almost exactly in the middle of the stress range, this was surprising considering international research indicated adolescents from high-SES families were under a significant amount of pressure and experienced a significant amount of stress (Luthar, 2003, 2013; Randall et al., 2015; Travers et al., 2013). However, research into the developmental changes in adolescence has indicated that stress is significantly higher in early adolescence and begins to decline in later adolescence (Seiffge-Krenke, Aunola, & Nurmi, 2009). This has in part been attributed to the fact that as adolescents develop cognitively they develop better strategies to cope and are better equipped to manage their mood and levels of stress (Arsenio & Loria, 2014). In this current study over 71% of the participants were 16 – 18 years of age, which in relation to these findings may have impacted their levels of stress. From a different perspective, although mean stress levels were lower than expected, more than half the participants indicated moderate to high levels of perceived stress, indicating that many of the participants do in fact experience significant levels of stress.
regression analysis that identified increased stress as significantly impacting risk-taking behaviour. The results indicate that stress is not the lone variable that results in risk- taking behaviour, but that it is a significant contributor to levels of risk-taking. This was an unsurprising result that concurs with the review of literature from international studies (see Luthar, 2013; Luthar & Barkin, 2012). In addition, this result is in line with the theoretical framework that identified stress as one of the Environmental variables that contributed to increased risk taking behaviour. As discussed in Chapter 2, levels of stress have been found to be one of the contributing environmental factors that increase behavioural risks, such as cheating, stealing, substance use and random acts of delinquency (Luthar, 2013; Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Luthar & Sexton, 2004).
The present study indicated that riding without seatbelts, going to nightclubs, drinking alcohol and getting drunk, as well as not studying for school exams as the five highest risk-taking behaviours that this population engage in. The finding that drinking alcohol and getting drunk is a behaviour more commonly engaged in is concurrent with international findings that suggests affluent adolescents generally engage in increased alcohol consumption (Humensky, 2010). In addition it is in line with South African research, conducted in the Western Cape, that indicated alcohol consumption as being prevalent in South African youth (see Morojele et al., 2013). .
Marijuana and other illicit substance use, also indicated as prevalent amongst international affluent youth (Humensky, 2010; Luthar, 2013; Luthar & Barkin, 2012), were found to be less prevalent in this study. This is surprising considering South African research has indicated a prevalence of substance use, especially marijuana use, amongst
South African youth (Morojele et al., 2013; Reddy et al., 2013). It must be noted that this research was not conducted on affluent adolescents specifically, and thus may not be a true reflection of the substance using habits of this population. In addition, peer influence, an environmental risk factor, has been shown to be increasingly influential in adolescents substance using habits (Iwamoto & Smiler, 2013; Kelly et al., 2012; Simons-Morton & Chen, 2006). The results in this study may indicate that the sample of adolescents have reduced exposure to peers that promote substance using habits, although more research needs to be conducted in this area. Peer influence will be discussed in more depth in the following section.
Furthermore, research has indicated that a lack of anonymity reduces the truthfulness of participants answers to self-reports of a sensitive nature (Ong & Weiss, 2000; Vainio, 2013). It must then be considered that although confidentiality was assured, the lack of anonymity during data collection may have influenced the participants’ willingness to answer truthfully with regards to their use of illegal substances. Thus the results of questions relating to substance use may not be a true reflection of participant’s substance using habits.
Behaviours such as cheating and stealing, identified by international research as prevalent risk behaviours in affluent adolescents (Luthar, 2013), were also not as prevalent in this study. In fact, they ranked amongst the lowest of the risk-taking behaviours that this population engaged in. As discussed, lack of anonymity may have influenced participants’ willingness to be forthcoming regarding these activities, which may have legal or academic consequences. Furthermore, looking at stealing, little research has been
conducted into the reasons that affluent adolescents engage in this specific risk-taking behaviour, although Luthar (2013) suggests that it is simply a thrill seeking behaviour used to relieve pressure. In addition, as 78% of the adolescents in the current study are boarding students they may not have as much opportunity to engage in this type of thrill seeking behaviour, as they may be quite stringently monitored (see Kabiru & Orpinas, 2009). This will be discussed in more depth under the influence of parenting style on risk-taking behaviour.
The overall result regarding perceived stress and risk-taking behaviours appears to be congruent with international findings. What seems to differ in these results is simply the types of risk-taking behaviours these adolescents chose to engage in.
5.3. The Relationship between Resilience Potential and Level of Perceived Stress