence
problem behaviour involvement. Notably, the pathways to problem behaviour were
different for females and males. For females, alienation played an important role in
their involvement in problem behaviour, and entirely mediated the effects of parental
care and overprotection on problem behaviour involvement. For males,
impulsiveness, and to a lesser extent, venturesomeness, had significant moderating
effects on the relationships between perceptions of problem behaviour involvement
and commitment to school, and involvement in problem behaviour.

200
This final chapter begins with a discussion of the major contributions that this
program of research has made to understanding the nature, sources, and consequences
of stereotypic beliefs about youth. It then highlights the limitations of the studies
conducted for this thesis, and offers suggestions for future research. The chapter ends
by detailing the implications of the findings of the program of research for improving
adult-youth relations and preventing adolescent problem behaviour.
Understanding stereotypic beliefs about youth
The program of research conducted for this thesis has made three important
contributions to our understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth. First, it has
widened knowledge concerning the nature of stereotypic beliefs about youth.
Second, it has extended understanding of the sources of stereotypic beliefs about
youth. Third, it has demonstrated that stereotypic beliefs about youth have important
consequences for the behaviour of both adults and young people.
Nature of stereotypic beliefs
Four approaches were used to specify the nature of stereotypic beliefs about
youth. Previous research was limited to adults' personal beliefs about youth
(Buchanan & Holmbeck, 1998). The present program of research was conducted from
a social psychological perspective and, in particular, adopted a social cognitive
approach. This informed an examination not only of adults' personal beliefs, but also
of the cultural stereotype of youth, young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs, and
of multiple stereotypes of youth. Thus, the studies that were conducted to specify the
201
nature of stereotypic beliefs about youth have provided a more comprehensive
understanding of the nature of those beliefs than currently exist in this literature.
The investigation of the four belief sets provided converging evidence that
stereotypic beliefs about youth are largely negative. In the examination of multiple
stereotypes of youth, the 'p roblem kids' subtype was found to be the most salient of
the youth subtypes. Yet, stereotyping is known to occur at both superordinate and
subcategory levels. M oreover, one or two subtypes within any superordinate
category are often regarded as most typical of the general category (Brewer et al.,
1981; Taylor, 1981). When participants were asked to think at the superordinate
level, in terms of typical teenagers, they relied heavily on the 'problem kids' subtype.
This suggested that the traits and behaviours in the 'problem kids' subtype are
contained also in the global or superordinate youth-related stereotype. In other
words, the 'p roblem kids' subtype serves as the 'default value' for categorising young
people (cf. Brewer et al., 1981).
Although adults' personal beliefs about young people were largely negative,
those held by the young adults were substantially more negative than those held by
the older adults. There are at least two possible explanations for this finding. First,
young adults are not far removed from their own adolescence, and so they may have a
more realistic view than older adults of the extent to which young people today are
engaging in problematic behaviours. An equally plausible explanation for the more
positive personal beliefs of the older adults is that they recognise the transitional
nature of adolescent misbehaviour. In other words, perhaps older adults are able to
appreciate that many young people will encounter difficulties during the adolescent
202
period, but that most of them will mature into responsible adults. To the extent that is
true, older adults are able to recognise both the positive and negative characteristics
of young people.
The present program of research has extended understanding of the nature of
stereotypic beliefs about youth by generating the first two Australian measures for
assessing those beliefs. The Beliefs About Adolescence Scale allows adult members
of the community to report the extent to which 20 traits and behaviours are
stereotypical of young people. This new measure possessed good psychometric
properties. The overall measure and its subscales were internally consistent and had
good test-retest reliability over a one-month period. Convergent validity was also
demonstrated; the '(Lack of) Discipline', ' (Seeking) Independence ' and 'Problem
Behaviours' subscales were correlated positively with beliefs that adolescence is a
period of storm and stress. A major strength of the instrument is its assessment of
both positive and negative characteristics of young people. As Buchanan and
Holmbeck (1998) noted, it is likely that adults' behaviour toward young people is
determined by a combination of positive and negative beliefs, not simply the extent to
which they endorse negative stereotypes. The measure improves on that developed
by Buchanan and Holmbeck (1998) in two ways. First, the inclusion of only those
items for which the sample had provided a rating of 5, 6, or 7 (out of 7) on the
extremely characteristic side of the rating scale ensured that the beliefs being
documented were in fact stereotypic. Second, only items that were given those
ratings by more than 50 percent of the sample were retained. Thus, there was
203
considerable agreement that the traits and behaviours comprising the measure were
characteristic of young people.
The second measure developed was the Adolescents' Perceptions of Adults'
Beliefs Scale. This 26-item scale is the first measure to assess young people's
perceptions of adults' beliefs about them. The overall measure and its three subscales
had very high internal consistency reliability and test-retest reliability. Almost all of
the 26 items in the measure are socially undesirable traits and behaviours. Two of the
three subscales, 'Egocentrism' and 'Problem behaviours' are clearly made up of
extremely negative traits and behaviours. The development of the measure enabled
systematic testing to be carried out of the role of young people's perceptions of adults'
beliefs in contributing to young people's involvement in problem behaviour.
Both measures can be completed in a short time, and can be easily
administered to individuals or to groups. The Beliefs About Adolescence Scale and
the Adolescents Perceptions of Adults Beliefs Scale will allow researchers to pursue
questions of how community beliefs about youth, and young people's perceptions of
those beliefs, influence adult-youth relations. The Adolescents Perceptions of Adults
Beliefs Scale will be useful also for further investigations of the role of young
peoples perceptions in contributing to their involvement in problem behaviour.
Sources of stereotypic beliefs
The review of the literature in Chapter 1 indicated that negative stereotypic
beliefs about youth are assumed to derive in part from media representations of young
people (Bessant & Hil, 1997; Omaji, 1997), although the empirical evidence to
support that assumption is limited. The program of research conducted for this thesis
204
demonstrated an empirical link between newspaper reports and stereotypic beliefs
about youth. Newspaper readership was shown to be predictive of stereotypic beliefs
about youth. Participants who were primarily tabloid, rather than broadsheet, readers
reported strong beliefs that young people lack discipline, that they adhere to popular
notions of adolescence, and that they engage in problem behaviours. Further, the
different sets of stereotypic beliefs about youth combined to discriminate between
tabloid and broadsheet readers. The major difference between the two readership
groups was attributed to their negative beliefs about young people; negative
stereotypic beliefs were predictive of tabloid readership. Taken together, the findings
suggested that the nature of the relationship between newspaper readership and
stereotypic beliefs about youth is bi-directional. Because of the cross-sectional nature
of the research, however, this issue requires further detailed investigation.
Nevertheless, the demonstration of an empirical link between newspaper
readership and stereotypic beliefs extends our understanding of the nature of the
relationship between media representations and stereotypic beliefs about youth. The
findings indicate that media representations of young people, at the very least, reflect
and reinforce negative stereotypic beliefs about youth. One implication of those
findings is that the media have the opportunity to play an important role in
influencing the public perception of young people.

205
Consequences of stereotypic beliefs
No previous researcher has investigated the consequences of stereotypic
beliefs about youth for information-processing and behaviour. The program of
research conducted for this thesis focused on the consequences of stereotypic beliefs
about youth for evaluations of young people and for self-fulfilling prophecies.
Adults' stereotypic beliefs about youth were shown to influence their subsequent
evaluations of young people and to elicit self-fulfilling prophecies. In both instances,
the adult participants were unaware that their stereotypic beliefs about youth were
producing those effects.
Adopting an implicit approach to investigate the consequences of stereotypic
beliefs about youth ensured participants' lack of awareness, and this was a
methodological strength of the experimental studies that were conducted. Some
researchers have argued that the use of an experimental design to examine
behavioural confirmation of stereotypic beliefs has limited generalisability (M iller &
Turnbull, 1986; Jussim, 1990). For instance, it has been claimed by Jussim (1990)
that experimental studies of behavioural confirmation effects are flawed because they
have given perceivers false expectancies, and so we do not know the extent to which
naturally occurring expectancies produce behavioural confirmation effects. With
respect to the present program of research, however, the adoption of an implicit
methodology increased the ecological validity of the experimental design. The
participants in the present program of research were not given false expectancies
about their interaction partner. The only difference between perceivers in the
experimental and control conditions was that those in the experimental condition
206
were shown faces of teenagers and those in the control condition were presented with
faces of adults. The presentation of teenage faces corresponded to the real-world
situation of an individual encountering a young person, and the findings indicated that
this is sufficient to elicit self-fulfilling prophecies.
These findings represent an experimental analogue of the ways in which
stereotyped information about young people can exert effects in everyday life. Adults
are exposed to information about young people in a variety of ways. To some extent,
beliefs about youth derive from actual experiences with young people. Because of
their high public visibility, including their tendency to congregate in groups, their
physical appearance (e.g. style of dress), and their energy, young people are often
perceived as threatening and out of control (White, 1997). As the findings from this
program of research indicate, stereotypic beliefs about youth also derive from
information presented in media representations, which are generally negative and
often depict young people as problematic. Repeated exposure to information that
portrays certain groups of young people as problematic may result in negative
evaluations of all young people. Stereotyped information achieves its ultimate
influence via a self-fulfilling prophecy. Beliefs that young people are problematic
and potential deviants can induce behaviour in accord with these expectations and
views.
Whereas some young people do experiment, take risks, and challenge
authorities, the findings from the present program of research emphasise that these
forms of behaviour are thought by many adults to be typical of young people in
general. M oreover, those beliefs have the ability to produce actual confirming
207
evidence in young peoples behaviour, via their effects on adults own behaviour. In
that way, adults beliefs that young people are problematic are validated and
perpetuated.
In addition to demonstrating the consequences of adults' stereotypic beliefs
about youth, the findings have shown that young people's perceptions of adults'
beliefs about youth have consequences of their own. Acknowledging the multiple
causal pathways to problem behaviour (Sullivan & Wilson, 1995), and that behaviour
is influenced by the interaction of the social context and person-centred factors
(Jessor, 1993), the role of young peoples perceptions was examined within the
context of a structural model of problem behaviour. Young people's perceptions of
adults' beliefs about youth were found to interact with established correlates of
delinquency to influence their involvement in problem behaviour. Previous research
has shown that young people's perceptions that their parents and peers believe them to
engage in problem behaviour increases their involvement in such behaviour (Bartusch
& Matsueda, 1996; Heimer & M atsueda, 1994). The present findings showed that
young people's perceptions that the broader community considers them to be
problematic contribute to their involvement in problem behaviour. These findings
extend our understanding of the factors that influence adolescents' involvement in
problem behaviour.
208
Limitations of current research and future directions
There are two main limitations of this program of research. First, the studies
conducted for this thesis were cross-sectional in nature. An important task for future
research is, therefore, to re-examine the male and female models of problem
behaviour longitudinally. The factors that are known to influence involvement in
delinquent behaviour are dynamic and interactional (Thornberry, 1987).
Unfortunately, ethics approval to conduct the research program in New South Wales
secondary schools required that the research be cross-sectional. Further, the
evaluation of the models for the program of research primarily involved an attempt to
explain differences in the extent of delinquent behaviour engaged in. An equally
important question, however, relates to why so many young people engage in
delinquent behaviour and then desist as they approach adulthood. This question must
be answered within the context of a longitudinal study that examines which pathways
are associated with the onset of delinquency, and which better explain the variation in
desistance, or in some cases, escalation.
A longitudinal investigation of the relationship between media representations
and stereotypic beliefs about youth is also needed. The data from the research
program demonstrated a correlation between newspaper readership and stereotypic
beliefs about youth and it seems that that relationship is bi-directional. The
relationship between media representations and stereotypic beliefs about youth must
now be tested longitudinally to allow that relationship to be established confidently;
to clarify whether newspaper readership indeed predicts stereotypic beliefs, whether

209
people's stereotypic beliefs determine their choice of newspaper, or both, research
must be time-extended.
A second goal for future research relates to young people's perceptions of
adults' beliefs about youth. The program of research found that young people think
that adults see them as problems to society. The relevance of those findings to
specific high risk groups of young people must now be determined. For instance, it
has been claimed that Indo-Chinese, Arabic, and South Pacific Islanders are more
visible than other youths due to their cultural tendency to congregate in public spaces,
which often arouses suspicion (Standing Committee on Law and Justice, 1999). An
important goal for future research is, therefore, to identify the characteristics that
make some young people more vulnerable to perceptions of negative stereotypic
beliefs.
Improving adult-youth relations and preventing adolescent problem behaviour
The findings from this program of research have important implications for
improving adult-youth relations and for preventing young peoples involvement in
problem behaviour. In terms of improving adult-youth relations, the media have an
important role to play. Media portrayals of youth are fundamental to the ways in
which the public come to view young people individually and collectively (Bessant &
Hil, 1997). For the most part, newspaper reports of young people, and in particular,
tabloid reports, convey very negative images of young people. This is perhaps
because newspaper editors and journalists believe that this is what their audience likes
to read about young people. In other words, news producers are aware of the values
210
and beliefs of their audience and they pitch their stories to attract and to maintain that
audience. In this way, negative perceptions of young people are perpetuated. The
media have a responsibility, however, to provide balanced information about young
people. That responsibility can be fulfilled by recognising t he achievements and
talents of the vast majority of young people and by reporting on youth-related issues,
including juvenile crime, in ways that are consistent with scientific data.
It is well known that social policy is influenced by presumptions about public
opinion (Grisso, 1996). The media can be said to have an indirect effect on policy,
via their effect on public perception. In other words, media representations of
problematic youth fuel negative public reactions to young people. Those reactions
are often reflected in law and order campaigns and anti-juvenile legislation
(Findlay, Odgers, & Yeo, 1994; Omaji, 1997). Examples of such get tough policies
include an increase in the range of powers available to police, enabling them to
interfere in the activities of young people even when they have not engaged in any
wrongdoing (White, 1997), and escalated penalties for certain offences (Coventry,
M uncie, & Walters, 1992). By focusing on the positive contributions that young
people can make to society, the media could help to create a more informed public.
This in turn would encourage the development of positive adult-youth relations
within the community. Also it would hopefully influence law and policy makers to
move away from the current focus on punitive 'law and order' approaches towards
young people.
The Australian government has already begun to acknowledge the important
role that the media play in orchestrating public opinion about young people in our
211
society. While the present program of research was in progress, the Government
established the National Youth Media Awards. These awards were designed to
recognise the best examples of journalism that reflect the positive contributions that
young people make to society. They represent an attempt to encourage journalists to
look beyond the sensational and to draw upon stories that promote a more balanced
reflection of young people today. It is hoped that such incentives will serve to
improve media portrayals of young people and, as a result, to foster positive relations
between adults and young people.
The findings from the present program of research also have important
implications for the prevention of adolescent problem behaviour. Consistent with
previous research (e.g. Jessor et al., 1995; O'Donnell et al., 1995; Sankey & Huon,
1999), the findings indicated that multiple factors contribute to the emergence of
delinquent or problematic behaviour. Prevention programs therefore need to be
multimodal and address all aspects of adolescent life (see also Huon & McConkey,
1998). Programs that address a constellation of risk factors achieve more preventive
effects than those that address just one or two (Yoshikawa, 1994). The findings also
indicated that young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs about youth make an
important contribution to their involvement in problem behaviour. This emphasises
the need for prevention programs to include a community-based component. Feelings
of inclusiveness, and positive social relationships between young people and adult
members of the community are crucial in reducing involvement in delinquent
behaviour (Owen & Carroll, 1997). Fostering young people's attachment to their
communities has been identified as a major factor in crime prevention (Standing

212
Committee on Law and Justice, 1999). Despite this, among the major preventive
strategies that have been proposed, those targeting the community have received the
least attention (M ulvey, Arthur, & Reppucci, 1993).
The findings from the present program of research suggest that community-
based prevention programs should seek to promote positive adult-youth relations. In
particular, the findings suggest two specific ways in which this could be achieved.
First, adult-youth relations could be improved through the provision of educational
programs that seek to alter adults' stereotypic beliefs about young people. Such
interventions have been used to reduce stereotypes and prejudice toward a range of
social groups, including Aboriginal Australians (Augoustinos & Hil, 1999) and the
elderly (Dooley & Frankel, 1990). Other programs have sought to modify gender
steretoypes (Gash & M organ, 1993). Essentially, stereotype and prejudice reduction
programs attempt to increase knowledge, awareness and understanding of a specific
group by providing information about the group's history, achievements, and
contributions (Augoustinos & Hil, 1999). There is some empirical evidence to
suggest that education can help to modify adults' stereotypic beliefs about young
people. Holmbeck and Hill (1988) assessed college students' beliefs about
adolescence both before and after their completion of a course on adolescent
development. Prior to the course, participants' beliefs about young people were very
negative, and indicated that adolescence was characterised by storm and stress,
rebelliousness, and poor relations with parents. After the course, students' tendency
to report that the typical adolescent experiences were stormy and stressful decreased
substantially. These results suggest that teaching adults about adolescent

213
development is one potential way to change their stereotypic beliefs about youth and
improve adult-youth relations. It would be necessary, however, to further evaluate
the effectiveness of such programs by conducting follow-up assessments several
months after the completion of the course. This would determine the extent to which
positive beliefs about young people were maintained over time.
A second useful strategy for promoting positive adult-youth relations and
preventing adolescent problem behaviour involves the provision of opportunities for
young people to interact with adult members of the wider community. Sercombe
(1997) claimed that because young people are generally excluded from most aspects
of society, many adults lack direct contact with young people. Local community
authorities are in an ideal position to help with the creation of connections between
young people and adults. M entoring is one way in which this can be achieved.
M entors are adults who assume quasi-parental roles as advisors and role models for
young people to whom they are unrelated; they provide support in social and
academic development (Hamilton & Hamilton, 1992). Mentors can help to promote a
sense of personal worth, broaden opportunities for young people and assist them in
making intelligent choices (Dondero, 1997). Such adult-young person involvement
would help to foster a cohesive community. At the same time, young people would
be provided with responsible adult role models, thereby hopefully reducing the
likelihood of their involvement in problem behaviour.
Community-based programs to reduce adolescent problem behaviour will only
be effective if they are implemented in conjunction with programs that target the
multiple factors that contribute to that behaviour. The findings from this research
214
program indicated that commitment to school has an important role in both males' and
females' involvement in problem behaviour. Communities and schools should
therefore work together to promote positive relationships between young people and
adults. The 'Rave' Project (Harrison, Laughlin, & M idford, 1995) is one example of
how this can be achieved. This project sought to involve young people in the
planning and development of educational programs to combat adolescent drug use.
Young people, teachers and health professionals worked together to produce a
newspaper publication on alcohol and other drug issues for young people. M ost
importantly, young people were in control of the project and the adult participants
acted as facilitators. M uch of the newspaper content was provided by youth, they
consulted on issues of theme and style, and they made decisions about how the
newspaper would be produced and distributed. The handing over of control of the
project to young people sent a message to them that their views were valued and that
they could make a positive contribution to the issues that directly affected them. At
the same time, the implementation of the project through the school system provided
young people with a positive school-related experience. In that way, the program
targeted both community- and school-based risk factors for problem behaviour.
In conclusion, this program of research has demonstrated that the media and
adult members of the broader community must recognise the role that they play in
creating and reinforcing adolescent problem behaviour. The media have a
responsibility to disseminate accurate and balanced information about young people,
and community-based prevention programs have an obligation to focus on methods
that foster a cohesive community and positive intergenerational relations. Such

215
efforts are critical if we are to combat negative stereotypic beliefs about young
people. They are also essential if we are to prevent adolescent problem behaviour.
216
REFERENCES
Akers, R.L. (1977). Deviant Behaviour: A Social Learning Perspective. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.
Allport, G.W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, M A: Addison-Wesley.
Anderson, N.H. (1968). Likableness ratings of 555 personality-trait words. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 272-279.
Arnett, J.J. (1999). Adolescent storm and stress, reconsidered. American
Psychologist, 54, 317-326.
Ashmore, R.D. & Del Boca, F.K. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and
stereotyping. In D.L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive Processes in Stereotyping and
Intergroup Behaviour. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Atwater, E. (1988). Adolescence. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Audit Bureau of Circulations (2000). July-December, 1999, Sydney.
Augoustinos, M ., Ahrens, C, & Innes, M.J. (1994). Stereotypes and prejudice: The
Australian experience. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 125-141.
Augoustinos, M ., & Hill, M. (1999). Stereotype and prejudice reduction: Short and
long-term evaluation of a cross-cultural awareness program. Paper presented

th
at the 12 General Meeting of the European Association of Experimental
Social Psychology, University of Oxford.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2000). Labour Force Australia. Canberra: ABS.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1997). Youth, Australia: A Social Report. Canberra:
ABS.
217
Australian Centre for Independent Journalism (1992). Youth and the Media: A report
into the representation of young people in the New South Wales print media.
Sydney, NSW: University of Technology.
Banaji, M .R., & Greenwald, A.G. (1994). Implicit stereotyping and prejudice. In M .P.
Zanna & J.M. Olson (Eds.), The Psychology of Prejudice: The Ontario
Symposium Volume 7. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Banaji, M .R., Hardin, C., & Rothman, A.J. (1993). Implicit stereotyping in person
judgement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 272-281.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. New Jersey: Prentice
Hall.
Bargh, J.A., Chen, M ., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behaviour:
Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of
Bargh, J.A., & Pietromonaco, P. (1982). Automatic information processing and social
perception: The influence of trait information presented outside of conscious
awareness on impression formation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 43, 437-449.
Baron, R., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in
social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical
considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
Bartusch, D.J., & Matsueda, R.L. (1996). Gender, reflected appraisals, and labeling:
A cross-group test of an interactionist theory of delinquency. Social Forces,
75, 145-177.
218
Bentler, P.M., & Bonnett, D.G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the
analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588-606.
Bessant, J. (1994). Questioning popular representations of youth. Australian Institute
of Family Studies, 38, 38-39.
Bessant, J., & Hil, R. (1997). Youth, Crime and the Media: Media representation of
and reaction to young people in relation to law and order. Hobart: National
Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.
Biddle, B.J., & M artin, M .M . (1987). Causality, confirmation, credulity, and
structural equation modeling. Child Development, 58, 4-17.
Black, J., & Bryant, J. (1995). Introduction to Media Communication. Dubuque, IA:
Brown & Benchmark.
Bledsoe, J.C., & Wiggins, R.G. (1973). Congruence of adolescents' self-concepts and
parents' perceptions of adolescents' self-concepts. Journal of Psychology, 83,
157-162.
Bodenhausen, G.V. (1988). Stereotypic biases in social decision making and memory:
Testing process models of stereotype use. Journal of Personality and Social
Bodenhausen, G.V., & Lichtenstein, M . (1987). Social stereotypes and information
processing strategies: The impact of task complexity. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 52, 871-880.
Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.

219
Boomsma, A. (1983). On the robustness of LISREL against small sample size and
nonnormality. Amsterdam: Sociometric Research Foundation.
Bonney, B., & Wilson, H. (1983). Australia's commercial media. M elbourne, Vic:
M acM illan.
Breckler, S.J. (1990). Applications of covariance structure modelling in psychology:
Cause for concern? Psychological Bulletin, 107, 260-273.
Brewer, M .B., Dull, V., & Lui, L. (1981). Perceptions of the elderly: Stereotypes as
Prototypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 656-670.
Broverman, I.K., Vogel, S.R., Broverman, D.M ., Clarkson, F.E., & Rosenkrantz, P.S.
(1972). Sex-role stereotypes: A current appraisal. Journal of Social Issues,
28, 59-78.
Browne, M.W. (1984). Asymptotically distribution-free methods for the analysis of
covariance structures. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical
Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Single sample cross-validation indices for
covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445-455.
Buchanan, C.M ., Eccles, J.S., Flanagan, C., M idgley, C., Feldlaufer, H., & Harold,
R.D. (1990). Parents and teachers beliefs about adolescents: Effects of sex
and experience. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 19, 363-394.
Buchanan, C.M ., & Holmbeck, G.N. (1998). M easuring beliefs about adolescent
behaviour. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 27, 607-627.

220
Buttrum, K. (1997). Juvenile justice: What works and what doesnt! Paper presented
at Australian Institute of Criminology Conference, Adelaide 26-27 June,
1997.
Cain, M . (1996). Recidivism of juvenile offenders in New South Wales. Sydney,
NSW: New South Wales Department of Juvenile Justice.
Chernkovich, S.A., & Giordano, P.C. (1987). Family relationships and delinquency.
Criminology, 25, 295-321.
Chen, M ., & Bargh, J.A. (1997). Nonconscious behavioural confirmation processes:
The self-fulfilling consequences of automatic stereotype activation. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 541-560.
Clift, S.M ., Wilkins, J.C., & Davidson, C.A. (1993). Impulsiveness, venturesomeness
and sexual risk taking among heterosexual GUM clinic attenders. Personality
and Individual Differences, 15, 403-410.
Collins, C., Batten, M ., Ainley, J., & Getty, C. (1996). Gender and Education. ACT:
Australian Government Publishing Service.
Congalton, A.A. (1961). Status Ranking of Sydney Suburbs. University of New South
Wales: Sydney, NSW.
Cooley, C.H. (1964, originally published in 1902). Human Nature and the Social
Order. New York: Schocken Books.
Coventry, G., M uncie, J., & Walters, R. (1992). Rethinking Social Policy for Young
People and Crime Prevention. Bundoora, Vic: La Trobe University.
Cunneen, C., & White, R. (1995). Juvenile Justice: An Australian Perspective.
M elbourne, Vic: Oxford University Press.

221
Daniel, A. (1983). Power, privilege, and prestige: Occupations in Australia.
M elbourne, Vic: Longman Cheshire.
Darley, J.M., & Gross, P.H. (1983). A hypothesis-confirming bias in labeling effects.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 20-33.
Davidson, H.H., & Lang, G. (1960). Children's perceptions of their teachers feelings
toward them related to self-perception, school adjustment and behaviour.
Journal of Experimental Education, 29, 107-118.
Davies, M .F. (1997). Belief persistence after evidential discrediting: The impact of
generated versus provided explanations on the likelihood of discredited
outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 561-578.
Davison, W., Boylan, J., & Yu, F. (1976). Mass Media: Systems and Effects. New
York: Preager.
Dean, D. (1961). Alienation: Its meaning and measurement. American Sociological
Review, 26, 753-758.
Deaux, K., & Wrightsman, L.S. (1988). Social Psychology. Pacific Grove, CA:
Brooks/Cole.
Denholm, C., Horniblow, T., & Smalley, R. (1992). The times they are still a
changing: Characteristics of Tasmanian adolescent peer groups. Youth Studies
Australia (Winter, 1992), 18-25.
DePaulo, B.M ., Kenny, D.A., Hoover, C.W., Webb, W., & Oliver, P.V. (1987).
Accuracy of person perception: Do people know what kinds of impressions
they convey? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 303-315.

222
Devine, P.G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled
components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5-18.
Devine, P.G., & Baker, S.M. (1991). M easurement of racial stereotype subtyping.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 44-50.
Dondero, G.M . (1997). Mentors: Beacons of hope. Adolescence, 32, 881-886.
Dooley, S., & Frankel, B.G. (1990). Improving attitudes toward elderly people:
Evaluation of an intervention program for adolescents. Canadian Journal on
Aging, 9, 400-409.
Dovidio, J.F., Evans, N., & Tyler, R.B. (1986). Racial stereotypes: The contents of
their cognitive representations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
22, 22-37.
Esses, V.M ., Haddock, G., & Zanna, M.P. (1994). The role of mood in the expression
of intergroup stereotypes. In M .P Zanna & J.M Olson (Eds.), The Psychology
of Prejudice: The Ontario Symposium. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Eysenck, S., Easting, G., & Pearson, P. (1984). Age norms for impulsiveness,
venturesomeness and empathy in children. Personality and Individual
Differences, 5, 315-321.
Eysenck, S.B.G., & Eysenck, H.J. (1978). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness:
Their position in a dimensional system of personality description.
Psychological Reports, 43, 1247-1255.
Eysenck, S.B.G., & M cGurk, B.J. (1980). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness in a
detention centre population. Psychological Reports, 47, 1299-1306.

223
Fabrigar, L.R., Wegener, D.T., M acCallum, R.C., & Strahan, E.J. (1999). Evaluating
the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological
Methods, 4, 272-299.
Felson, R. B. (1985). Reflected appraisal and the development of self. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 48, 71-78.
Felson, R.B. (1989). Parents and the reflected appraisal process: A longitudinal
analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 965-971.
Fergusson, D.M ., & Horwood, J.L. (1999). Prospective childhood predictors of
deviant peer affiliations in adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry, 40, 581-592.
Findlay, M., Odgers, S., & Yeo, S. (1994). Australian Criminal Justice. M elbourne,
Vic: Oxford University Press.
Fiske, S.T., Neuberg, S.L., Beattie, A.E., & M ilberg, S.J. (1987). Category-based and
attribute-based reactions to others: Some informational conditions of
stereotyping and individuating processes. Journal of Experimental Social
Forgas, J.P. (1992). Interpersonal Behaviour: The Psychology of Social Interaction.
Sydney: Maxwell Macmillan.
Freeman, K. (1996). Young people and crime. Crime and Justice Bulletin Number 32.
New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research.
Freud, A. (1958). Adolescence. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 15, 255-278.

224
Freud, A. (1969). Adolescence as a developmental disturbance. In G. Caplan & S.
Lebovici (Eds.), Adolescence: Psychosocial perspectives. New York: Basic
Books.
Friedenberg, E.Z. (1966). Adolescence as a social problem. In H. Becker (Ed.),
Social problems: a modern approach. New York: John Wiley.
Gaertner, S.L., & McLaughlin, J.P. (1983). Racial stereotypes: Associations and
ascriptions of positive and negative characteristics. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 46, 23-30.
Gardner, R.C., Lalonde, R.N., Nero, A.M ., & Young, M .Y. (1988). Ethnic
stereotypes: Implications of measurement strategy. Social Cognition, 6, 40-60.
Gash, H., & M organ, M . (1993). School-based modifications of children's gender-
related beliefs. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 277-287.
Gecas, V., & Seff, M. (1990). Families and adolescents: A review of the 1980s.
Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 941-958.
Gilbert, D.T., & Hixon, J.G. (1991). The trouble of thinking: Activation and
application of stereotypic beliefs. Journal of Personality and Social
Gilbert, D.T., Krull, D.S., & M alone, P.S. (1990). Unbelieving the unbelievable:
Some problems in the rejection of false information. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 59, 601-613.

225
Gladue, B.A. (1991). Qualitative and quantitative sex differences in self-reported
aggressive behavioural characteristics. Psychological Reports, 68, 675-684.
Greenwald, A.G. & Banaji, M .R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-
esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4-27.
Greenwald, A.G., McGhee, D.E., & Schwartz, J.L.K. (1998). Measuring individual
differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of
Griffin, C. (1997). Representations of the young. In J. Roche and S. Tucker (Eds.),
Youth in society: Contemporary theory, policy and practice. London: Sage
Publications.
Grisso, T. (1996). Society's retributive response to juvenile violence: A
developmental perspective. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 229-247.
Hall, G.S. (1904). Adolescence: Its psychology and its relations to physiology,
anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion, and education (Vol. 2).
New York: Appleton.
Hamilton, D.L. (1981). Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup
behaviour. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hamilton, D.L., Devine, P.G., & Ostrom, T.M . (1994). Social cognition and classic
issues in social psychology. In P.G. Devine, D.L. Hamilton, & Ostrom, T.M.
(Eds.), Social cognition: Impact on social psychology. San Diego: Academic
Press.
226
Hamilton, D.L., & Gifford, R.K. (1976). Illusory correlation in interpersonal
perception: A cognitive basis of stereotypic judgements. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 12, 392-407.
Hamilton, D.L., & Sherman, J.W. (1994). Stereotypes. In R.S. Wyer & T.K. Srull
(Eds.), Handbook of Social Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hamilton, D.L., Sherman, S.J., & Ruvolo, C.M . (1990). Stereotype-based
expectancies: Effects on information processing and social behaviour. Journal
of Social Issues, 46, 35-60.
Hamilton, D.L., Stroessner, S.J., & Driscoll, D.M. (1994). Social cognition and the
study of stereotyping. In P.G. Devine, D.L. Hamilton, & Ostrom, T.M. (Eds.),
Social cognition: Impact on social psychology. San Diego: Academic Press.
Hamilton, S.F., & Hamilton, M .A. (1992). M entoring programs: Promise and
paradox. Phi Delta Kappan, M arch, 546-550.
Harrison, D., Laughlin, D., & M idford, R. (1995). Students tackle their own drug
issues: A community-schools approach. Health Promotion Journal of
Australia, 5, 58-60.
Haslam, S.A. (1997). Stereotyping and social influence: Foundations of stereotype
consensus. In R. Spears, P.J. Oakes, N. Ellemers & S.A. Haslam (Eds) The
Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hayduk, L.A. (1987). Structural equation modelling with LISREL: Essentials and
Advances. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
Hays, W.L. (1981). Statistics. New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston.
227
Heath, L., & Petraitis, J. (1987). Television viewing and fear of crime: Where is the
mean world? Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 8, 97-123.
Heaven, P. (1989). Venturesomeness and impulsiveness: Their relation to orientation
to authority among adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 10,
1205-1208.
Heaven, P. (1993). Personality predictors of self-reported delinquency. Personality
and Individual Differences, 14, 67-76.
Heaven, P. (1994a). Family of origin, personality, and self-reported delinquency.
Journal of Adolescence, 17, 445-459.
Heaven, P. (1994b). Contemporary Adolescence: A psychosocial approach.
M elbourne: M acMillan Education.
Heckhausen, J., Dixon, R.A., & Baltes, P.B. (1989). Gains and losses in development
throughout adulthood as perceived by different adult age groups.
Developmental Psychology, 25, 109-121.
Heimer, K., & M atsueda, R.L. (1994). Role-taking, role commitment, and
delinquency: A theory of differential social control. American Sociological
Review, 59, 365-390.
Higgins, E.T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and
salience. In E.T. Higgins & A.W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social Psychology:
Handbook of Basic Principles. New York: Guilford Press.
Higgins, E.T., Rholes, W.S., & Jones, C.R. (1977). Category accessibility and
impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13,
141-154.
228
Hil, R. (1997). Waves, epidemics and racial war: The construction of a black
juvenile crime problem in Queensland. In J. Bessant & R.Hil (Eds.), Youth,
crime and the media: Media representation of and reaction to young people in
relation to law and order. Hobart: National Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.
Hilton, J.L., & Darley, J.M. (1985). Constructing other persons: A limit on the effect.
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 1-18.
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hirt, E.R., & M arkman, K.D. (1995). M ultiple explanation: A consider-an-alternative
strategy for debiasing judgements. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 69, 1069-1088.
Holmbeck, G.N., & Hill, J.P. (1988). Storm and stress beliefs about adolescence:
Prevalence, self-reported antecedents, and effects of an undergraduate course.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17, 285-306.
Holmes-Smith, P. (1998). Introduction to structural equation modelling using
LISREL and AMOS. M elbourne: School, Research, Evaluation and
M easurement Services.
Horowitz, F.D. (1962). The relationship of anxiety, self-concept, and sociometric
status among fourth, fifth, and sixth grade children. Journal of Abnormal and
Social Psychology, 65, 212-214.
Hort, B.E., Fagot, B.I., & Leinbach, M .D. (1990). Are peoples notions of maleness
more stereotypically framed than their notions of femaleness? Sex Roles, 23,
197-212.
Howitt, D. (1982). The Mass Media and Social Problems. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
229
Hummert, M.L. (1990). Multiple stereotypes of elderly and young adults: A
comparison of structure and evaluations. Psychology and Aging, 5, 182-193.
Hummert, M.L., Garstka, T.A., Shaner, J.L., & Strahm, S. (1994). Stereotypes of the
elderly held by young, middle-aged, and elderly adults. Journal of
Gerontology, 49, 240-249.
Huon, G.F. & McConkey, K.M. (1998). Major influences on the development of
criminal activity among young people: A qualitative study. University of
NSW, June, 1998.
Jessor, R. (1993). Successful adolescent development among youth in high-risk
settings. American Psychologist, 48, 117-126.
Jessor, R., Van Den Bos, J, Vanderryn, J., Costa, F.M ., & Turbin, M .S. (1995).
Protective factors in adolescent problem behaviour: M oderator effects and
developmental change. Developmental Psychology, 31, 923-933.
Joreskog, K.G., & Sorbom, D. (1996a). PRELIS2 users reference guide. Chicago:
Scientific Software International.
Joreskog, K.G., & Sorbom, D. (1996b). LISREL8 users reference guide. Chicago:
Scientific Software International.
Jussim, L. (1990). Social reality and social problems: The role of expectancies.
Journal of Social Issues, 46, 9-34.
Katz, D. (1960). The functional approach to the study of attitudes. Public Opinion
Quarterly, 24, 163-204.
Katz, D., & Braly, K. (1933). Racial stereotypes of one hundred undergraduates.
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 30, 175-193.

230
Katz, P.A. (1976). The acquisition of racial attitudes in children. In P.A. Katz (Ed.),
Towards the elimination of racism. New York: Pergamon.
Kenrick, D.T., Neuberg, S.L., Cialdini, R.B. (1999). Social psychology: Unraveling
the mystery. Needham Heights, M A: Allyn & Bacon.
Kinch, J.W. (1963). A formalised theory of the self-concept. American Journal of
Sociology, 68, 481-486.
Kohn, M ., & Schooler, C. (1983). Work and personality: An inquiry into the impact
of social stratification. New Jersey: Ablex.
Klimidis, S., M inas, I.H., & Ata, A.W. (1992). The PBI-BC: A brief current form of
the Parental Bonding Instrument for Adolescent Research. Comprehensive
Psychiatry, 33, 374-377.
Knight, T. (1997). Schools, delinquency, and youth culture. In A. Borowski & I.
OConnor (Eds.), Juvenile Crime and Justice Corrections. M elbourne:
Longman.
Krueger, J. (1994). Personal beliefs and cultural stereotypes about racial
characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 536-548.
Kulik, J.A. (1983). Confirmatory attribution and the perpetuation of social beliefs.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1171-1181.
Kunda, Z. (1999). Social Cognition: Making Sense of People. Cambridge, M A:
M assachusetts Institute of Technology.
Kurdek, L.A., & Fine, M .A. (1994). Family acceptance and family control as
predictors of adjustment in young adolescents: Linear, curvilinear, or
interactive effects? Child Development, 65, 1137-1146.

231
Lepore, L., & Brown, R. (1997). Category and stereotype activation: Is prejudice
inevitable? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 275-287.
Lippmann, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York: M acMillan.
Little, R.J., & Rubin, D.B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York:
Wiley.
Loehlin, J.C. (1992). Latent variable models: An introduction to factor, path, and
Structural analysis. Second edition. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Luengo, M .A., Carrillo-de-la-Pena, M .T., Otero, J.M ., & Romero, E. (1994). A short-
term longitudinal study of impulsivity and antisocial behaviour. Journal of
M acrae, N.C., Bodenhausen, G.V., M ilne, A.B., Thorn, T.M .J, and Castelli, L.
(1997). On the activation of social stereotypes: The moderating role of
processing objectives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33,
471-489.
M ak, A.S. (1990). Testing a psychosocial control theory of delinquency. Criminal
Justice and Behaviour, 17, 215-230.
M ak, A.S. (1993). A self-report delinquency scale for Australian adolescents.
Australian Journal of Psychology, 45, 75-79.
M ak, A.S. (1994). Parental neglect and overprotection as risk factors in delinquency.
Australian Journal of Psychology, 46, 107-111.
M ak, A.S. & Kinsella, C. (1996). Adolescent drinking, conduct problems, and
parental bonding. Australian Journal of Psychology, 48, 15-20.

232
M alhotra, N.K. (1987). Analysing marketing research data with incomplete
information on the dependent variable. Journal of Marketing Research, 24,
74-84.
M atsueda, R.L. (1992). Reflected appraisals, parental labeling, and delinquency:
Specifying a symbolic interactionist theory. American Journal of Sociology,
97, 1577-1611.
M cConkey, K.M ., Roche, S.M., & Sheehan, P.W. (1989). Reports of forensic
hypnosis: A critical analysis. Australian Psychologist, 24, 249-272.
M cGarty, C., & de la Haye, A. (1997). Stereotype formation: Beyond illusory
correlation. In R. Spears, P.J. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S.A. Haslam (Eds.), The
Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life. Oxford: Blackwell.
M cMahon, A. (1997). Rough justice: Juveniles and the reporting of crime in
Townsville. In J. Bessant & R. Hil (Eds.), Youth, crime and the media: Media
representation of and reaction to young people in relation to law and order.
Hobart: National Clearinghouse for Youth Studies.
M cMahon, B., & Quin, R. (1987). Stories and Stereotypes: A course in mass media.
M elbourne: Longman Cheshire.
M cKnight, J., & Sutton, J. (1994). Social Psychology. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
M ead, G.H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
M erton, R.K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. Antioch Review, 8, 193-210.
M iller, D.T., & Turnbull, W. (1986). Expectancies and interpersonal processes.
Annual Review of Psychology, 37, 233-256.

233
M oran, G.F., & Vinovskis, M .A. (1994). Troubled youth: Children at risk in early
modern England, Colonial America, and 19th-Century America. In R.D
Ketterlinus and M .E. Lamb (Eds.), Adolescent problem behaviours: Issues
and Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
M organ, M. (1982). Television and adolescents sex role stereotypes: A longitudinal
study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 947-955.
M ulvey, E.P., Arthur, M.W., & Reppucci, N.D. (1993). The prevention and treatment
of juvenile delinquency: A review of the research. Clinical Psychology
Review, 13, 133-167.
M unck, I.M. (1979). Model building in comparative education: Applications of the
LISREL method to cross-national survey data. Stockholm: Almquist &
Wiskell.
M uuss, R.E. (1996). Theories of adolescence. New York: M cGraw Hill.
M yers, D.G. (1999). Social Psychology. Boston: McGraw Hill.
Neale, J.M ., & Liebert, R.M. (1986). Science and Behaviour: An introduction to
Methods of Research. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Neuberg, S.L. (1989). The goal of forming accurate impressions during social
interactions: Attenuating the impact of negative expectancies. Journal of
New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. (1990). NSW Lower
Criminal Courts and Children's Courts Statistics.

234
Noller, P., & Patton, W. (1990). Maintaining family relationships at adolescence. In
P.C.L. Heaven & V.J Callan (Eds.), Adolescence: An Australian perspective.
Sydney: Harcourt Brace Janovich.
Norusis, M.J. (1993). SPSS for Windows: Base system users guide. Chicago: SPSS,
Inc.
OConnell, M ., Invernizzi, F., & Fuller, R. (1998). Newspaper readership and the
perception of crime: Testing an assumed relationship through a triangulation
of methods. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 3, 29-57.
ODonnell, J., Hawkins, J.D., & Abbott, R.D. (1995). Predicting serious delinquency
and substance use among aggressive boys. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Offer, D., Ostrov, E., & Howard, K.I. (1981). The mental health professionals
concept of the normal adolescent. Archives of General Psychiatry, 38,
149-153.
Offer, D., Ostrov, E., Howard, K.I., & Atkinson, R. (1988). The teenage world:
Adolescents self-image in ten countries. New York: Plenum Publishing.
Omaji, P.O. (1997). The violent juvenile offender. In A. Borowski & I. OConnor
(Eds.), Juvenile Crime and Justice Corrections. M elbourne: Longman.
OKeefe, G.J., & Reid-Nash, K. (1987). Crime news and real-world blues.
Communication Research, 14, 147-163.
Owen, L.S., & Carroll, M . (1997). An Australian agenda for delinquency research. In
A. Borowski & I. OConnor (Eds.), Juvenile Crime and Justice Corrections.
M elbourne: Longman.
235
Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L.B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument.
British Journal of Medical Psychology, 52, 1-10.
Pedhazur, E.J. (1997). Multiple Regression in Behavioural Research: Explanation
and Prediction. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace College.
Peterson, C. (1990). Disagreement, negotiation, and conflict resolution in families
with adolescents. In P.C.L. Heaven & V.J Callan (Eds) Adolescence: An
Australian perspective. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Janovich.
Powers, S.I., Hauser, S.T., & Kilner, L.A. (1989). Adolescent mental health.
American psychologist, 44, 200-208.
Reiss, A.J. (1951). Delinquency and the failure of personal and social controls.
American Sociological Review, 16, 196-207.
Rendell, P. (1997). Youth and crime in television news bulletins. In J. Bessant &
R.Hil (Eds.), Youth, crime and the media: Media representation of and
reaction to young people in relation to law and order. Hobart: National
Richards, T.J., & Richards, L. (1994). Using computers in qualitative research. In
N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rigby, K., & Slee, P. (1987). Eysencks personality factors and orientation toward
authority among schoolchildren. Australian Journal of Psychology, 39,
151-161.
Roberts, B.R. (1987). A confirmatory factor-analytic model of alienation. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 50, 346-351.

236
Rosch, E.H. (1978). Principles of categorisation. In E. Rosch & B.B. Lloyd (Eds.),
Cognition and categorisation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Roshier, R. (1973). The selection of crime news by the press. In S. Cohen & J. Young
(Eds.), The Manufacture of News: Deviance, Social Problems and the Media.
London: Constable.
Roth, P.L. (1994). M issing data: A conceptual review for applied psychologists.
Personnel Psychology, 47, 537-560.
Rutter, M ., & Giller, H. (1983). Juvenile delinquency. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Sankey, M ., & Huon, G.F. (1999). Investigating the role of alienation in a
multicomponent model of juvenile delinquency. Journal of Adolescence, 22,
95-107.
Saris, W.E., & Stronkhorst, L.H. (1984). Causal modelling in nonexperimental
Research: An introduction to the LISREL approach. Amsterdam: Sociometric
Research Foundation.
Schmidt, D.F., & Boland, S.M . (1986). The structure of impressions of older adults:
Evidence for multiple stereotypes. Psychology and Aging, 1, 255-260.
Scholte, E.M. (1992). Prevention and treatment of juvenile problem behaviour: A
proposal for a socio-ecological approach. Journal of Abnormal Child
Schumaker, R.E., & Lomax, R.G. (1996). A beginners guide to structural equation
Modelling. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schwalbe, M.L. & Staples, C.L. (1991). Gender differences in sources of self-esteem.
Social Psychology Quarterly, 54, 158-168.

237
Seeman, M . (1959). On the meaning of alienation. American Sociological Review, 34,
783-791.
Sercombe, H. (1997). Youth crime and the economy of news production. In J.
Bessant & R.Hil (Eds.), Youth, crime and the media: Media representation of
and reaction to young people in relation to law and order. Hobart: National
Sherman, S.J., Judd, C.M ., & Park, B. (1989). Social cognition. In M.R. Rosenzweig
& L.W. Porter (Eds.), Annual Review of Psychology (Vol. 10). Palo Alto, CA:
Annual Reviews.
Shrauger, S.J., & Schoeneman, T.J. (1979). Symbolic interactionist view of self-
concept: Through the looking glass darkly. Psychological Bulletin, 86,
549-573.
Smith, E.R., & M ackie, D.M . (1995). Social Psychology. New York: Worth
Publishers.
Snyder, M . (1992). M otivational foundations of behavioural confirmation. In M.P.
Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 25). Orlando,
FL: Academic Press.
Snyder, M ., Tanke, E.D., & Berscheid, E. (1977). Social perception and interpersonal
behaviour: On the self-fulfilling nature of social stereotypes. Journal of
Snyder, M ., & M eine, P. (1994). On the functions of stereotypes and prejudice. In
M .P. Zanna & J.M. Olson (Eds.), The Psychology of Prejudice: The Ontario
Symposium Volume 7. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

238
Snyder, M ., & Swann, W.B., Jr. (1978). Behavioural confirmation in social
interaction: From social perception to social reality. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 14, 148-162.
Spears, R., Oakes, P.J., Ellemers, N., & Haslam S.A. (1997). Introduction: The social
psychology of stereotyping and group life. In R. Spears, P.J. Oakes, N.
Ellemers, & S.A. Haslam (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and
Group Life. Oxford: Blackwell.
Srull, T.K., & Wyer, R.S., Jr. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the
interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and
implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660-1672.
Srull, T.K., & Wyer, R.S., Jr. (1980). Category accessibility and social perception:
Some implications for the study of person memory and interpersonal
judgements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38, 841-85.
Standing Committee on Law and Justice (1999). Crime Prevention Through Social
Support. Sydney, NSW: Parliament of New South Wales Legislative Council.
Stevens, J. (1986). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stoller, C.L., Offer, D., Howard, K.I., & Koenig, L. (1996). Psychiatrists concept of
adolescent self-image. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 25, 273-283.
Sullivan, R., & Wilson, M .F. (1995). New directions for research in prevention and
treatment of delinquency: A review and proposal. Adolescence, 30, 1-17.
Surette, R. (1990). Criminal justice policy and the media. In R. Surette (Ed.), The
M edia and Criminal Justice Policy. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas.

239
Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (1989). Using multivariate statistics. New York:
Harper & Row.
Taylor, S.E. (1981). A categorisation approach to stereotyping. In D.L. Hamilton
(Ed.), Cognitive Processes in Stereotyping and Intergroup Behaviour.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Thompson, W.C., Fong, G.T., & Rosenhan, D.L. (1981). Inadmissible evidence and
juror verdicts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 453-463.
Thornberry, T.P. (1987). Toward an interactional theory of delinquency.
Criminology, 25, 863-887.
Webber, R. (1998). Voices of authority: Press reports about problematic young
people. Just Policy, 14, 32-40.
White, J.L., M offitt, T.E., Caspi, A., Bartusch, D.J., Needles, D.J., &
Stouthamer-Loeber, M . (1994). M easuring impulsivity and examining its
relationship to delinquency. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 192-205.
White, R. (1997). Police practices, punishment and juvenile crime prevention. In A.
Borowski & I. OConnor (Eds.), Juvenile Crime and Justice Corrections.
M elbourne: Longman.
Willis, M .R. (1981). The maligning of adolescence: Why? Adolescence, 26, 953-958.
Wills, T.A. (1981). Downward social comparison principles in social psychology.
Psychological Bulletin, 90, 245-271.
Wilson, J.Q., & Herrnstein, R. (1985). Crime and human nature. New York: Simon
& Schuster.
240
Windschuttle, K. (1988). The media: A new analysis of the press, television, radio
and advertising in Australia. Ringwood, Vic: Penguin.
Word, C.O., Zanna, M .P., & Cooper, J. (1974). The nonverbal mediation of self-
fulfilling prophecies in interracial interaction. Journal of Experimental Social
Yoshikawa, H. (1994). Prevention as cumulative protection: Effects of early family
support and education on chronic delinquency and its risks. Psychological
Bulletin, 115, 28-54.

241
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix to Chapter 2 (Studies 1 through to 4)
STUDY 1: The cultural stereotype of youth
List of descriptors (and mean social desirability ratings) produced in the

content generation phase
List of descriptors that were shown to comprise the cultural stereotype of

youth
STUDY 2A: Personal beliefs about youth
List of descriptors that were shown to comprise young adults' personal beliefs
about youth
List of descriptors that were shown to comprise older adults' personal beliefs
about youth
STUDY 3A: Young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about youth
List of descriptors that were shown to comprise young people's perceptions of

adults' beliefs about youth
List of descriptors that were shown to comprise young people's beliefs about
themselves
242
S TUDY 1
List of descriptors (and mean social desirability ratings)

produced in the content generation phase
Descriptor Social desirability rating

M SD
Is a drug addict 5.66 0.7

Is violent 5.58 0.7
Steals 5.58 0.9
Is a drug user 5.44 0.9
Bullies 5.44 0.7
Is destructive 5.36 0.8
Has low self-esteem 5.34 0.8
Is disrespectful 5.32 0.8
Is unhappy 5.32 0.8
Is uneducated 5.28 1.0
Is a trouble-maker 5.27 0.7
Is dishonest 5.22 1.0
Is rude 5.21 0.8
Becomes pregnant 5.21 0.9
Has problems at home 5.21 0.9
Is depressed 5.15 0.9
Is irresponsible 5.09 0.9
Lacks ambition 5.09 0.8
Has behaviour problems 5.08 0.9
Is a dole bludger 5.08 1.0
Graffitis 5.05 0.9
Smokes 5.05 1.0
Belongs to gangs 5.04 1.0
Is undisciplined 4.96 1.1
Is arrogant 4.94 0.9
Uses marijuana 4.94 1.2
Is easily led 4.94 1.0
Is selfish 4.94 1.0
Is impulsive 4.91 1.1
Lacks confidence 4.91 1.0
Is aggressive 4.88 1.2
Is snobby 4.88 1.0
Doesn't care about school 4.87 1.1
Is lazy 4.87 1.0
Has poor communication with parents 4.82 1.1
Is spoilt 4.82 0.9
243

M SD
Is foolish 4.76 1.1

Is annoying 4.73 1.0
Has a bad attitude 4.71 1.2
Has a defeatist attitude 4.69 1.3
Swears 4.67 1.1
Hates authority 4.61 1.1
Watches too much TV 4.54 1.0
Is bored 4.50 1.0
Eats a lot of junk food 4.48 1.2
Is moody 4.48 0.9
Is materialistic 4.42 1.5
Is rebellious 4.38 1.4
Is confused 4.32 1.0
Is unsupervised 4.31 1.2
Is influenced by American culture 4.27 1.2
Is under pressure 4.27 1.3
Uses alcohol 4.16 1.2
Shows off 4.13 1.0
Is a fashion victim 4.09 1.2
Friends are more important than family 4.07 1.2
Is noisy 3.86 1.1
Is wild 3.78 1.4
Is skinny 3.74 1.2
Is scruffy 3.73 1.2
Has too easy a life 3.69 1.4
Is nerdy 3.59 1.2
Is sexually active 3.53 1.3
Stays out until late 3.46 1.3
Is fashion conscious 3.38 1.3
Goes to dance parties 3.31 1.3
Is outrageous 3.21 1.5
Wants to be popular 3.19 1.1
Hangs around in large groups 3.14 1.3
Is risk taking 3.06 1.5
Is layed back 3.05 1.1
Is boy-girl crazy 3.04 1.3
Is testing his or her limits 3.00 1.6
Listens to loud music 3.00 1.1
Is dreamy 2.82 1.4
Skates 2.76 1.0
Is outspoken 2.74 1.4
244

M SD
Is carefree 2.31 1.5

Surfs 2.24 1.3
Is attractive 2.14 1.2
Is talkative 1.99 1.3
Wants freedom 1.96 1.2
Is competitive 1.95 1.4
Is adventure seeking 1.76 1.3
Places great emphasis on individuality 1.74 1.4
Is assertive 1.65 1.6
Is sporty 1.64 1.1
Is funny 1.49 1.2
Is studious 1.48 1.4
Has casual jobs 1.41 1.3
Explores new things 1.38 1.2
Is independent 1.34 1.2
Is keen to travel 1.28 1.2
Is smart 1.13 1.2
Is computer literate 1.11 1.2
Is healthy 1.11 1.2
Is well mannered 1.10 1.3
Is environmentally minded 1.04 1.1
Is ambitious 1.00 1.2
Is open minded 0.94 1.3
Is caring 0.89 1.2
Works hard to achieve goals 0.87 1.2
Is confident 0.87 1.1
Is enthusiastic 0.86 1.1
Is helpful 0.85 1.1
Does the right thing 0.78 1.1
Is educated 0.69 1.0
Is happy 0.54 1.1
245
List of descriptors that were shown to comprise

the cultural stereotype of youth
Negative descriptors Neutral descriptors

Is violent Is noisy
Is destructive Is wild
Uses drugs Has too easy a life
Is disrespectful Is scruffy
Is a trouble maker Stays out until late
Is rude Is sexually active
Has problems at home Is fashion conscious
Is dishonest Goes to dance parties
Is irresponsible Wants to be popular
Has behaviour problems Hangs out in large groups
Smokes Is risk taking
Graffitis Is testing his or her limits
Belongs to gangs Listens to loud music
Is undisciplined Is boy-girl crazy
Is impulsive
Doesnt care about school Positive descriptors
Is easily led Is dreamy
Is selfish Is outspoken
Is lazy Is talkative
Is arrogant Wants freedom
Is aggressive Is adventure-seeking
Is spoilt Explores new things
Is foolish Is keen to travel
Has poor communication with parents Is computer literate
Has a bad attitude
Swears
Hates authority
Is moody
Watches too much TV
Eats junk food
Is materialistic
Is rebellious
Is influenced by American culture
Is unsupervised
Is confused
Uses alcohol
Friends are more important than family
Is a fashion victim
Shows off
246
S TUDY 2A

young adults' personal beliefs about youth
Negative descriptors
Is easily led
Is impulsive
Has poor communication with parents
Swears
Hates authority
Watches too much TV
Eats junk food
Is moody
Is materialistic
Is rebellious
Is confused
Is under pressure
Uses alcohol
Shows off
Is a fashion victim
Neutral descriptors
Is noisy
Is sexually active
Stays out late
Is fashion conscious
Wants to be popular
Hangs around in large groups
Is risk taking
Is boy-girl crazy
Is testing his or her limits
Listens to loud music
Positive descriptors
Wants freedom
Is competitive
Has casual jobs
Explores new things
Is keen to travel
Is computer literate
Is healthy
Is educated
247

older adults' personal beliefs about youth
Negative descriptors Positive descriptors

Is undisciplined Is outspoken
Is easily led Wants freedom
Is selfish Is competitive
Is impulsive Is adventure-seeking
Has poor communication with parents Is assertive
Is spoilt Is sporty
Swears Has casual jobs
Hates authority Is independent
Watches too much TV Is keen to travel
Is bored Is smart
Eats junk food Is computer literate
Is moody Is environmentally minded
Is materialistic Is ambitious
Is rebellious Is open minded
Is unsupervised Works hard to achieve goals
Is influenced by American culture Is confident
Is under pressure Is enthusiastic
Uses alcohol Is educated
Shows off
Is a fashion victim
Neutral descriptors
Is noisy
Is sexually active
Stays out late
Wants to be popular
Is risk taking
Is boy-girl crazy
248
S TUDY 3A

young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about youth
Negative descriptors Is testing his or her limits

Is disrespectful Listens to loud music
Is a trouble maker
Is dishonest Positive descriptors
Is rude Is outspoken
Is irresponsible Is talkative
Smokes Wants freedom
Is undisciplined Is sporty
Is easily led Is computer literate
Is selfish
Is impulsive
Doesnt care about school
Is lazy
Is spoilt
Is foolish
Swears
Hates authority
Watches too much TV
Eats junk food
Is moody
Is materialistic
Is rebellious
Uses alcohol
Shows off
Is a fashion victim
Neutral descriptors
Is noisy
Is wild
Is scruffy
Has too easy a life
Stays out until late
Goes to dance parties (raves)
Wants to be popular
Is risk taking
Is boy-girl crazy
249

young people's beliefs about themselves
Negative descriptors Positive descriptors

Swears Is talkative
Hates authority Wants freedom
Watches too much TV Is competitive
Eats junk food Is adventure seeking
Is moody Is sporty
Is materialistic Explores new things
Is rebellious Is keen to travel
Is influenced by American culture Is computer literate
Is under pressure Is healthy
Uses alcohol Is educated
Is a fashion victim
Neutral descriptors
Stays out until late
Wants to be popular
Is risk taking
Is boy-girl crazy
250
Appendix B
Appendix to Chapter 3 (Study 6)
STUDY 6: Newspaper readership and stereotypic beliefs about youth
Statistical summaries
Table B4.1
Regression analysis summary table predicting beliefs that young people adhere to
popular notions of adolescence from newspaper readership habits
Sum of M ean
M odel Squares df Square F Sig.
Regression 1.42 1 1.42 6.10 .02
Residual 22.58 96 0.24
Total 24.00 97
SE of
M odel R R2 Adj R 2 Estimate
1 0.24 0.06 0.05 0.48
Unstandardised coeff Stand. coeff

M odel B SE Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 2.35 0.32 7.35 .00
Pop Notions 0.03 0.02 -0.24 -2.46 .02

251
Table B4.2
Regression analysis summary table predicting beliefs that young people lack
discipline from newspaper readership habits
Sum of M ean
Regression 2.52 1 2.52 11.26 .00
Residual 21.48 96 0.22
Total 24.00 97
SE of
1 0.32 0.11 0.10 0.47

1 (Constant) 2.22 0.32 11.11 .00
(Lack of) 0.04 0.02 -0.32 -3.36 .00

Discipline
252
Table B4.3
Regression analysis summary table predicting beliefs that young people are seeking
independence from newspaper readership habits
Sum of M ean
Regression 0.47 1 0.47 1.92 .17
Residual 23.53 96 0.25
Total 24.00 97
SE of
1 0.14 0.02 0.01 0.50

1 (Constant) 2.05 0.35 5.84 .00

(Seeking)
Independence 0.01 0.01 -0.14 -1.39 .17
253
Table B4.4
Regression analysis summary table predicting beliefs that young people are
conventional from newspaper readership habits
Sum of M ean
Regression 0.08 1 0.08 0.33 .57
Residual 23.73 95 0.25
Total 23.81 96
SE of
1 0.06 0.03 -0.07 0.50

1 (Constant) 1.39 0.32 4.41 .00
Conventionalism 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.57 .57

254
Table B4.5
Regression analysis summary table predicting beliefs that young people engage in
problem behaviour from newspaper readership habits
Sum of M ean
Regression 0.92 1 0.92 3.81 .05
Residual 23.08 96 0.24
Total 24.00 97
SE of
1 0.20 0.04 0.03 0.49

1 (Constant) 2.13 0.29 7.37 .00

Problem
Behaviour 0.03 0.02 -0.20 -1.95 .05
255
Table B4.6
Discriminant function analysis summary table predicting newspaper readership habits
(Tests of equality of group means)
Wilks
Lambda F df1 df2 Sig.
Popular notions of adolescence 0.94 5.82 1 95 .02
Undisciplined 0.90 10.67 1 95 .00
Independence seeking 0.98 2.00 1 95 .16
Conventional 0.99 0.33 1 95 .57
Problem behaviour 0.95 4.88 1 95 .03

256
Appendix C
Appendix to Chapter 4 (Studies 7 and 8)
STUDY 7: Stereotypic beliefs about youth: Effects on evaluations of young people
M aterials
Pilot materials for the scrambled sentence task
Scrambled sentence task
Target paragraph
Trait rating scales
Filler task
STUDY 8: The behavioural confirmation of stereotypic beliefs about youth
M aterials
Trait rating scales
Outside observer rating scale
257
S TUDY 7
M aterials
Pilot materials for the scrambled sentence task
In the space provided below, please list as many behaviours as come to mind that are
characteristic of irresponsibility in young people. If you need, you may continue
writing on the back of the page.
Now, could you please list as many behaviours as come to mind that are characteristic
of disrespectfulness in young people. Again, if you run out of space, continue on
the back of the page.
258
Below is a list of behaviours that could be said to be characteristic of either

disrespectfulness or irresponsibility. For each behaviour, please indicate the
typical age group that the behaviour is most characteristic of. For example, if
you believe that the item is most descriptive of the behaviour of young people
and doesnt describe adult behaviour at all, you would circle 7. Alternatively,
if you think that the item completely describes adult behaviour but is not at all
characteristic of young peoples behaviour, then you should circle 1. A rating
of 4 would indicate that the behaviour is equally characteristic of young people
and adults.
__________________________________________________________________
completely completely
describes adults describes y outh
1. Ignores social rules 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
2. Damages peoples property 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
3. Speeds when driving 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
4. Is never grateful 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
5. Has unprotected sex 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
6. Disregards personal safety 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
7. Takes many risks 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
8. Unhelpful toward others 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
9. Uses illegal drugs 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
10. Is a litterer 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
11. Left school early 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
12. Jumps the queue 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
13. Lives for today 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
14. Is always noisy 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
15. Lies to others 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
16. Behaviour is inconsiderate 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
17. Vandalises public property 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
18. Disobeys authority figures 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7

259
describes adults describes youth
19. Uses bad language 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
20. Often carries weapons 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
21. Always interrupts people 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
22. Often dresses inappropriately 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
23. Drives while drunk 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
24. Leaves electricity running 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
25. Has bad manners 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
26. Unwilling to work 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
27. Is always impatient 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
28. Uncaring of others 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
29. A smart alec 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
30. Defies his elders 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
31. Not security conscious 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
32. Deliberately ignores people 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
33. Late for work 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
34. Speaks over others 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
35. Doesnt save money 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
36. Disregards others' safety 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
37. Is a shoplifter 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
38. Disregards others feelings 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
39. Gets into fights 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
40. Enters without knocking 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
41. Degrades other people 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
42. Threatens elderly people 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7

260
describes adults describes youth
43. Loses borrowed items 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
44. Ignores peoples advice 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
45. Forgets important 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7

appointments
46. Intolerant of elders 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
47. Leaves lights on 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
48. Graffitis public spaces 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
49. Careless with belongings 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
50. Is never punctual 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
51. Eats junk food 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
52. Doesnt do chores 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
53. Always slams doors 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
54. Rebels against parents 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
55. Pollutes the environment 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
56. Shouts at others 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
57. Never plans ahead 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
58. Never cleans up 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
59. Has loud parties 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
60. Often drinks excessively 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
61. Room is untidy 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7

261
Scrambled sentence task
Youth prime condition
Be low is a se rie s of scramble d se nte nce s. Each sentence begins with the word he and
contains four othe r words. Your task is to unscramble each sente nce so that it is
me aningful and grammatically corre ct. This can only be achieved by eliminating an
incorre ct word. The word he is always the first word of the se ntence . For e ach
scramble d se nte nce ple ase numbe r the thre e additional words ne ede d to form the
me aningful and grammatically corre ct se nte nce .
E.G. He planting2 is 1 tulips 3 are
1. He loud has have parties

2. He vandalises if property public
3. He threatens people an elderly

4. He the an answered phone
5. He has have the card

6. He carries often the weapons
7. He personal safety had disregards
8. He gets in on fights
9. He chores do a doesnt
10. He thought an through it
11. He peoples damages does property
12. He the matter our discussed
13. He without with enters knocking
14. He uses drugs a illegal
15. He ignores social that rules

16. He for prepared it of
17. He got the a things
18. He has never is grateful
19. He cleans at up never
20. He a their shoplifter is

21. He read book by the
262
22. He is unprotected has sex

23. He is running electricity leaves
24. He date thee set the
25. He is defies elders his

26. He against is parents rebels
27. He public has spaces graffitis
28. He figures the disobeys authority
Neutral prime condition
Be low is a se rie s of scramble d se nte nce s. Each sentence begins with the word he and
contains four other words. Your task is to unscramble e ach se nte nce so that it is
me aningful and grammatically corre ct. This can only be achieved by eliminating an
incorre ct word. The word he is always the first word of the se ntence . For e ach
scramble d se nte nce ple ase numbe r the thre e additional words ne e de d to form the
me aningful and grammatically corre ct se nte nce .
E.G. He planting2 is 1 tulips 3 are
1. He the an answered phone

2. He has have the card
3. He reached it for of
4. He away it threw a
5. He date thee set the
6. He saw figure an a
7. He thought an through it
8. He an reported it on
9. He the matter our discussed
10. He ordered thus meal the

12. He got the a things
13. He box it lifted the
14. He bought a under ticket
15. He read book by the
263
16. He under the sound heard
17. He of door opened the

18. He a last arrived at
19. He often a comes over

20. He locked four window the
21. He marked before line the
22. He the doubted off reason

23. He saw a either movie
24. He for a hoped it
25. He you spoke most of
26. He a gave gift are

28. He so shirt has a
Target paragraph
Adult version
Ben catches the train to work on most days. It is peak hour around that time, and so
he always makes sure to get to the front of the queue so that he gets a seat. Last
Tuesday Ben slept in a little and arrived just as the train doors were closing. He
managed to slip through the doors and a woman smiled at him and said, That was
lucky! Ben walked straight passed her to an empty seat. As the train began to move,
Ben spotted a friend of his, Tim, at the opposite end of the carriage. He yelled out to
Tim to come over. His voice was so loud that everyone in the carriage looked up.
Tim came over and they chatted for a few minutes. They made plans to see a movie
on the weekend and Tim got off at the next stop. At that moment, Ben realised that he
hadnt eaten because he had been running late. The breakfast that his wife had made
for him was probably still sitting on the table He took out a M ars bar from his bag,
put his feet up on the chair in front of him, and ate his breakfast. For the remainder of
the journey Ben read the newspaper.
Finally the train arrived at his station. Ben got off and threw the M ars bar wrapper
toward a nearby rubbish bin. He missed and it landed on the ground. He shrugged his
shoulders and headed toward his work. On the way, Ben passed his favourite CD
store. He just had to go in and buy something. When he got to the counter, he realised
he only had $20 of his own money and $15 that he owed a friend. The CD he wanted
264
was $30 so he decided to use $10 of what he owed his friend. He would give him $5
today and pay the rest back another day. As he left the store he glanced at his watch
and realised he was already 10 minutes late for work. Where had the time gone? He
ran as fast as he could and walked through the doors 15 minutes late. When his boss
asked why he was late Ben said that the train had arrived late. His boss commented
on how unreliable public transport was and Ben took his seat.
Youth version
Ben catches the train to school on most days. It is peak hour around that time, and so
he always makes sure to get to the front of the queue so that he gets a seat. Last
Tuesday Ben slept in a little and arrived just as the train doors were closing. He
managed to slip through the doors and a woman smiled at him and said, That was
lucky! Ben walked straight passed her to an empty seat. As the train began to move,
Ben spotted a friend of his, Tim, at the opposite end of the carriage. He yelled out to
Tim to come over. His voice was so loud that everyone in the carriage looked up.
Tim came over and they chatted for a few minutes. They made plans to see a movie
on the weekend and Tim got off at the next stop. At that moment, Ben realised that he
hadnt eaten because he had been running late. The breakfast that his mum had made
for him was probably still sitting on the table He took out a M ars bar from his bag,
put his feet up on the chair in front of him, and ate his breakfast. For the remainder of
the journey Ben read the newspaper.
Finally the train arrived at his station. Ben got off and threw the M ars bar wrapper
toward a nearby rubbish bin. He missed and it landed on the ground. He shrugged his
shoulders and headed toward his school. On the way, Ben passed his favourite CD
store. He just had to go in and buy something. When he got to the counter, he realised
he only had $20 of his own money and $15 that he owed a friend. The CD he wanted
was $30 so he decided to use $10 of what he owed his friend. He would give him $5
today and pay the rest back another day. As he left the store he glanced at his watch
and realised he was already 10 minutes late for school. Where had the time gone? He
ran as fast as he could and walked through the doors 15 minutes late. When his
teacher asked why he was late Ben said that the train had arrived late. His teacher
commented on how unreliable public transport was and Ben took his seat.
265
Trait rating scales
Now could you please think back to your overall impression that you formed of
Ben and then rate Ben on the following scales. Please make your rating by
circling the appropriate number opposite each item.
not at all extremely
1. disrespectful 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
2. irresponsible 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
3. boring 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
4. rude 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
5. unreliable 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
6. superficial 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
7. insulting 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
8. selfish 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
9. greedy 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
10. offensive 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
11. thoughtless 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
12. narrow-minded 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
13. insolent 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
14. distrustful 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
266
Filler task
Be low is a spe e d and accuracy numbe r che cking te st. You will be presented with pairs
of numbe rs. If the two numbe rs in e ach pair are exactly the SAME, write the letter S
in the space provide d; if the y are DIFFERENT, write the le tte r D in the space
provide d. You must start and stop work immediate ly when you are told. Work as fast
as you can without making mistake s.
S ample items S 1. 6359....6359 S
S 2. 235....253 D
1. 284....284 _______ 22. 5903....5903 _______

2. 1027....1027 _______ 23. 44438069986....44438069884 ______
3. 34214....34214 _______ 24. 142909340447....142908340447 ____
4. 618177232....618177232 _______ 25. 5843280....5843250 _______
5. 6115181....6115181 _______ 26. 1043672....1043672 _______
6. 9176....9177 _______ 27. 44388....44377 _______
7. 977908....977908 _______ 28. 906959195185....906959194185 ____

8. 364618349....364518349 _______ 29. 41471025629....41471025629 ______
9. 889899....889898 _______ 30. 919414631....919419631 _______
10. 437598....437568 _______ 31. 80065418....80063418 _______

11. 3662063441....3662063441 _______ 32. 67727....67727 _______
12. 78472....78427 _______ 33. 5940241....5940241 _______

13. 876862154....876862154 _______ 34. 303372....303373 _______
14. 4760921077....4760921077 _______ 35. 9018481326....9018481326 _______
15. 56888759416....56888759416 ______ 36. 61813196820....61813198620 ______

16. 25745....25746 _______ 37. 4288....4288 _______
17. 315....305 _______ 38. 77943005392....77943055392 ______
18. 28501643362....28501643362 ______ 39. 788319761694....788319761694 ____
19. 6329....6329 _______ 40. 877....877 ______
20. 456558265176....456558265176 ____ 41. 914305964....914304964 _______
21. 396....396 _______ 42. 849777....849977 _______
267
43. 7371....7371 _______ 72. 87452....87452 _______

44. 722056201....720256201 _______ 73. 2519648....2519648 _______
45. 75138....75138 _______ 74. 230241460444....230241464444 ____
46. 374860....374960 _______ 75. 55856....55836 _______

47. 68080235903....68008235903 ______ 76. 6845196959....6845196659 _______
48. 1423986....1423986 _______ 77. 69337316128....69337316128 ______
49. 4905....4900 _______ 78. 66421....66421 _______
50. 336578....336579 _______ 79. 662141....662241 _______
51. 7632....7623 _______ 80. 87054652....87053652 _______

52. 4333420259....4333420259 _______ 81. 4690610306....4690611306 _______
53. 2831934....28331914 _______ 82. 1188530....1188530 _______
54. 971921633469....971921633469 ____ 83. 11059206....11059206 _______

55. 828037142....828037142 ______ 84. 339424202....339424212 _______
56. 368....368 _______ 85. 2849....2849 _______

57. 65107100....65107110 _______ 86. 1519746723....1519746423 _______
58. 24655....24655 _______ 87. 564127088....564121088 _______
59. 272640775....272640755 ______ 88. 5749364....5749394 _______

60. 7914....7914 _______ 89. 778....778 _______
61. 4751493396....4751439395 _______ 90. 241070....241070 _______
62. 24655....24655 _______ 91. 50000778234....50000787234 ______
63. 272640775....272640755 _______ 92. 44377....44377 _______
64. 406464457....406465457 _______ 93. 9057551747....9057551747 _______

65. 62707342601....62707342601 ______ 94. 50746467....50747467 _______
66. 624003....624003 _______ 95. 440470220284....440470220087 ____
67. 984818979....984817979 _______ 96. 946....946 _______
68. 50641918....50641908 _______ 97. 7573517049....7573517069 _______
69. 3854....3854 _______ 98. 761836163416....761836263416 ____
70. 4686097....4686097 _______ 99. 1737718164....1737718164 _______
71. 907....907 _______ 100. 5495575....5495575 _______

268
S TUDY 7
Table C5.1
ANOVA summary table for irresponsible ratings according to prime type (neutral
versus youth) and target age (adult versus youth)
Sum of M ean
Regression 44.11 7 6.30 2.09 .06
Residual 156.74 52 3.01
Total 200.85 59
Unstandardised Coeff. Stand Coeff

(Constant) 12.34 1.56 7.89 .00
Prime type 1.48 1.56 .81 0.95 .35
Target age 0.26 1.56 .14 0.16 .87
Subject age -0.27 0.08 -.67 -3.41 .00
Prime x
Target age 2.70 1.56 1.48 1.72 .09
Subject age
x Target age 0.01 0.08 -.13 -0.15 .88
Subject age
x Prime type 0.08 0.08 -1.01 -1.13 .26
Subject age
x Target age
x Prime type -0.13 0.08 -1.46 -1.62 .11
269
Table C5.2
T-test summary table for differences in irresponsible ratings of the youth target
according to prime type (youth versus neutral)
Variable N M ean SD SE of M ean
Youth prime 15 7.47 1.51 0.39
Neutral prime 15 6.53 1.81 0.47
Variances t df 2 tail Sig. SE of Diff 95% CI
Equal 1.54 28 .14 0.61 -0.31, 2.18
Table C5.3
T-test summary table for differences in irresponsible ratings of the adult target
Youth prime 15 7.00 2.07 0.53
Neutral prime 15 7.20 2.01 0.52
Equal -0.27 28 .79 0.74 -1.73, 1.33

270
Table C5.4
T-test summary table for differences in irresponsible ratings of the target (adult versus
youth) after the youth prime
Youth target 15 7.47 1.51 0.39
Adult target 15 7.00 2.07 0.53
Equal 0.71 28 .70 0.66 -0.89, 1.82
Table C5.5
T-test summary table for differences in irresponsible ratings of the target (adult versus
youth) after the neutral prime
Youth target 15 6.53 1.81 0.47
Adult target 15 7.20 2.01 0.52
Equal -0.96 28 .35 0.70 -2.10, 0.76

271
Table C5.6
ANOVA summary table for disrespectful ratings according to prime type (neutral
versus youth) and target age (adult versus youth)
Sum of M ean
Regression 56.98 7 8.14 2.63 .02
Residual 160.96 52 3.10
Total 217.93 59

(Constant) 12.57 1.59 7.93 .00
Prime type 2.71 1.59 1.42 1.71 .09
Target age 1.66 1.59 .87 1.05 .30
Subject age -0.29 0.08 -.68 -3.52 .00
Prime x
Target age 2.34 1.59 1.23 1.47 .15
Subject age
x Target age 0.07 0.08 -.86 -0.98 .33
Subject age
x Prime type -0.16 0.08 -1.79 -2.05 .05
Subject age
x Target age
x Prime type -0.11 0.08 -1.20 -1.38 .17
272
Table C5.7
T-test summary table for differences in disrespectful ratings of the youth target
Youth prime 15 7.60 1.30 0.34
Neutral prime 15 6.20 1.93 0.50
Equal 2.33 28 .03 0.60 0.17, 2.63
Table C5.8
T-test summary table for differences in disrespectful ratings of the adult target
Youth prime 15 7.27 1.98 0.51
Neutral prime 15 7.07 2.25 0.58
Equal 0.26 28 .80 0.77 -1.39, 1.79

273
Table C5.9
T-test summary table for differences in disrespectful ratings of the target (adult versus
youth) after the youth prime
Youth target 15 7.60 1.30 0.34
Adult target 15 7.27 1.98 0.51
Equal 0.55 28 .59 0.61 -0.92, 1.59
Table C5.10
T-test summary table for differences in disrespectful ratings of the target (adult versus
youth) after the neutral prime
Youth target 15 6.20 1.93 0.50
Adult target 15 7.07 2.25 0.58
Equal -1.13 28 .27 0.77 -2.44, 0.70

274
Table C5.11
ANOVA summary table for semantically related to irresponsible ratings according to

prime type (neutral versus youth) and target age (adult versus youth)
Sum of M ean
Regression 778.27 7 111.18 2.649 .03
Residual 2320.32 52 44.62
Total 3098.58 59

(Constant) 48.77 6.02 8.10 .00
Prime type 5.05 6.02 0.70 0.84 .41
Target age 0.44 6.02 0.06 0.07 .94
Subject age -1.04 0.30 -.67 -3.46 .00
Prime x
Target age 10.91 6.02 1.52 1.81 .07
Subject age
x Target age 0.07 0.30 -0.02 -0.03 .98
Subject age
x Prime type -0.33 0.30 -0.97 -1.10 .28
Subject age
x Target age
x Prime type -0.50 0.30 -1.46 -1.66 .10
275
Table C5.12
T-test summary table for differences in semantically related to irresponsible ratings of

the youth target according to prime type (youth versus neutral)
Youth prime 15 7.57 1.52 0.39
Neutral prime 15 6.28 1.95 0.51
Equal 2.01 28 .05 0.64 -0.10, 2.59
Table C5.13

the adult target according to prime type (youth versus neutral)
Youth prime 15 7.08 1.98 0.51
Neutral prime 15 7.15 1.70 0.44
Equal -0.10 28 0.92 0.67 1.44, 1.31

276
Table C5.14

the target (adult versus youth) after the youth prime
Youth target 15 7.57 1.52 0.39
Adult target 15 7.08 1.98 0.51
Equal 0.75 28 .46 0.64 -0.83, 1.80
Table C5.15

the target (adult versus youth) after the neutral prime
Youth target 15 6.28 1.95 0.51
Adult target 15 7.15 1.70 0.44
Equal -1.30 28 .21 0.67 -2.24, 0.50

277
Table C5.16
ANOVA summary table for semantically related to disrespectful ratings according to

prime type (neutral versus youth) and target age (adult versus youth)
Sum of M ean
Regression 671.22 7 95.89 1.79 .11
Residual 2788.96 52 53.63
Total 3460.18 59

(Constant) 44.70 6.60 6.77 .00
Prime type 12.37 6.60 1.63 1.88 .07
Target age 7.65 6.60 1.01 1.16 .25
Subject age -0.99 0.33 -.60 -2.99 .00
Prime x
Target age 7.87 6.60 1.04 1.19 .24
Subject age
x Target age -0.37 0.33 -1.01 -1.11 .27
Subject age
x Prime type -0.69 0.33 -1.91 -2.10 .04
Subject age
x Target age
x Prime type -0.37 0.33 -1.03 -1.13 .27
278
Table C5.17
T-test summary table for differences in semantically related to disrespectful ratings of

the youth target according to prime type (youth versus neutral)
Youth prime 15 6.65 1.84 0.48
Neutral prime 15 5.68 2.18 0.56
Equal 1.34 28 .19 0.74 -0.52, 2.49
Table C5.18

the adult target according to prime type (youth versus neutral)
Youth prime 15 6.40 1.67 0.43
Neutral prime 15 6.40 1.99 0.51
Equal 0.00 28 1.00 0.67 -1.37, 1.37

279
Table C5.19

the target (adult versus youth) after the youth prime
Youth target 15 6.65 1.84 0.48
Adult target 15 6.40 1.67 0.43
Equal 0.39 28 .70 0.64 -1.06, 1.56
Table C5.20

the target (adult versus youth) after the neutral prime
Youth target 15 5.67 2.18 0.56
Adult target 15 6.40 1.99 0.51
Equal -0.96 28 .34 0.76 -2.29, 0.83

280
Table C5.21
ANOVA summary table for semantically unrelated evaluatively negative ratings

according to prime type (neutral versus youth) and target age (adult versus youth)
Sum of M ean
Regression 296.62 7 42.37 1.06 .40
Residual 2073.97 52 39.88
Total 2370.58 59

(Constant) 33.17 5.69 5.83 .00
Prime type 5.29 5.69 .84 0.93 .36
Target age 0.07 5.69 -.01 -0.01 .99
Subject age -0.56 0.28 -.42 -1.98 .05
Prime x
Target age 1.44 5.69 .23 0.25 .80
Subject age
x Target age 0.03 0.28 .13 0.13 .89
Subject age
x Prime type -0.33 0.28 -1.09 -1.15 .26
Subject age
x Target age
x Prime type 0.05 0.28 -.17 -0.18 .86
281
Table C5.22
T-test summary table for subjects recall of youth primes in the adult versus youth
target conditions
Youth target 15 2.27 1.58 0.41
Adult target 15 3.40 2.26 0.58
Equal -1.59 28 .12 0.71 -2.59, 0.33

282
S TUDY 8
M aterials
Trait rating scales
Before introduction of the prime
During the word guessing game, you would have almost certainly formed an
initial impression of your interaction partner. Based on that impression, please
rate him or her in terms of each of the following characteristics. Please make
your ratings by circling the appropriate number on each of the relevant rating
scales.
___________________________________________________________________
My interaction partner seems to be:
1. rude 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
2. arrogant 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
3. boring 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
4. courteous 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
5. superficial 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
6. insulting 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
7. narrow-minded 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
8. offensive 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
9. humorless 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
10. incompetent 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
11. impolite 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
283
After introduction of the prime
Now that you have interacted with your partner a second time, your impression
of him or her might well have changed in some respects. Based on the
interaction you have just had with your partner, please now indicate the degree
to which he or she is characterised by each of the traits presented below. Please
make your ratings by circling the appropriate number on each of the relevant
rating scales.
____________________________________________________________________
My interaction partner seems to be:
1. rude 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
2. arrogant 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
3. boring 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
4. courteous 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
5. superficial 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
6. insulting 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
7. narrow-minded 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
8. offensive 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
9. humorless 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
10. incompetent 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
11. impolite 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7 : 8 : 9 : 10
284
Outside observer rating scale
1 - The individual is extremely polite. Continues to give clues in a friendly manner,

regardless of the others performance.
2 - The individual is neither polite nor rude. Flattened affect indicating civil, yet
indifferent attitude.
3 - Subtle signs of frustration. Occasional sighing, terseness of language. Use of long

nos.
4 - M oderate signs of frustration. Frequent sighing, increasing voice volume, and

terseness of language. Abrupt use of no.
5 - Significant signs of frustration. Characterised by outward annoyance and

impatience, but still attempts to remain civil.
6 - Display of moderate outward rudeness. Heightened voice level, significant

outward annoyance and impatience.
7 - High levels of outward rudeness. Yelling, use of insults, and derogatory

comments.
285
S TUDY 8
Table C5.23
Contrasts used in the ANOVA reported in Table C5.24
Youth prime Adult prime

(n = 28) (n = 26)
Pre Pre Post Post Pre Pre Post Post
Perc. Targ. Perc. Targ. Perc. Targ. Perc. Targ.
M 2.93 2.87 3.10 3.27 2.70 2.43 2.57 2.40
SD 0.72 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.75 0.68 0.79 0.66
Contrast
coefficients
Between
A 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1
Within
B1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1
B2 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1
Interaction
AB1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1
AB2 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1
286
Table C5.24
ANOVA summary table for outside observer rudeness ratings according to prime
type (youth versus adult), role (perceiver versus target) and time (before prime versus
after prime)
M ean
Source SS df Square F Sig.
Between subjects 39.84 26
Prime type 7.75 1 7.75 6.77 .02
Error 32.08 25 1.15
Within subjects 26.06 81
Time 0.25 1 0.25 2.55 .12
Prime type X 0.92 1 0.92 9.30 .01

Time
Error 2.77 25 0.10
Role 0.17 1 0.17 0.28 .60
Prime type X 0.60 1 0.60 1.01 .32

Role
Error 16.67 25 0.60
Prime type X 0.05 1 0.05 0.33 .57

Time X Role
Error 4.38 25 0.16

287
Table C5.25
ANOVA summary table for outside observer rudeness ratings of targets before the
introduction of the prime according to prime type (youth versus adult)
Sum of M ean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between Groups 0.36 1 0.36 1.12 .30
Within Groups 8.10 25 0.32
Total 8.46 26
Table C5.26
ANOVA summary table for outside observer rudeness ratings of targets after the
Sum of M ean
Between Groups 2.40 1 2.40 6.98 .01
Total 11.00 26
288
Table C5.27
ANOVA summary table for outside observer rudeness ratings of perceivers before the
Sum of M ean
Between Groups 0.67 1 0.67 0.10 .95
Total 11.35 26
Table C5.28
ANOVA summary table for outside observer rudeness ratings of perceivers after the
Sum of M ean
Between Groups 2.75 1 2.75 4.53 .04
Total 17.91 26
289
Table C5.29
Regression analysis summary table predicting target rudeness from prime type
Sum of M ean
Regression 2.40 1 2.40 6.98 .01
Residual 8.60 25 0.34
Total 11.00 26
SE of
2
M odel R R Adj R 2 Estimate
1 0.47 0.22 0.19 0.59

1 (Constant) 2.40 0.15 15.85 .00
Prime 0.60 0.23 0.47 2.64 .01

290
Table C5.30
Regression analysis summary table predicting perceiver rudeness from prime type
Sum of M ean
Regression 2.75 1 2.75 4.52 .04
Residual 15.16 25 0.61
Total 17.91 26
SE of
2
M odel R R Adj R 2 Estimate
1 0.39 0.15 0.12 0.78

1 (Constant) 2.57 0.20 12.76 .00
Prime 0.64 0.30 0.39 2.13 .04

291
Table C5.31
Regression analysis summary table predicting target rudeness from perceiver

rudeness
Sum of M ean
Regression 2.87 1 2.87 8.82 .01
Residual 8.13 25 0.33
Total 11.00 26
SE of
2 2
M odel R R Adj R Estimate
1 0.51 0.26 0.23 0.57

1 (Constant) 1.53 0.40 3.82 .00

Perceiver
rudeness 0.40 0.14 0.51 2.97 .01
292
Table C5.32
Regression analysis summary table predicting target rudeness from prime type,
mediated by perceiver rudeness
Sum of M ean
Regression 3.80 1 1.90 6.32 .01
Residual 7.20 25 0.30
Total 11.00 26
SE of
2 2
M odel R R Adj R Estimate
1 0.59 0.35 0.29 0.55

1 (Constant) 1.62 0.39 4.18 .00
Prime type 0.41 0.23 0.32 1.76 .09
Perceiver
rudeness 0.30 0.14 0.39 2.16 .04
293
Table C5.33
Contrasts used in the ANOVA reported in Table C5.34
Pre prime Post prime
Yth. Yth. Adlt. Adlt. Yth. Yth. Adlt. Adlt.

Perc. Targ. Perc. Targ. Perc. Targ. Perc. Targ.
M 9.13 9.73 11.73 8.73 9.20 9.87 9.67 9.13
SD 2.91 3.10 3.71 2.41 3.41 3.03 3.32 3.32
Contrast
coefficients
Between
A1 1 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1
A2 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1 -1
Within
B 1 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1
Interaction
A1B 1 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1
A2B 1 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1
294
Table C5.34
ANOVA summary table for rudeness ratings according to prime type (youth versus
adult), role (perceiver versus target) and time (before prime versus after prime)
M ean
Source SS df Square F Sig.
Between subjects 1018.30 49
Prime type 3.33 1 3.33 0.19 .66
Role 9.63 1 9.63 0.56 .46
Prime type X 43.20 1 43.20 2.51 .12

Role
Error 962.13 50 17.18
Within subjects 275.00 54
Time 4.03 1 4.03 0.94 .34
Prime type 6.53 1 6.53 1.51 .22

X Time
Role X Time 12.03 1 12.03 2.79 .10
Error 241.60 50 4.31
Prime type X 10.80 1 10.80 2.50 .11

Role X Time
Error 241.60 50 4.31

295
Table C5.35
Paired sample T-test summary table comparing outside observer and perceiver ratings
of targets after the introduction of the prime
Observer rating 27 2.67 0.65 0.13
Perceiver rating 27 1.15 0.46 0.09
Pair: Observer rating- 27 1.52 0.70 0.13

Perceiver rating
t df 2 tail Sig. 95% CI
Observer rating- 11.27 26 .00 1.24, 1.80

Perceiver rating
Table C5.36
Paired sample T-test summary table comparing outside observer and target ratings of
perceivers after the introduction of the prime
Target rating 27 1.07 0.38 0.07

Target rating
Observer rating- 9.38 26 .00 1.39, 2.17

Target rating
296
Table C5.37
Paired sample T-test summary table comparing outside observer and perceiver ratings
of targets before the introduction of the prime
Perceiver rating 27 1.19 0.48 0.09

Perceiver rating
Observer rating- 10.84 26 .00 1.10, 1.61

Perceiver rating
Table C5.38
Paired sample T-test summary table comparing outside observer and target ratings of
perceivers after the introduction of the prime
Target rating 27 1.07 0.38 0.07

Target rating
Observer rating- 12.59 26 .00 1.41, 1.96

Target rating
297
Appendix D
Appendix to Chapter 5 (Study 9)
STUDY 9: A structural model of problem behaviour: The role of young peoples

perceptions of adults beliefs
M aterials
Cover sheet
Parental care and overprotection measure
Liking for school measure
Young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs measure
Impulsiveness measure
Venturesomeness measure
Normlessness measure
Association with problem peers measure
Engagement in problem behaviour measure
298
S TUDY 9
M aterials
Cover sheet
This questionnaire forms part of a research study that is concerned with some of the
primary experiences of teenagers in our society. In particular, we are wanting to find
out about the different family-, school-, and peer-related experiences that teenagers
have. Some of those experiences might be pleasant, while others can be more
difficult. Our major goal is to shed some light on the way those difficult experiences
can affect teenagers getting into some kind of trouble. We really need your help to
answer these questions.
Your responses to this questionnaire will be kept strictly confidential. No one other
than the researchers will have access to your individual responses, and the
information you give will be used only for research purposes.
Thank you for your help.

299
Parental care and overprotection measure
Below is a list of various attitudes and behaviours of parents. Please read each
item carefully and indicate the extent to which they are characteristic of the
attitudes and behaviours of your parents by circling the most appropriate
number next to each item.
_____________________________________________________________________
M Y M OTHER: n ever sometimes usually
1. Does not help me as much as I need. 0 : 1 : 2
2. Seems emotionally cold to me. 0 : 1 : 2
3. Appears to understand my problems and worries.0 : 1 : 2
4. Likes me to make my own decisions. 0 : 1 : 2
5. Tries to control everything I do. 0 : 1 : 2
6. Tends to baby me. 0 : 1 : 2
7. Can make me feel better when I am upset. 0 : 1 : 2
8. Gives me as much freedom as I want. 0 : 1 : 2
M Y FATHER: n ever sometimes usually
1. Does not help me as much as I need. 0 : 1 : 2
2. Seems emotionally cold to me. 0 : 1 : 2
3. Appears to understand my problems and worries.0 : 1 : 2
4. Likes me to make my own decisions. 0 : 1 : 2
5. Tries to control everything I do. 0 : 1 : 2
6. Tends to baby me. 0 : 1 : 2
7. Can make me feel better when I am upset. 0 : 1 : 2
8. Gives me as much freedom as I want. 0 : 1 : 2

300
Liking for school measure
The following statements describe various thoughts and feelings sometimes

expressed by secondary school students. We would like you to express your
personal opinions by showing your agreement or disagreement with each
statement. Circle 0 if you strongly agree with the statement or 4 if you strongly
disagree. Otherwise, circle 1 or 3 to show that you tend to agree or disagree, and
circle 2 only if you really cannot decide.
_____________________________________________________________________
strongly strongly
agree d isagree
1. I am happy with the amount of freedom

we have at school. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
2. I am not popular with my schoolmates. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
3. The subjects I am doing at school seem to

have little relevance to the kind of job I like. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
4. I am interested in the subjects I do at

school. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
5. The variety of subjects and units to choose

from school is appropriate. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
6. My teachers do not show enough concern

and interest in me. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
7. I find my fellow students helpful with

regard to school work. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
8. I have difficulty with my school work. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
9. There is too much school work to do

most of the time. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
10. I do not like the present methods of

assessment at school. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
11. If I had the choice, I would rather work

than stay on at school. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
301
strongly strongly
agree d isagree
12. The school should be more relaxed
about rules and regulations. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
13. The standards of teaching at school are

generally high and satisfactory. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
14. I have been able to get adequate guidance

from school counsellors and teachers
when I have work or personal problems. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
15. I often skip classes. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
16. I find the social climate at school to be

generally warm and friendly. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
17. I find the teaching methods at school to

be sufficiently varied and stimulating. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
18. The extracurricular activities at school

(e.g. sports, clubs, interest groups, social
functions, etc.) are generally boring. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
19. The variety of extracurricular activities

at school is satisfactory. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
20. If not for my parents wish, I would

leave school if I could. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4
302
Young peoples perceptions of adults beliefs measure
We are inte re ste d in how you think adults in our community would characterise the
average or typical te enage r. Please rate e ach of the behaviours in the way you think
an adult in our community would re spond if the y were making judgements about the
ave rage te enage r today. So, a rating of 7 would indicate that you believe an adult would
think the de scriptor is e xtre me ly characte ristic of a typical te e nage r. Arating of 0
would me an that you be lie ve an adult would think the ite m is e xtre me ly
uncharacteristic of a typical te enage r. Make the rating by circling the appropriate
numbe r.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
extremely extremely
uncharacteristic characteristic
1. Uses alcohol 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
2. Is disrespectful 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
3. Wants to be popular 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
4. Is rebellious 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
5. Watches too much T .V. 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7

6. Is spoilt 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
7. Is easily led 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
8. Is noisy 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
9. Swears 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
10. Is a fashion victim 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
11. Listens to loud music 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
12. Is risk-taking 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
13. Eats a lot of junk food 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
14. Is rude 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
15. Is a trouble-maker 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
16. Smokes 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
17. Is materialistic 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
18. Is irresponsible 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
19. Is dishonest 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
20. Stays out until late 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
303
extremely extremely
uncharacteristic characteristic
21. Has too easy a life 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
22. Hates authority 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
23. Goes to dance parties (raves) 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7

24. Is selfish 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
25. Is wild 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
26. Hangs around in large groups 0 : 1 : 2 : 3 : 4 : 5 : 6 : 7
Impulsiveness measure
Below is a list of questions which describe the way people may sometimes feel
and behave. Please read each question very carefully and indicate whether each
of them are characteristic of you. Please answer each question by circling the
appropriate number opposite each question.
_____________________________________________________________________
NO YES
1. Do you generally do and say things without stopping

to think? 0 : 1
2. Do you often get into a jam because you do things

without thinking? 0 : 1
3. Do you usually think carefully before doing anything? 0 : 1
4. Do you mostly speak before thinking things out? 0 : 1
5. Do you often buy things on impulse? 0 : 1
6. Are you an impulsive person? 0 : 1
7. Do you often do things on the spur of the moment? 0 : 1

304
Venturesomeness measure
_____________________________________________________________________
NO YES
1. Would you enjoy parachute jumping? 0 : 1
2. Would you like to learn to fly an aeroplane? 0 : 1
3. Do you find it hard to understand people who risk their

necks climbing mountains? 0 : 1
4. Would you enjoy the sensation of skiing very fast down

a high mountain slope? 0 : 1
5. Would you like to go cave-exploring? 0 : 1
6. Do you quite enjoy taking risks? 0 : 1
7. Do you enjoy new and exciting happenings and sensations,

even if they are a little frightening and unusual? 0 : 1
8. Do you sometimes like doing things that are a bit

frightening? 0 : 1
9. Would life with no danger in it be too dull for you? 0 : 1

305
Normlessness measure
_____________________________________________________________________
agree d isagree
1. Its all right to do anything you want as long as

you stay out of trouble. 0 : 1
2. Its all right to get around the law as long as

you dont actually break it. 0 : 1
3. If something works, it doesnt matter whether

its right or wrong. 0 : 1
some thin gs
whatever the are wrong
law allows even if legal
4. Do you believe that its all right to do whatever
the law allows, or are there some things that
are wrong even if they are legal? 0 : 1
306
Association with problem peers measure
Below is a list of things that people might do. Please read each question carefully
and indicate how many of your friends have done each of those things, by
circling the appropriate number opposite each question.
_____________________________________________________________________
HOW MANY OF YOUR
FRIENDS HAVE............ none of a few of many of all of
my friends my friends my friends my friends
1. Obtained free games from coin-
operated space invaders or other
games machines? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
2. Bought beer, wine, spirits, or other

kinds of liquor? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
3. Used a weapon of some sort, e.g.

knife,stick, chains or bottle in a
fight? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
4. Stolen things or parts out of a car? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
5. Used illegal drugs, such as

amphetamines (e.g. speed)
or cocaine? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
6. Stolen money of more than $10

in one go? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
7. Purposely hurt or beat up someone? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
8. Taken and driven a car or a motor

bike that belonged to someone else
without the owners consent? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
9. Taken part in a fist fight in which a

group of people was against another
group? 0 : 1 : 2 : 3
307
Engagement in problem behaviour measure
Be low is a list of things that young people might do. Young people engage in a variety
of activities and some might break a social rule from time to time. We want to get a true
picture of the things that young pe ople in Australia, like you might do.The way you can
he lp is by re ading e ach of the ite ms in this questionnaire carefully and checking whether
the ite m describe s some thing that you have done in the past ye ar.
Your re sponse s to this que stionnaire will be kept strictly confidential. Please DO NOT
put your name on the que stionnaire . That way the re is no way you can be identified.
The information you give will be use d only for re se arch about group re sponse s.
Please re spond to all the que stions by circling the appropriate number opposite each
question.
HAVE YO U IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS No Ye s
1. Driven an unregistered car? 0 : 1
2. Driven a car or a motor bike on the roadwithout a

drivers license or a learners permit? 0 : 1
3. Driven a car or a bike when drunk or over the legal alcohol limit? 0 : 1
4. Raced with other vehicles while driving a car or a motor bike on the road? 0 : 1
5. Taken and driven a car or a motor bike that belonged to someoneelse

without the owners consent? 0 : 1
6. Stolen things or parts out of a car? 0 : 1
7. Stolen a bicycle or parts from a bicycle? 0 : 1
8. Gone to see an R film? 0 : 1
9. Failed to keep a promise? 0 : 1
10. Bought beer, wine, spirits, or other kinds of liquor? 0 : 1
11. Drunk alcohol in a public place, e.g., a disco, pub, tavern, or bistro? 0 : 1
12. Got onto a bus or into a cinema, swimming pool, disco etc without
paying the proper fee? 0: 1
13. Not attended class or wagged school? 0 : 1
14. Run away from home (at least overnight)? 0 : 1
15. Shoplifted from supermarkets, department stores, or shops? 0 : 1

308
No Ye s
16. Stolen money of less than $10 (in one go) from shops,
school, locker rooms, home, peoples milk money, etc.? 0 : 1
17. Stolen money of more than $10 in one go? 0 : 1
18. Been late for school, a meeting, an appointment, etc.? 0 : 1
19. Broken into a house/building with the intention of stealing

something, e.g., money, exam papers, or other things? 0 : 1
20. Cheated or stolen food, drinks, or other goods from dispenser machines,
e.g., by tilting or banging the machines, or using the wrong coins? 0 : 1
21. Obtained free games from coin-operated space invaders or other games
machines (not including reward of goodperformance by machines in the
form of bonus games)? 0 : 1
22. Purposely messed up other peoples property, e.g. turning on water taps in
peoples gardens, letting off fire-crackers in mail boxes, burning rubbish
bins, etc.? 0 : 1
23. Purposely damaged property by starting a fire? 0 : 1
24. Purposely damaged things in public places, e.g.telephone

boxes, street signs, road lamps, etc.? 0 : 1
25. Purposely damaged school desks, windows, or other school

property, e.g., kicking holes in the wall? 0 : 1
26. Put graffiti on walls, toilet doors, bus panels, or other public places? 0 : 1
27. Done something that your parents did not want you to do? 0 : 1
28. Taken part in a fist fight in which a group of people was

against another group? 0 : 1
29. Purposely hurt or beat up someone? 0 : 1
30. Used a weapon of some sort, e.g., knife, stick, chains or bottle in afight? 0 : 1
31. Used or threatened to use force to get money or things from another person? 0 : 1
32. Used marijuana (also called grass, dope or hash)? 0 : 1
33. Used illegal drugs, such as amphetamines (e.g. speed) or cocaine? 0 : 1
34. Abused barbiturates (also called barbs) by not properly following

medical advice? 0 : 1
309
No Ye s
35. Tricked someone on the telephone, e.g., false restaurant

booking, false reports of fire alarm, bombs, etc.? 0 : 1
36. Made abusive phone calls, e.g., saying nasty or obscene things? 0 : 1
37. Been warned by the police (but without being charged) for
something that you did? 0 : 1
38. Appeared in the Childrens Court for something that you did? 0 : 1
39. Told a lie to someone? 0 : 1

310
S TUDY 9
Table D6.1 Results of t tests comparing male participants with no missing data with
those who had missing data on at least one variable.
Group
Participants with Participants with
no missing data missing data
(n = 179) (n = 80)
M SD M SD t
M other care 1.99 1.57 2.47 1.74 -2.16

Father care 2.69 2.03 2.72 1.72 -0.12
M other overprotection 2.99 1.72 3.05 1.60 0.25
Father overprotection 2.61 1.80 2.55 1.51 0.24
Liking for school 43.30 9.86 42.10 8.57 0.85
Perceptions of community beliefs 108.20 28.59 103.13 33.88 1.04
Impulsiveness 2.50 1.80 3.04 1.83 -2.11
Venturesomeness 6.11 2.30 5.92 2.01 0.61
Normlessness 1.83 1.22 1.97 1.01 -0.87
Association with problem peers 6.13 5.11 6.89 6.21 -0.99
Engagement in problem 5.11 5.50 7.66 8.28 -2.35
behaviour
* Significant at t.05/11 (256) = 2.89

311
Table D6.2 Results of t tests comparing female participants with no missing data
with those who had missing data on at least one variable.
Group
Participants with Participants with
no missing data missing data
(n = 178) (n = 59)
M SD M SD t
M other care 2.52 1.85 2.62 1.88 -0.35

Father care 3.28 2.08 3.30 2.06 -0.07
M other overprotection 3.10 1.84 3.31 1.74 0.76
Father overprotection 3.03 2.06 2.74 1.61 0.87
Liking for school 40.65 9.44 40.55 6.41 0.07
Perceptions of community beliefs 111.11 32.83 113.49 31.04 -0.40
Impulsiveness 3.17 1.95 3.24 1.83 -0.20
Venturesomeness 5.70 2.35 5.71 2.16 -0.05
Normlessness 1.62 1.07 1.84 0.95 -1.38
Association with problem peers 4.90 4.77 5.71 4.84 -1.10
Engagement in problem 5.26 5.33 5.33 5.45 -0.08
behaviour
* Significant at t.05/11 (234) = 2.81

312
PRELIS commands for the male model analysis
DA NI=11 NO=259 M I=-1 TR=LI

RA=A:\M ALES.DAT
LA
PROBEH PEER ALIEN COM MBEL SCHLIKE M CARE DCARE MOVERPR
DOVERPR IM PULS VENT
OU XB M A=PM SM =MALEMOD.PMM SA=M ALEM OD.ACM
PRELIS generated correlation matrix for the male model
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. PROBEH 1.00
2. PEER 0.67 1.00
3. ALIEN 0.22 0.13 1.00
4. COMMBEL 0.19 0.18 -0.11 1.00
5. SCHLIKE -0.29 -0.19 -0.25 0.06 1.00
6. MCARE -0.07 -0.06 0.12 0.07 -0.31 1.00
7. DCARE -0.08 0.01 0.09 0.08 -0.30 0.57 1.00
8. MOVERPR -0.01 0.01 0.07 0.15 -0.10 0.20 0.15 1.00
9. DOVERPR -0.00 -0.00 -0.05 0.13 -0.11 0.12 0.29 0.56 1.00
10. IMPULS 0.48 0.38 0.30 0.10 -0.22 0.26 0.17 0.09 0.12 1.00
11. VENT 0.34 0.28 0.10 0.17 -0.06 0.18 0.05 -0.05 -0.13 0.23 1.00
PRELIS generated means and standard deviations for the male model
M SD
PROBEH 5.11 5.50

PEER 6.13 5.11
ALIEN 0.00 1.00
COMM BEL 1.08 0.29
SCHLIKE 43.30 9.86
M CARE 0.00 1.00
DCARE 0.00 1.00
M OVERPR 0.00 1.00
DOVERPR 0.00 1.00
IM PULS 0.00 1.00
VENT 0.00 1.00
313
PRELIS commands for the female model analysis
DA NI=11 NO=237 M I=-1 TR=LI

RA=A:\FEMALES.DAT
LA
OU XB M A=PM SM =FEM ALEM OD.PM M SA=FEMALEMOD.ACM
PRELIS generated correlation matrix for the female model
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. PROBEH 1.00
2. PEER 0.68 1.00
3. ALIEN 0.28 0.22 1.00
4. COMMBEL 0.33 0.36 0.10 1.00
5. SCHLIKE -0.33 -0.21 -0.25 -0.12 1.00
6. MCARE -0.22 -0.18 0.19 0.22 -0.35 1.00
7. DCARE -0.33 -0.28 0.23 0.11 -0.33 0.46 1.00
8. MOVERPR 0.02 -0.05 -0.14 0.06 -0.23 0.26 0.17 1.00
9. DOVERPR 0.29 0.24 0.06 0.11 -0.31 0.28 0.26 0.52 1.00
10. IMPULS 0.43 0.31 0.08 0.14 -0.22 0.23 0.31 0.22 0.20 1.00
11. VENT 0.29 0.14 0.10 0.14 0.02 -0.03 0.10 -0.05 0.06 0.27 1.00
PRELIS generated means and standard deviations for the female model
M SD
PROBEH 5.26 5.33

PEER 4.90 4.77
ALIEN 0.00 1.00
COMM BEL 1.11 0.33
SCHLIKE 40.65 9.44
M CARE 0.00 1.00
DCARE 0.00 1.00
M OVERPR 0.00 1.00
DOVERPR 0.00 1.00
IM PULS 0.00 1.00
VENT 0.00 1.00
314
LISREL commands for initial male model analysis
DA NI=11 NO=179 M A=PM

LA
PM FI=M ALES.PM M
AC FI=M ALES.ACM
M O NY=3 NX=8 NE=2 NK=6 BE=FU,FI GA=FU,FI TD=SY,FI TE=SY,FI
VA .938 LY 1 1
VA .120 TE 1 1
VA .949 LY 3 2
VA .100 TE 3 3
VA .969 LX 1 1
VA .061 TD 1 1
VA .889 LX 2 2
VA .210 TD 2 2
VA .835 LX 8 6
VA .303 TD 8 8
VA 1.00 LX 3 3
VA 1.00 LX 5 4
VA 1.00 LX 7 5
VA 0.00 TD 7 7
FR LY 2 1
FR TE 2 2
FR LX 4 3 LX 6 4
FR TD 3 3 TD 4 4 TD 5 5 TD 6 6
FR BE 1 2
FR GA 2 2 GA 2 5 GA 1 5 GA 1 6 GA 1 1 GA 1 3 GA 1 2 GA 1 4
LK
COMM SCHOOL CARE OVERPR IM P VENTURE
LE
DELINQ NORM
PATH DIAGRAM
OU M I EF SC
315
LISREL commands for the modified male model with parental overprotection
(OVERPR) removed
DA NI=11 NO=179 MA=PM

LA
SE
PROBEH PEER ALIEN COM MBEL SCHLIKE M CARE DCARE IMPULS VENT/
PM FI=M ALES.PM M
AC FI=M ALES.ACM
VA .938 LY 1 1
VA .120 TE 1 1
VA .949 LY 3 2
VA .100 TE 3 3
VA .969 LX 1 1
VA .061 TD 1 1
VA .889 LX 2 2
VA .210 TD 2 2
VA .835 LX 6 5
VA .303 TD 6 6
VA 1.00 LX 3 3
VA 1.00 LX 5 4
VA 0.00 TD 5 5
FR LY 2 1
FR TE 2 2
FR LX 4 3
FR TD 3 3 TD 4 4
FR BE 1 2
FR GA 2 2 GA 2 4 GA 1 5 GA 1 1 GA 1 3 GA 1 2
LK
COMM SCHOOL CARE IM P VENTURE
LE
DELINQ NORM
PATH DIAGRAM
OU M I EF SC
316
LISREL commands for the modified male model with parental overprotection
(OVERPR) and alienation (NORM) removed

LA
SE
PROBEH PEER COM M BEL SCHLIKE M CARE DCARE IMPULS VENT/
PM FI=M ALES.PM M
AC FI=M ALES.ACM
VA .938 LY 1 1
VA .120 TE 1 1
VA .969 LX 1 1
VA .061 TD 1 1
VA .889 LX 2 2
VA .210 TD 2 2
VA .835 LX 6 5
VA .303 TD 6 6
VA 1.00 LX 3 3
VA 1.00 LX 5 4
VA 0.00 TD 5 5
FR LY 2 1
FR TE 2 2
FR LX 4 3
FR TD 3 3 TD 4 4
FR GA 1 1 GA 1 2 GA 1 3 GA 1 4 GA 1 5
LK
COMM SCHOOL CARE IM P VENTURE
LE
DELINQ
PATH DIAGRAM
OU M I EF SC
317
LISREL commands for female model analysis

LA
PM FI=FEMALES.PM M
AC FI=FEMALES.ACM
VA .938 LY 1 1
VA .120 TE 1 1
VA .949 LY 3 2
VA .100 TE 3 3
VA .969 LX 1 1
VA .061 TD 1 1
VA .889 LX 2 2
VA .210 TD 2 2
VA .835 LX 8 6
VA .303 TD 8 8
VA .240 TD 5 5
VA 1.00 LX 3 3
VA 1.00 LX 5 4
VA 1.00 LX 7 5
VA 0.00 TD 7 7
FR LY 2 1
FR TE 2 2
FR LX 4 3 LX 6 4 LX 6 3
FR TD 3 3 TD 4 4 TD 6 6
FR BE 1 2
FR GA 2 3 GA 2 4 GA 1 5 GA 1 1 GA 1 2 GA 1 6
LK
COMM SCHOOL CARE OVERPR IM P VENTURE
LE
DELINQ NORM
PATH DIAGRAM
OU M I EF SC

Sankey - Stereotypic Beliefs About Young People PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Sankey - Stereotypic Beliefs About Young People PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sankey - Stereotypic Beliefs About Young People PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

S TEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUNG PEOPLE:

NATURE, SOURCES , AND CONS EQUENCES

Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Adolescents are grouped together by adults

I am grateful to my supervisor Associate Professor Gail Huon for her

throughout my postgraduate career has been invaluable. I am also grateful to my

throughout my doctoral studies.

I am grateful to Dr Amanda Barnier for her helpful advice, especially in the

Special thanks to my family and friends, and especially to M um and to Ron,

M ost stereotypes of youth depict them as problematic. Yet, the effects of

understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth. It also highlights the limitations of

Chapter 2 presents studies 1 to 4, which explored the breadth in the content of

in content. Study 3A compared young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about

as adults knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth in Study 1. In contrast, young

beliefs about youth. Study 3B developed the 26-item Adolescents Perceptions of

Chapter 3 presents studies 5 and 6, which examined the media as a possible

source of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Study 5 investigated media representations

of youth as they appear in newspaper reports. Study 6 aimed to establish an empirical

association between those representations and stereotypic beliefs about youth. In

readership was shown to be predictive of stereotypic beliefs about youth. Further,

stereotypic beliefs were found to discriminate between readers of broadsheet and

Chapter 4 presents Studies 7 and 8, which focused on the consequences of

described irresponsible and disrespectful behaviours later judged a youth target as

Chapter 5 presents Study 9. Its focus was on young people's perceptions of

engagement in problem behaviour, in interaction with established correlates of

model accounted for a substantial proportion of the variance in problem behaviour.

Young people's perceptions of adults' beliefs about them made an important

contribution to the explanation of problem behaviour involvement. Subsidiary

engage in problem behaviour was the 'active ingredient' of that construct.

young people's behaviour. Recommendations are made for improving adult-youth

causation of adolescent problem behaviour. The media have a responsibility to

issues. In addition, interventions aimed at reducing adolescent problem behaviour

need to incorporate a community-based component that seeks to promote positive

adult-youth relations within the wider community.

ACKNOWLEDGEM ENTS iii

LIST OF TABLES xiv

1. INVESTIGATING STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH: 1

Introduction and overview 2

As cultural beliefs and as personal beliefs 10

As perceived by the stereotyped group 11

Sources of stereotypic beliefs 15

Social learning: Family, friends, and the media 17

Consequences of stereotypic beliefs 19

Evaluations of stereotyped group members 20

Current understanding of stereotypic beliefs about youth 25

2. STEREOTYPIC BELIEFS ABOUT YOUTH 34

STUDY 1: Cultural stereotype of youth 37

M easures and Procedure 38

Results and Discussion 39

Phase one: Content generation 39

Phase two: Knowledge of the cultural stereotype of youth 40

STUDIES 2A & 2B: Personal beliefs about youth 43

M easures and Procedure 45

Results and Discussion 46

Adults' personal beliefs about young people 46

Cultural stereotype compared with personal beliefs 50

Results and Discussion 51

M easures and Procedure 57