Adolescent Focal Theories Age-Trends In Developmental Transitions

Journal of Adolescence 1996, 19, 307–320
Adolescent focal theories: age-trends in developmental
transitions
L. B. HENDRY, A. GLENDINNING AND J
. SHUCKSMITH
Focal theory is considered as a framework for looking at psychosocial and leisure
transitions in middle and later adolescence. Although these transitions are exam-
ined from a different perspective in the present study, by utilising cross-sectional
survey data from a representative sample of three age groups of young Scots
(13–14, 15–16 and 17–18 year-olds), the results confirm and extend the general
age-trends in relational issues and leisure involvement reported in original studies.
Within this overall picture, few gender differences are found in age-related
relational transitions, but gender differences are apparent in shifting focuses of
leisure involvement with age. Further, the findings suggest a linkage between
relational issues in adolescence and leisure contexts, where psychosocial processes
are seen to be associated with contextual changes in young people’s lives. Focal
theory has been criticised for a failure to take true account of the social circum-
stances, constraints and contexts affecting adolescent development, but in the pre-
sent study surprisingly few differences are found with respect to the young person’s
social class of family background, for example, with age-trends in developmental
transitions similar for all social groups. By contrast, in later adolescence aspects of
the young person’s own socio-economic position, rather than that of their family
background, are clearly linked to both relational issues and leisure involvement,
for example, creating a disrupting effect on those young people who are currently
unemployed or non-employed at this age.
 1996 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents
Introduction
The paper sets out to consider aspects of developmental transitions in adolescence, as
suggested by Coleman and Hendry’s (1990) focal theories, but using an empirically different
approach. In presenting the original “focal theory” model, Coleman (1974) argued that the
transition between childhood and adulthood cannot be achieved without substantial
adjustments of both a psychological and social nature. It was suggested, however, that most
young people negotiate this period of the life cycle without evidence of profound stress and
emotional upheaval by focusing on one developmental issue at a time. Hence, different
relationship patterns and associated issues and concerns come into focus at different ages, in
the sense of being most prominent; but Coleman was careful to point out that these
patterns overlap, that the resolution of one issue is not essential to facing another, and
further, that there is no fixed sequence that every adolescent must inevitably follow.
Nevertheless, based on detailed interview studies, Coleman found that for the majority of
young people particular themes and concerns came into focus as being most prominent at
particular ages. For example, concerns about “acceptance or rejection from peers” were most
Reprint requests and correspondence should be addressed to L. B. Hendry, Department of Education, King’s
College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB9 2UB, U.K.
0140-1971/
96/
040307+14/
$18.00/
0  1996 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents

308 L. B. Hendry, A. Glendinning and J. Shucksmith
prominent in middle adolescence, whilst “conflicts with parents” were seen as of increasing
significance in middle and later adolescence.
Hendry (1983) utilised a focal theory perspective to look at the changes and continuities
in the adolescent’s leisure preferences and behaviour (i.e. the shifting focus of leisure
interests). Here, for example, it was argued that the focus generally shifts from more casual
pursuits within informal leisure contexts in middle adolescence, to more commercially
organised leisure contexts such as pubs, clubs and discos later in adolescence. Hendry
further suggested that these leisure transitions may be concurrent with the main
relationship patterns identified by Coleman.
Hence, involvement in casual leisure pursuits can be seen as linked to the relational issue
of peer acceptance and rejection, where this is of most significance in middle adolescence.
From this perspective more informal leisure contexts provide a setting for developing social
roles, skills and values away from adult scrutiny and controls, and where the young person
can seek re-affirmation from peers. Some young people may well continue to be attracted to
more formal adult-led activities and organisations at this age, but such structured settings
are seen as of less interest and relevance to other adolescents, who may, for example, prefer
to “hang about” in the local neighbourhood with their friends.
Allied to a developing autonomy from the family, young people “try out” leisure
behaviours and roles which are increasingly the “social norm” in later adolescence and early
adulthood. Involvement in commercial leisure provision, such as discos, clubs and pubs,
may therefore confirm a sense of independence, in particular from parents. Once more, this
can be seen as linked to the relational issue of conflict with parents, where young people’s
leisure pursuits raise concerns among parents about the appropriateness of the adolescent’s
maturity to engage in such activities.
However, suggested links between leisure pursuits and relational issues in adolescence
must acknowledge the role of background factors in constraining the “choices” and
“preferences” of young people, for example, through the role of the family, sub-cultural
norms, and financial constraints. More generally, critics have cited the failure of focal
theory to take sufficient account of social constraints and contexts as a fundamental
weakness (Coffield et al., 1986), and it should be noted that Coleman’s (1974) original
samples were drawn from grammar and public schools and the upper academic streams of
comprehensive schools.
The present paper therefore sets out to consider aspects of relational and leisure
transitions in middle and later adolescence, from the young person’s perspective, where this
perspective is derived from survey data from a recent large scale study of Scottish youth.
The paper considers four key questions: (1) Does the empirical evidence provide support for
a general pattern of age-related developmental transitions, as proposed by the two focal
theories? (2) What effect does gender have on these patterns of developmental transitions?
(3) What is the effect of family background and socio-economic circumstances? (4) What
connections exist to tie leisure contexts and pursuits to relational transitions?
Methodology
The analysis is based on data drawn from the Young People’s Leisure and Lifestyle Project
(Hendry et al., 1993). The present findings derive from the first cross-sectional surveysweep
of this study, and relate to three age cohorts of young people. Respondents in these three

309
Adolescent focal theories
age groups were 13 to 14 (n=2049), 15 to 16 (n=2140) and 17 to 18 (n=998) years-old. The
sample was drawn from 30 secondary schools located throughout Scotland, selected at
random from education directory listings. Within each of the survey schools the sample was
further stratified into three year groups. For the younger two age groups (second year and
fourth year pupils) the questionnaire was administered at school under the guidance of a
field worker. Once absentees had been followed up a response rate well in excess of 90%
was achieved. For the old age group the questionnaire was administered by post using
address lists provided by the schools, since many young people in this group had already left
secondary school. Once reminders had been sent an eventual response rate of around 50%
was achieved with the older age group.
One of the aims of the present paper is to locate adolescent relational and leisure
transitions—as suggested by focal theory—within the broader context of the young person’s
social position, and it is therefore clearly important to consider the socio-economic and
gender compositions of the achieved survey sample. The construction of the 17- to 18-year-
old cohort is of particular concern, given the relatively low response rate for this age group.
Table 1 provides details of the distribution of parental social class (head of household) as
reported by young people. These data indicate that the class composition of the sample is
largely unaffected by gender and age of respondent, and comparisons with other datasets
(OPCS, 1989) also indicate that the sample is fairly representative of the national picture.
The final row of the table suggests that there is a slight over-representation of females
compared to males in the older cohort (52%:48%) but the pattern of non-response by
gender does not reach statistical significance in the postal survey sample. Table 2 profiles
Table 1 Distribution of parental social class by gender and age group
Social class of Males Females Britain*
head of household 13–14 15–16 17–18 13–14 15–16 17–18
Non-manual occupations 44% 46% 46% 44% 47% 46% 46%
Skilled manual occupations 36% 34% 33% 35% 32% 34% 36%
Semi/
unskilled occupations 20% 20% 21% 21% 21% 20% 18%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Unemployed (n=) 146 159 73 154 158 76
Unclassified (n=) 129 136 67 128 134 71
All households (n=) 1030 1076 483 1019 1064 515
*1987 General Household Survey figures for households with dependent children. Source: OPCS
(1989).
Table 2 Distribution of current economic activity status by gender (17–18-year-olds)
Current economic activity status Total
At At Youth Employed Un/
non-employed
school college training
Males 34% 7% 9% 34% 16% 100%
Females 35% 11% 10% 33% 11% 100%
All 34% 9% 10% 34% 13% 100%

the current circumstances of young people in the older cohort in terms of their own
economic activity status—as opposed to parental occupations—and as can be seen from the
table only around one-third of this sample of older adolescents stay on at school for a sixth
year of secondary education.
Turning to a description of the variables used in the analysis, these fall into three broad
areas: (1) structural factors (i.e. age, gender and socio-economic status); (2) relational
factors (i.e. perceptions of self, peer and family relations); and (3) leisure factors (i.e.
informal or casual and commercial leisure contexts). Looking firstly at structural factors, a
measure of the socio-economic status of the young person’s family is derived from self-
reports of parental occupations. The occupation of the head of the household (where the
family household and it’s occupants are identified by the young person) is categorised in
terms of the Registrar General’s classification of occupations. These categories are then
further collapsed to form three social groupings of families: non-manual households, skilled
manual households, and semi/
unskilled households. The young person’s self-reports of their
own economic activity status are also used to provide a further measure of current social
position, although this is only really meaningful for the older cohort, since respondents in
the younger two age cohorts were officially still at school completing the statutory phase of
secondary education. Current economic activity status defined in terms of five groupings:
those young people in secondary education (at school), those in tertiary education (at
college), those on youth employment training schemes, those in paid employment (but not
on youth training schemes), and those currently unemployed and otherwise non-employed.
With respect to relational issues in adolescence, some 18 questionnaire items are
included in the analysis. These items typically allow for five categories of response where
these indicate level of agreement with a statement (e.g. . . . I like being the way I am). In
general terms the 18 items relate to perceptions of self, relationships with parents, and
aspects of peer conformity and acceptance. In the case of leisure transitions, 12
questionnaire items are included in the analysis where these relate to informal leisure
contexts (e.g. . . . hanging about in the street with friends) and commercial leisure contexts
(e.g. . . . going to a pub). Responses to these questionnaire items are on a four-point scale
where these typically indicate degree of involvement.
Finally in this section, an outline of the approach taken in the analysis is given, along
with a description of the statistical methods employed. The 18 questionnaire items
characterising relational issues in middle and later adolescence are first entered into a
principal components analysis where the aim is to summarise these data in terms of a
smaller and more manageable number of underlying factors. These relational factors are
then examined for variations with respect to the young person’s age, gender and social class
of family background (and the young person’s own socio-economic position in the case of
17–18-year-olds). This is done by conducting a series of ANOVAs with each of the relational
factors (identified from the principal components analysis) treated in turn as the dependent
variable, and with age, gender and social class background treated as independent grouping
variables in the analysis. In this way it is possible to examine the effects of gender and social
class on developmental issues, and so to test whether focal theory is applicable to both sexes
and across all social groupings. The same analytical approach is repeated for the 12 leisure
items. Once again, factors relating to leisure transitions are first identified from a principal
components analysis, and these factors are then examined for variations with respect to age,
gender and social class by conducting a series of ANOVAs. As a final step in our analysis,
correlations between the relational factors and leisure factors (identified from the principal

311
components analyses) are examined for each age group separately, in order to identify links
between relational issues and leisure activities in middle and later adolescence.
Findings
The results of a principal components analysis of 18 questionnaire items are presented in
Table 3, where these items relate to aspects of adolescent psychosocial development. Six
factors are identified from the analysis and together these account for around one-half of
the variance in the input data. Despite this loss of information the rotated factor solution
provides a clear and meaningful picture of relational issues in middle and later adolescence.
Interpretations of the factor solution can be made by examining the loading of the input
variables on the individual factors, as is done in Table 3. Factor 1 relates to peer popularity
and acceptance, in terms of behaviours, preferences and appearance. (Popularity here refers
to the young person’s friends, and not to peers in general.) Factors 2 and 3 relate to family
relations, from the young person’s perspective, with the second factor representing
perceived levels of parental criticism and control and the third factor reflecting perceived
levels of parental support and acceptance. The fourth factor relates to more general
attitudes to parental and adult authority. The fifth factor is linked to a positive self-image
and to feelings of social competence, whilst the final factor perhaps reflects a sense of social
Table 3 Perceptions of self, peer acceptance and family relations in adolescence. Results of a
principal components analysis indicating loadings of input variables on the factor solution obtained
Factors (varimax rotation) Factor Cumulative
Loadings % variance
($0.5) explained
1 Unpopular with friends if don’t drink 0.76 12.8%
Unpopular with friends if don’t smoke 0.71
Unpopular with friends if seen as unfashionable 0.67
Popular if seen as like friends in appearance, interests, etc. 0.61
2 Parent/
s have strong views about appearance 0.74 22.3%
Parent/
s critical of friends 0.68
Parent/
s want to knowwhere go to in free time 0.63
3 Get on well with parent/
s 0.72 31.6%
Parent/
s support and encourage interests and activities 0.72
Feel that parent/
s expectations are too high −0.56
4 What young people do outside the home is their own business 0.74 40.2%
Feel that parents ought to be stricter with young people −0.72
Feel that parents expect too much of young people 0.69
5 I like being the way I am 0.73 48.1%
Describe self as someone who is easy to get along with 0.69
6 Describe self as someone who finds it hard to make friends 0.75 54.9%
Spend a lot of free time alone 0.66
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin>0.7.

isolation. Thus, these six relational factors can be seen to represent different aspects of the
young person’s perceptions of self, peer acceptance and family relations.
Six separate three-way ANOVAs were conducted (one for each relational factor) with age,
gender and social class of family background entered as independent grouping variables in
each analysis. No evidence was found for a significant three-way interaction among age,
gender and class in any of these analyses. Further, no evidence was found for significant
two-way interactions either between age and class, or between gender and class. In other
words, the effects of age and gender on relational issues in adolescence would appear to be
largely independent of the young person’s social class background (at least, in so far as such
relational issues are characterised bythe factors identified here).
Turning to a consideration of gender differences—within shifting patterns of self-
perceptions, peer acceptable and family relations across the adolescent years—the data
presented in Table 4 provide some evidence for an interaction between age and gender.
This is restricted to the third factor, however, with differences from the overall
developmental trend focused on the youngest age group of adolescent males. Young men at
13 to 14 years of age would appear to feel more supported by their parents. There is also an
additional main effect for gender on the first factor, with peer acceptance apparently more
of an issue for males than females throughout middle and later adolescence. The findings
presented thus far suggest that the shifting focus of relational issues in adolescence can be
considered independently of social class background and, to a lesser extent, of gender. That
is, the same general patterns of psychosocial development are evident irrespective of the
social position of the young person’s family, whilst there are some developmental
differences between boys and girls earlier in adolescence.
Table 4 Variations in perceptions of self, peer acceptance and family relations across the
adolescent years. Mean factor score by gender by age group. (n.s.
not significant; *p<0.05;
**p<0.01.)
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3
Drinking, smoking, fashion Parent/
s seen as Parent/
s seen as
important to peer popularity critical and controlling supportive and accepting
Age 13–14 15–16 17–18 All 13–14 15–16 17–18 All 13–14 15–16 17–18 All
(years-old)
Male 0.06 0.16 −0.17 0.08 Male 0.20 −0.06 −0.32 −0.01 Male 0.22 −0.08 −0.10 0.03
Female −0.07 0.02 −0.29 −0.08 Female 0.21 −0.05 −0.28 0.01 Female 0.04 −0.06 −0.07 −0.03
All −0.01 0.09 −0.22 0.00 All 0.21 −0.06 −0.30 0.00 All 0.13 −0.07 −0.08 0.00
Age** Gender** Age×Gendern.s.
Age** Gendern.s.
Age×Gendern.s.
Age** Gendern.s.
Age×Gender**
Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6
Challenge parental Like being the way I am, Find it hard to make friends,
and adult authority easy to get along with, spend a lot of free time alone
Age 13–14 15–16 17–18 All 13–14 15–16 17–18 All 13–14 15–16 17–18 All
(years-old)
Male −0.05 0.15 −0.19 0.02 Male −0.11 0.03 0.18 −0.01 Male −0.04 0.03 0.05 −0.01
Female −0.04 0.12 −0.22 −0.02 Female −0.09 0.03 0.12 0.01 Female −0.02 0.01 0.03 0.01
All −0.04 0.13 −0.21 0.00 All −0.10 0.03 0.15 0.00 All −0.03 0.02 0.04 0.00
Age** Gendern.s.
Age×Gendern.s.
Age** Gendern.s.
Age×Gendern.s.
Agen.s.
Gendern.s.
Age×Gendern.s.

313
The data presented in Table 4 also provide a picture of overall developmental trends,
with five out of the six factors giving main effects for age. Mean scores on the first factor,
for example, suggest that acknowledgement of peer group norms (associated with drinking,
smoking, fashions, appearance and interests) peak at 15 to 16 years of age and show a
marked decline thereafter. Interestingly, challenges to parental and adult authority also
peak at 15 to 16 years of age, in a way which parallels peer acceptance. Looking at
perceptions of family relations, parental criticisms and controls steadily decline with age
whilst more supportive relationships are a feature of earlier adolescence. Finally, the data
indicate that there is a progressive strengthening of self-concept and growth of self-esteem
with age, but that feelings of social isolation are apparently unaffected byage.
When considered separately from age and gender, social class background does have some
impact on peer and family relations. As can be seen from Table 5, for example, young
people from middle class families are more likely to view parents as supportive, whilst young
people from relatively less advantaged home backgrounds are correspondingly less likely to
do so. Concerns with peer acceptance would also appear to be associated with social class
background. However, even in terms of such main effects for social class, overall there are
relatively few differences with respect to the young person’s family background.
The data presented in Table 6 provide a very different picture in later adolescence, when
the young person’s own social circumstances are considered. Current circumstances at this
Table 5 Family background and perceptions of self, peer acceptance and family relations in
adolescence. Mean factor score by parental social class
Factors Social class of head of household
Non Skilled Semi/
manual manual unskilled
1 Popular if drink, smoke, fashionable* −0.07 0.01 0.05
2 Parent/
s seen as critical and controlling (n.s.) −0.03 0.01 −0.01
3 Parent/
s seen as supportive and accepting** 0.15 0.02 −0.12
4 Challenge parental/
adult authority (n.s.) −0.02 0.01 0.04
5 Like the way I am, easy-going (n.s.) 0.04 0.01 −0.03
6 Hard to make friends, a lot of time alone (n.s.) 0.04 −0.03 −0.03
n.s.=not significant; *p<0.05; **p<0.01.
Table 6 Current circumstances and perceptions of self, peer acceptance and family relations in
later adolescence. Mean factor score by current economic activity status (17–18-year-olds)
Factors Current economic activity status
non-
school college training employed
1 Popular if drink, smoke, fashionable** −0.36 −0.26 −0.15 −0.16 −0.08
2 Parent/
s seen as critical and controlling* −0.22 −0.24 −0.18 −0.42 −0.43
3 Parent/
s seen as supportive and accepting** 0.12 −0.06 −0.07 −0.08 −0.55
4 Challenge parental/
adult authority (n.s.) −0.18 −0.25 −0.27 −0.26 −0.24
5 Like the way I am, easy going* 0.15 0.16 0.29 0.26 0.04
6 Hard to make friends, a lot of time alone** 0.19 0.07 −0.12 −0.13 0.19

age are linked to relational issues in a number of ways. Un- and non-employed youth
continue to rate acceptance and conformity to peer group norms as relatively important,
whilst young people who are in full-time education are less likely to acknowledge that such
peer pressures are of importance. The relaxation of parental controls is also less marked
among young people in full-time education, whilst un- and non-employed youth are more
likely to view parents as unsupportive. Finally, a raised sense of self-esteem and social
integration is more likely among young people who are engaged in the youth labour market
(in employment or employment training) and correspondingly lower levels of self-esteem
and social integration are more likely among the un- and non-employed, whilst the
situation is more complex for those young people who remain at school. Thus, different sets
of circumstances may be linked to different patterns of transition towards adult status, with
delays in some situations and more rapid transitions in others. For un- and non-employed
youth in particular the picture is (relatively speaking) a negative one, with the findings
indicative of poorer self-esteem and feelings of social isolation, allied to detachment from
parents, and a continued conformity to behavioural norms more commonly associated with
middle adolescence. It is perhaps also worth noting that additional analyses show that the
picture obtained from the data presented in Table 6 holds equally well for both females and
males. In other words, our data suggest that in later adolescence links between relational
factors and current circumstances are largely unaffected by gender (although for the
purposes of this analysis un- and non-employed youth are treated as one group).
We next examine leisure transitions in adolescence. The results of a principal
components analysis of 12 questionnaire items are presented in Table 7. Four factors are
identified from the analysis, where these are interpreted as follows: informal leisure through
associations with friends at home, commercial leisure through attendance of pubs,
commercial leisure through attendance of cinemas and discos, and finally, informal leisure
through associations with friends in the local neighbourhood. Four separate three-way
ANOVAs were then conducted (one for each leisure factor) with age, gender and social class
of family background as independent variables. The results of these analyses suggest that
Table 7 Adolescent leisure involvement. Results of a principal components analysis indicating
loadings of input variables on the factor solution obtained
Factors (varimax rotation) Factor Cumulative
loadings % variance
($0.5) explained
1 Have friends to visit regularly 0.88 16.8%
Visit friends at home regularly 0.87
2 Go to a pub regularly 0.81 32.1%
Alcohol is a major item of expenditure 0.77
Cigarettes are a major item of expenditure 0.58
3 Entertainments (cinema, disco, etc) a major item of expenditure 0.79 45.5%
Go to a cinema regularly 0.67
Go to a disco regularly 0.57
4 Often hang about in the street with friends 0.78 56.4%
Spend a lot of free time with a (same sex) group of friends 0.74
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin>0.7.

315
leisure transitions in adolescence can be considered as largely independent of the young
person’s social class background, with no evidence for significant three-way interactions in
any of the analyses, and no evidence for significant two-way interactions between age and
social class, or between gender and social class.
The data presented in Table 8 show that there are significant main effects with respect to
age for three out of the four leisure factors, and that gender has a significant interaction
effect on these leisure transitions for two of the factors considered. Additionally, there are
main effects for gender on all four factors. We outline this complex set of interactions
between age and gender for each factor in turn. There is little evidence of transition effects
for the first factor, with adolescent females consistently more likely than their male
contemporaries to visit and be visited by friends irrespective of age. By contrast, our data
show that there is a rapid growth in the frequency of pub attendance with age, where this
growth is more marked among males than it is among females from middle adolescence
onwards. There is also a steady increase in other commercial leisure involvement, as is
shown by cinema and disco attendance, but, unlike pub attendance, the pattern of growth is
very similar for both sexes, and once again, unlike pub attendance, females are more likely
than males to participate in these commercial leisure pursuits at all ages. Finally, the use of
the local neighbourhood as an informal context where young people associate with a group
of friends is also linked to age and gender. Our data here suggest that the local
neighbourhood is an important informal leisure context, particularly for males. Between
middle and later adolescence involvement declines rapidly, however, and this decline is
much more marked among young women.
Thus, the findings suggest that transitions in leisure involvement occur across the
Table 8 Variations in leisure involvement across the adolescent years. Mean factor score by
gender by age group. (n.s.
not significant; *p<0.05; **p<0.01.)
Factor 1 Factor 2
Casual leisure— Commercial leisure—
the home context pubs, alcohol
Age 13–14 15–16 17–18 All 13–14 15–16 17–18 All
(years-old)
Male −0.17 −0.18 −0.16 −0.18 Male −0.41 0.12 0.82 0.05
Female 0.15 0.20 0.19 0.18 Female −0.41 0.01 0.63 −0.05
All −0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 All −0.41 0.06 0.72 0.00
Agen.s.
Gender** Age×Gendern.s.
Age** Gender* Age×Gender*
Factor 3 Factor 4
Commercial leisure— Casual leisure—
cinemas, discos the neighbourhood context
Age 13–14 15–16 17–18 All 13–14 15–16 17–18 All
(years-old)
Male −0.30 −0.16 0.09 −0.18 Male 0.19 0.20 −0.49 0.08
Female 0.02 0.17 0.39 0.18 Female 0.11 0.11 −0.81 −0.08
All −0.14 0.01 0.24 0.00 All 0.15 0.16 −0.66 0.00
Age** Gender** Age×Gendern.s.
Age** Gender** Age×Gender**

adolescent years, from the more informal context of the local neighbourhood towards more
commercially oriented leisure pursuits of cinemas, discos and pubs. The findings would also
indicate that adolescent leisure transitions are gender dependent, but that such transitions
are largely unaffected by the young person’s social class background. Nevertheless, as can be
seen from the data presented in Table 9, social class background does impact on adolescent
leisure pursuits, albeit independently of age and gender. Interestingly, these differences are
focused within the informal leisure contexts of the home and local neighbourhood, whilst
our data suggest that there are few class based differences in young people’s commercial
leisure involvement.
However, differences in terms of social position would appear to be much more
pronounced with respect to the young person’s own circumstances in later adolescence, as
characterised by their current economic activity status. As can be seen from Table 10,
leisure involvement in later adolescence at 17 to 18 years of age is clearly linked to current
economic activity status. The picture is broadly similar for those young people who are at
college, in paid employment, or on employment training schemes, with generally raised
levels of commercial leisure involvement among these three groups (although college
students are less involved in informal contexts). But at the two extremes, young people who
stay on at secondary school and young people who are currently un- and non-employed
stand out as different. Those who stay on at school are apparently less involved in informal
peer-oriented leisure contexts and they are also less involved in commercial adult-oriented
leisure pursuits. The pattern of differences is most marked for un- and non-employed youth.
Young people who find themselves in such circumstances are much more likely to continue
Table 9 Family background and adolescent leisure involvement. Mean factor score by parental
social class
Factors Social class of head of household
Non Skilled Semi/
manual manual Unskilled
Casual leisure—home context** −0.10 0.08 0.03
Commercial leisure—pubs, alcohol (n.s.) 0.01 0.03 0.02
Commercial leisure—cinemas, discos (n.s.) 0.07 0.02 −0.03
Casual leisure—neighbourhood context* −0.15 0.07 0.06
Table 10 Current circumstances and leisure involvement in later adolescence. Mean factor score
by economic activity status (17–18-year-olds)
Factors Current economic activity status
non-
school college training employed
Casual leisure—home context** −0.20 −0.01 0.23 0.25 0.01
Commercial leisure—pubs, alcohol** 0.42 0.75 0.94 0.95 0.94
Commercial leisure—cinema, discos** 0.23 0.49 0.35 0.37 −0.16
Casual leisure—neighbourhood context** −0.59 −0.78 −0.50 −0.59 −0.06
**p<0.01.

317
to use the local neighbourhood as an informal context for meeting friends, compared to
other young people at this age. Allied to this pattern of informal leisure involvement, un-
and non-employed youth are also much less likely to go to cinemas and discos, limiting
commercial leisure pursuits to pub attendance. As a final remark here, additional analyses
show that these profiles of leisure involvement with respect to the young person’s current
circumstances are largely unaffected by gender, with similar patterns being obtained for
young women and young men within each economic status group (although un- and non-
employed youth are treated as one group in this analysis).
We now return to the question of interrelationships between leisure activities and
contexts and relational issues in middle and later adolescence. Inter-correlations between
the six relational factors and the four leisure factors were examined for each age group
separately, and the results are presented in Table 11. First, looking at associations which are
common to all age groups (i.e. 13 to 14, 15 to 16 and 17 to 18 year-olds), feelings of social
isolation are negatively associated with use of the home as an informal setting for meeting
friends, and also with commercial leisure activities such as cinema going. In addition,
Table 11 Associations between relational issues and leisure involvement by age group
(correlation coefficients with #−0.10 or $0.10; p<0.001)
Perceptions of self, peer acceptance Leisure involvement
and family relations
Casual Commercial Commercial Casual
(Factors)
—home —pubs —cinema —neighbourhood
context alcohol discos context
13–14-year-olds
Popular if drink, smoke, fashionable 0.12 0.13
Parent/
s critical and controlling −0.12
Parent/
s supportive and accepting −0.10 −0.10
Challenge parental/
adult authority 0.10 0.16
Like the way I am, easy going
Hard to make friends, time alone −0.15 −0.11 −0.23
15–16-year-olds
Popular if drink, smoke, fashionable 0.20 0.15
Parent/
s critical and controlling
Parent/
Challenge parental/
Like the way I am, easy going
Hard to make friends, time alone −0.22 −0.15 −0.10 −0.25
17–18-year-olds
Popular if drink, smoke, fashionable
Parent/
s critical and controlling 0.12
Parent/
Challenge parental/
Like the way I am, easy going 0.15 0.14
Hard to make friends, time alone −0.20 −0.13 −0.19
Key: Associations which are marked in bold are common to all three age groups.
Associations which are underlined are restricted to the 13–14 and 15–16-year-old age groups.
Associations which are italicised are restricted to the 15–16 and 17–18-year-old age groups.
Entries in plain text represent those associations which are specific to one age group only.

perceptions of a supportive home environment are negatively associated with alcohol
consumption and pub attendance, and also with use of the local neighbourhood as an
informal leisure context, and, conversely, rejection of parental and adult authority is
positively associated with alcohol consumption and pub attendance, and also with “hanging
about” in the local neighbourhood. Next, looking at associations which are common to the
younger age groups only (i.e. 13 to 14 and 15 to 16 year-olds), feelings of social isolation are
negatively associated with use of the local neighbourhood, whilst peer conformity and
acceptance is positively associated with alcohol consumption and pub attendance, and with
“hanging about” in the local neighbourhood. Looking at associations which are common to
the older age groups only (i.e. 15 to 16 and 17 to 18 year-olds), this is limited to a negative
association between feelings of social isolation and pub attendance. Finally, looking at
associations which are specific to a particular age group, for 13- to 14-year-olds, perceptions
of controlling and critical parents are negatively associated with use of the home context as
an informal setting for meeting friends. For 17- to 18-year-olds, perceptions of parental
control and criticism are positively associated with pub attendance, whilst feelings of social
competence are associated with generally raised levels of involvement in commercial leisure
activities.
These findings may suggest a complex pattern of interrelationships between relational
issues and leisure contexts in middle and later adolescence, but closer examination reveals a
relatively coherent underlying picture. Thus, for example, if we look at “hanging about” in
the local neighbourhood and pub attendance as representative of a transition from a more
informal peer-oriented context to a more commercially-oriented context, we can see clear
links to relational issues in middle and later adolescence. Involvement in both of these
leisure contexts would appear to be associated with perceptions of an unsupportive family
environment and with challenge to parental authority. However, in middle adolescence
such involvement is further linked to concerns with peer acceptance and conformity, and,
in addition, “hanging around with friends” is linked to feelings of social integration. The
cross-sectional data presented here suggests that this pattern changes in later adolescence.
In later adolescence the pub context, rather than the local neighbourhood, is associated
with a sense of social competence and social integration, and, in addition, pub attendance is
now linked to perceptions of parental criticisms and controls, rather than to concerns with
peer acceptance and conformity. These patterns of association are indicative of an age-
related transition from more informal leisure settings towards more commercial contexts,
where this is linked to the relational issues of social integration, peer acceptance, and
independence from the family.
Conclusion
To summarise the results of the present study, using a different empirical approach with a
representative sample of Scottish adolescents, the same general age trends in relational
issues and concerns obtain as those originally reported in the work of Coleman in the 1970s
(Coleman and Hendry, 1990). Thus, at least from the young person’s perspective, the
general cross-sectional picture which is provided by the present study suggests that issues
and concerns around peer acceptance and challenge to adult authority are most prominent
in middle adolescence, whilst parental controls and support are seen to progressively
diminish across the adolescent years, where this reflects an increasing focus on

319
independence from the family and parallels a growing sense of self-esteem and social
competence amongst young people. Our results are also consistent with Coleman’s
observation that age-trends in relational issues are similar for females and males, although
we find some evidence for gender differences earlier in adolescence, where, for example,
females are less likely than males to view the home environment as supportive. When the
analysis is extended beyond the scope of Coleman’s original research to include other
aspects of the family context (i.e. social class of family background), once more, patterns of
developmental transition in adolescence are found to be broadly similar across social groups.
This is an important finding, given the criticisms that have been levelled at focal theory as
failing to take true account of social constraints and contexts which may affect processes of
psychosocial development in adolescence (Coffield et al., 1986).
The results also confirm the general age-trends in adolescent leisure involvement
proposed by Hendry (Coleman and Hendry, 1990). Here, the cross-sectional picture
provided bythe present study suggests that casual and informal leisure activities outwith the
home, such as “hanging about with friends” in the local neighbourhood, are at a peak in
middle adolescence and fall away rapidly thereafter, whilst commercial leisure venues, such
as cinemas, discos, clubs and pubs, steadily increase in importance across the adolescent
years to reach a peak in later adolescence. Gender differences are evident in these leisure
transitions, with a decline in the use of the local neighbourhood seen to be more marked
amongst young women, and an increase in pub attendance more marked amongst young
men. This presents a more complex picture of gender differences than that proposed in
Hendry’s (1983) model of adolescent leisure transitions. By contrast, the patterning of
leisure transitions with respect to social class background presents a simpler picture than
that originally proposed by Hendry. The results certainly suggest that young people’s leisure
involvement is linked to social class background (where social class differences relate to
casual rather than commercial leisure involvement) but the key finding is that age trends in
leisure involvement are broadly similar for all social groupings.
Our results for associations between relational issues and leisure preferences and
behaviours in adolescence would further suggest that there is some linkage between
psychosocial focuses and the “use” of leisure contexts by young people in order to meet
developmental needs (e.g. Silbereisen et al., 1987; Noack and Silbereisen, 1988; Cotterall,
1991). In the present study, for example, a shifting focus from the informal peer-oriented
local neighbourhood context to the commercial pub context is associated with issues of
family support and control, challenge to parental authority, with issues of peer acceptance,
and with perceptions of social competence and social integration. Gullotta et al. (1990)
point out that “competent” young people are active agents in, as well as reactive to, their
various environmental and developmental circumstances. Hence, from our research
perspective there is support for Lerner’s (1985) view that dynamic interactions occur in the
socialisation process, whereby young people may pace themselves through the adolescent
transition and, in a real sense of the term, be active agents in their own development.
This notion of self-efficacy, of the young person as an active agent, would certainly
concur with our conclusion that adolescent developmental transitions may operate largely
independently of social class background. This would appear to conflict with the
conclusions of Coffield et al. (1986) that the individual’s social position and circumstances
have a considerable role to play in processes of psychological adjustment and development
in adolescence. However, as our findings for older adolescents demonstrate, it is important
to make a clear distinction between the individual’s family circumstances (e.g. social class

of family background) and their own circumstances in later adolescence (e.g. current socio-
economic position). Indeed, the potential importance of social factors and constraints is
very clearly illustrated in the present study by the pattern of associations between the young
person’s current occupational status and their leisure pursuits and preferences, and
relational issues and concerns. In particular, our findings indicate that youth unemployment
and non-employment is associated with a “disrupted” pattern of relational concerns and
leisure involvement, when compared to other young people in later adolescence. One key
effect of youth unemployment may therefore be on the transition to “adult” status, where
expectations of increasing autonomy are frustrated, and where life-style “choices” are
limited (Coffield et al., 1986; Hendry and Raymond, 1986).
In conclusion, the series of age-trends in relational and leisure transitions which are
identified in the present cross-sectional study may well provide important markers for future
research on adolescent development. Yet on the evidence of the present study, Coleman’s
original focal theory continues to provide an adequate general description of age-trends in
developmental issues and concerns in middle and later adolescence. This is perhaps
surprising, given the many societal changes that have occurred since the publication of
Coleman’s original theory some 20 years ago. However, a more focused and process-
oriented longitudinal approach would be required in order to provide the substantial
empirical support necessary to a full confirmation of adolescent focal theory. Nevertheless,
any new theoretical perspective on adolescent development will need to take account of
the patterning of relational and leisure transitions reported in the present study, and, in
particular, the coalition of psychosocial processes and contextual changes in adolescence.
References
Coffield, F., Borrill, C. and Marshall, S. (1986). Growing Up at the Margins. Milton Keynes: Open
University Press.
Coleman, J.C. (1974). Relationships in Adolescence. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Coleman, J.C. & Hendry, L. B. (1990). The Nature of Adolescence, 2nd Edn. London: Routledge.
Cotterall, J. (1991). The emergence of adolescent territories in a large urban leisure environment.
Journal of Environmental Psychology, 11, 1, 25–41.
Gullotta, T.P., Adams, G.R. and Montemeyer, R. (1990). Developing Social Competency in Adolescence.
London: Sage.
Hendry, L.B. (1983). Growing Up and Going Out. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press.
Hendry, L.B. and Raymond, M. (1986). Psycho-social aspects of youth unemployment: an
interpretative theoretical model. Journal of Adolescence, 9, 355–366.
Hendry, L.B., Shucksmith, J., Love, J.G. and Glendinning, A. (1993). Young People’s Leisure and
Lifestyles. London: Routledge.
Lerner, R.M. (1985). Adolescent maturational changes and psychosocial development: a dynamic
interactional perspective. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 14, 355–372.
Noack, P. and Silbereisen, R.K. (1988). Adolescent development and choice of leisure settings.
Children’s Environments Quarterly, 5, 2, 25–33.
Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (1989). General Household Survey 1987. London: HMSO.
Silbereisen, R.K., Noack, P. and Eyferth, K. (1987). Place for development: adolescents, leisure
settings and developmental tasks. In Development as Action in Context: Problem Behaviour and
Normal Youth Development, Silbereisen, R.K., Eyferth, K. and Rudinger, G. (Eds). New York:
Springer.

Adolescent Focal Theories Age-Trends In Developmental Transitions

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Adolescent Focal Theories Age-Trends In Developmental Transitions

Similar to Adolescent Focal Theories Age-Trends In Developmental Transitions (20)

More from Luisa Polanco

More from Luisa Polanco (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Adolescent Focal Theories Age-Trends In Developmental Transitions