Patterns of Positive Risk-Taking and Negative Risk-Taking Among Adolescents: The Role of Relationship Quality

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2026.04.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Based on the dual function model of social adjustment, the present study adopted a person-centered approach to identify latent subgroups of adolescents in terms of positive and negative risk-taking behaviors, and examined the associations between positive and negative parent-adolescent relationship quality and these latent risk-taking subgroups. This study recruited 1583 middle school students via convenience sampling, and conducted analyses using the latent profile model and multinomial logistic regression. The results revealed four distinct latent subgroups of positive and negative risk-taking among adolescents: a positive risk-taking profile (14.0%), a negative risk-taking profile (9.9%), a low risk-taking profile (68.5%), and a co-occurrence profile (7.6%). Positive parent-adolescent relationship quality contributed to adolescents being classified into the positive risk-taking subgroup while reducing their likelihood of falling into the negative risk-taking subgroup, whereas negative parent-adolescent relationship quality increased the probability of adolescents being categorized into the negative risk-taking subgroup. The current findings provide empirical evidence for the dual function model of social adjustment and may provide significant implications for future research and the development of interventions.

Key words: positive risk-taking behavior, negative risk-taking behavior, relationship quality, person-centered approach

摘要：

基于社会适应双功能模型，本研究采用个体定向分析区分了积极和消极两类冒险行为在青少年群体中的潜在亚组，考察了青少年与父母间积极和消极的关系质量与冒险行为潜在亚组间的关系。研究采用方便取样法抽取1583名中学生，使用潜在剖面模型和多元逻辑回归开展相关分析。研究结果发现积极和消极冒险在青少年群体中存在四个亚组：积极冒险亚组(14.0%)、消极冒险亚组(9.9%)、低冒险亚组(68.5%)、共发亚组(7.6%)，积极父母关系质量帮助青少年进入积极冒险亚组的同时避免其成为消极冒险亚组的一员，消极父母关系质量增加了青少年进入消极冒险亚组的概率。研究为社会适应双功能模型提供了证据，为后续青少年积极和消极冒险行为的识别及干预工作提供科学依据。

关键词: 积极冒险行为, 消极冒险行为, 关系质量, 个体定向

CLC Number:

B844

Mingyu GUO, Wenyi FAN, Simiao XIE, Simeng ZU, Lumei TIAN. Patterns of Positive Risk-Taking and Negative Risk-Taking Among Adolescents: The Role of Relationship Quality[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2026, 24(4): 483-490.

郭明宇, 范文翼, 谢思渺, 祖思萌, 田录梅. 青少年积极和消极冒险行为的潜在类别：关系质量的作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2026, 24(4): 483-490.

Figures/Tables 5

References 0

	窦凯, 黄义婷, 李菁菁, 聂衍刚. 青少年亲社会冒险行为量表的修订及信效度检验. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2020, 28 (10): 1538- 1542.
	冯雪珂, 窦凯, 唐滢. 父母积极教养与青少年亲社会冒险行为: 有调节的中介模型. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40 (5): 658- 666. DOI
	廖文莉, 钟霜, 樊倩, 徐华春. 积极与消极冒险行为问卷在中国大学生群体中的修订. 心理与行为研究, 2024, 22 (6): 839- 846. DOI
	田录梅, 张文新, 陈光辉. 父母支持、友谊质量对孤独感和抑郁的影响: 检验一个间接效应模型. 心理学报, 2014, 46 (2): 238- 251. DOI
	张晨, 张丽锦, 尚丽. 青少年冒险问卷——冒险行为量表在中学生中的信效度. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2011, 25 (8): 636- 640. DOI
	张俊, 朱海东, 张慧如, 张文翼, 杨晶晶. 父母情感温暖对初中生亲社会冒险行为的纵向影响: 公正世界信念的中介与性别的调节. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2023, 31 (12): 1915- 1920. DOI
	张友印, 余益兵, 沙家明. 社会适应双功能模型在犯罪青少年群体中的初步验证. 中国特殊教育, 2015 (12): 90- 96. DOI
	邹泓, 余益兵, 周晖, 刘艳. 中学生社会适应状况评估的理论模型建构与验证. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2012 (1): 65- 72.
	Bowlby, J. Attachment and loss: Retrospect and prospect. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1982, 52 (4): 664- 678. DOI
	Bronfenbrenner, U., & Evans, G. W. Developmental science in the 21^st century: Emerging questions, theoretical models, research designs and empirical findings. Social Development, 2000, 9 (1): 115- 125. DOI
	Defoe, I. N., & Romer, D. Theoretical advances in research on the development of risk taking. Developmental Review, 2022, 63, 101001. DOI
	Do, K. T., Guassi Moreira, J. F., & Telzer, E. H. But is helping you worth the risk? Defining prosocial risk taking in adolescence. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2017, 25, 260- 271. DOI
	Duell, N., Christophe, N. K., & Romero, M. Y. M. Risk taking profiles among college students: An examination of health-risk taking, anti-racism action, and college functioning. Journal of American College Health, 2024, 72 (5): 1419- 1427. DOI
	Duell, N., Kwon, S. J., Do, K. T., Turpyn, C. C., Prinstein, M. J., Lindquist, K. A., & Telzer, E. H. Positive risk taking and neural sensitivity to risky decision making in adolescence. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2022, 57, 101142. DOI
	Duell, N., & Steinberg, L. Positive risk taking in adolescence. Child Development Perspectives, 2019, 13 (1): 48- 52. DOI
	Duell, N., & Steinberg, L. Differential correlates of positive and negative risk taking in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2020, 49 (6): 1162- 1178. DOI
	Duell, N., & Steinberg, L. Adolescents take positive risks, too. Developmental Review, 2021, 62, 100984. DOI
	Escribano, D., Doldán Martelli, V., Lapuente, F. J., Cuesta, J. A., & Sánchez, A. Evolution of social relationships between first-year students at middle school: From cliques to circles. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11 (1): 11694. DOI
	Fitzgerald, M., Ledermann, T., Grzywacz, J. G., & Hamstra, C. Childhood abuse and positive and negative relationship quality in women: The role of depression. Journal of Relationships Research, 2020, 11, e14. DOI
	Francis, K. A. General strain theory, gender, and the conditioning influence of negative internalizing emotions on youth risk behaviors. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2014, 12 (1): 58- 76. DOI
	French, D. C., Rianasari, M., Pidada, S., Nelwan, P., & Buhrmester, D. Social support of Indonesian and U.S. children and adolescents by family members and friends. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 2001, 47 (3): 377- 394. DOI
	Fryt, J., Duell, N., & Szczygieł, M. Psychological profiles associated with positive and negative risk-taking in adults. Current Psychology, 2024, 43 (14): 12744- 12753. DOI
	Fryt, J., & Szczygiel, M. Predictors of positive and negative risk-taking in adolescents and young adults: Similarities and differences. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 2021, 17 (1): 17- 30. DOI
	Fryt, J., Szczygieł, M., & Duell, N. Positive and negative risk taking in adolescence: Age patterns and relations to social environment. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2021, 2021 (179): 127- 146. DOI
	Granger, T. A., Cook, P. F., & Ramos, G. Adolescent peer and parent relationships into emerging adulthood. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 2020, 42 (2): 90- 96. DOI
	Gullone, E., Moore, S., Moss, S., & Boyd, C. The Adolescent Risk-Taking Questionnaire: Development and psychometric evaluation. Journal of Adolescent Research, 2000, 15 (2): 231- 250. DOI
	Icenogle, G., & Cauffman, E. Adolescent decision making: A decade in review. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2021, 31 (4): 1006- 1022. DOI
	Lewin-Bizan, S., Lynch, A. D., Fay, K., Schmid, K., McPherran, C., Lerner, J. V., & Lerner, R. M. Trajectories of positive and negative behaviors from early- to middle-adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2010, 39 (7): 751- 763. DOI
	Liu, Y., Zou, Q. F., Xie, Y., & Dou, K. Exploring shared and unique predictors of positive and negative risk-taking behaviors among Chinese adolescents through machine-learning approaches: Discovering gender and age variations. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2025, 54 (5): 1109- 1127. DOI
	Marzban, A. Parental monitoring and risk-taking levels of adolescents. International Journal of School Health, 2023, 10 (1): 49- 50.
	Maslowsky, J., Owotomo, O., Huntley, E. D., & Keating, D. Adolescent risk behavior: Differentiating reasoned and reactive risk-taking. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 2019, 48 (2): 243- 255. DOI
	McNaughton Reyes, H. L., Foshee, V. A., Gottfredson, N. C., Ennett, S. T., & Chen, M. S. Codevelopment of delinquency, alcohol use, and aggression toward peers and dates: Multitrajectory patterns and predictors. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2020, 30 (4): 1025- 1038. DOI
	Park, S., & Kim, J. Patterns of problem behaviors and predictors of class membership among adolescents in the Republic of Korea: A latent class analysis. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 2020, 29 (2): 315- 326. DOI
	Park, W. Y., & Gentzler, L. A. Profiles of negative and positive risk-taking behavior among Asian and non-Asian American emerging adults. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 2025, 35 (1): e70000. DOI
	Patterson, M. W., Pivnick, L., Mann, F. D., Grotzinger, A. D., Monahan, K. C., Steinberg, L. D., … Harden, K. P. (2023). A mixed-methods approach to refining and measuring the construct of positive risk-taking in adolescence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 33(2), 680–700.
	Rogers, M. M., & McKinney, C. Parent-child relationship quality and internalizing problems as predictors of risky sexual behavior. Journal of Family Issues, 2019, 40 (12): 1656- 1676. DOI
	Romer, D., Reyna, V. F., & Satterthwaite, T. D. Beyond stereotypes of adolescent risk taking: Placing the adolescent brain in developmental context. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 2017, 27, 19- 34. DOI
	Seale, J., Nind, M., & Simmons, B. Transforming positive risk-taking practices: The possibilities of creativity and resilience in learning disability contexts. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research, 2013, 15 (3): 233- 248. DOI
	Skabeikyte-Norkiene, G., Sharp, C., Kulesz, P. A., & Barkauskiene, R. Personality pathology in adolescence: Relationship quality with parents and peers as predictors of the level of personality functioning. Borderline Personality Disorder and Emotion Dysregulation, 2022, 9 (1): 31. DOI
	Steinberg, L. A dual systems model of adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Psychobiology, 2010, 52 (3): 216- 224. DOI
	Veselinova, C. Principles of positive risk taking for individuals with disabilities. Nursing and Residential Care, 2014, 16 (9): 526- 529. DOI
	Warren, C. M., Kechter, A., Christodoulou, G., Cappelli, C., & Pentz, M. A. Psychosocial factors and multiple health risk behaviors among early adolescents: A latent profile analysis. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 2020, 43 (6): 1002- 1013. DOI
	Wood, A. P., Dawe, S., & Gullo, M. J. The role of personality, family influences, and prosocial risk-taking behavior on substance use in early adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 2013, 36 (5): 871- 881. DOI

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1.积极父母关系质量	14.25	3.38
2.积极朋友关系质量	12.95	3.50	0.48***
3.消极父母关系质量	2.16	0.85	−0.20***	0.04
4.消极朋友关系质量	1.82	0.76	0.04	0.04	0.49***
5.积极冒险行为	2.00	0.68	0.24**	0.25***	0.02	0.09***
6.亲社会冒险行为	2.34	0.83	0.24***	0.26***	−0.03	0.05*	0.48***
7.叛逆行为	6.63	2.04	−0.05*	0.01	0.10***	0.09***	0.13***	0.14***
8.反社会行为	5.02	1.74	−0.10***	−0.01	0.19***	0.11***	0.09***	0.05*	0.62***

变量	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1.积极父母关系质量	14.25	3.38
2.积极朋友关系质量	12.95	3.50	0.48***
3.消极父母关系质量	2.16	0.85	−0.20***	0.04
4.消极朋友关系质量	1.82	0.76	0.04	0.04	0.49***
5.积极冒险行为	2.00	0.68	0.24**	0.25***	0.02	0.09***
6.亲社会冒险行为	2.34	0.83	0.24***	0.26***	−0.03	0.05*	0.48***
7.叛逆行为	6.63	2.04	−0.05*	0.01	0.10***	0.09***	0.13***	0.14***
8.反社会行为	5.02	1.74	−0.10***	−0.01	0.19***	0.11***	0.09***	0.05*	0.62***

模型	BIC	aBIC	LMR	BLRT	Entropy	组别样本量
1	14978.838	14953.424				1583
2	12878.507	12837.208	0.000	0.000	0.989	1450/133
3	12146.362	12089.180	0.007	0.000	0.951	1237/221/125
4	11836.350	11763.284	0.003	0.000	0.884	1084/222/121/156
5	11343.226	11254.276	0.000	0.000	0.905	1106/148/204/113/12

模型	BIC	aBIC	LMR	BLRT	Entropy	组别样本量
1	14978.838	14953.424				1583
2	12878.507	12837.208	0.000	0.000	0.989	1450/133
3	12146.362	12089.180	0.007	0.000	0.951	1237/221/125
4	11836.350	11763.284	0.003	0.000	0.884	1084/222/121/156
5	11343.226	11254.276	0.000	0.000	0.905	1106/148/204/113/12

变量	类别1	类别2	类别3	类别4	F	Post hoc
变量	低冒险亚组	积极冒险亚组	共发亚组	消极冒险亚组	F	Post hoc
n(%)	1084(68.5%)	222(14.0%)	121(7.6%)	156(9.9%)
积极冒险行为	−0.26±0.69	1.58±0.75	0.56±0.80	0.05±1.06	368.89***	2>3>4>1
亲社会冒险行为	−0.23±0.71	1.19±1.01	0.53±0.86	−0.01±0.98	200.07***	2>3>4>1
叛逆行为	−0.25±0.10	−0.24±0.12	1.72±0.46	0.46±0.23	5259.90***	3>4>(1, 2)
反社会行为	−0.22±0.53	−0.28±0.46	1.32±0.56	0.70±0.82	383.87***	3>4>(1, 2)