In: Economics
The dual systems model, also known as the maturational imbalance model,is a theory arising from developmental cognitive neuroscience which posits that increased risk-taking during adolescence is a result of a combination of heightened reward sensitivity and immature impulse control.In other words, the appreciation for the benefits arising from the success of an endeavor is heightened, but the appreciation of the risks of failure lags behind.
The dual systems model hypothesizes that early maturation of the socioemotional system (including brain regions like the striatum) increases adolescents' attraction for exciting, pleasurable, and novel activities during a time when cognitive control systems (including brain regions like the prefrontal cortex) are not fully developed and thus cannot regulate these appetitive, and potentially hazardous, impulses. The temporal gap in the development of the socioemotional and cognitive control systems creates a period of heightened vulnerability to risk-taking during mid-adolescence. In the dual systems model, "reward sensitivity" and "cognitive control" refer to neurobiological constructs that are measured in studies of brain structure and function. Other models similar to the dual systems model are the maturational imbalance model,the driven dual systems model,and the triadic model.
Both the double frameworks model and the maturational irregularity model imagine a more slow creating intellectual control framework that develops through late pre-adulthood. The double frameworks model proposes a reversed U shape improvement of the socioemotional framework, with the end goal that reward responsivity increments in early youthfulness and decays from there on. The maturational awkwardness model depicts a socioemotional framework that arrives at its top around mid-youthfulness and afterward levels into adulthood. Further, the double frameworks model recommends that the advancement of the intellectual control and socioemotional frameworks is autonomous while the maturational irregularity suggests that the development of the psychological control framework prompts hosing of socioemotional responsivity.