Future Orientation, Impulsivity, and Deviance: Longitudinal Relationships and Multilevel Processes

Abstract

Using a sample of over 14,000 adolescents from 145 schools of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), the current work tested the longitudinal relationship between future orientation and deviance while considering the impact by both impulsivity and the school context. Two interrelated and complimentary studies were conducted, each with a unique set of hypotheses. Based on hierarchical regressions, the first study tested the independent and interactive longitudinal relationships between future orientation, impulsivity, and deviance. The study also tested the effects by different domains of future orientation (education, life, and marriage) as well as developmental changes (early/middle versus late adolescence) in the links between future orientation, impulsivity, and deviance. Findings provided evidence of a negative longitudinal relationship between future orientation and deviance, net any effects by background variables and impulsivity. In addition, future orientation moderated the effect by impulsivity on deviance. Future orientation in the education and life domains had a stronger relationship with deviance than marriage future orientation, and only education future orientation moderated the link between impulsivity and deviance. Finally, no developmental differences were found in the relationships between future orientation, impulsivity, and deviance. The second study investigated the independent longitudinal effects by future orientation and school context (school size, school location, school SES, and school-level future orientation) on adolescent deviance as well as potential moderation effects by school context on the future orientation-deviance link using a multilevel modeling strategy. Again, the effects by impulsivity were considered, although in this study, the variable was conceptualized as a control variable. Individual-level future orientation had a negative relationship with deviance, net any effects by control variables or level-2 school context constructs. In addition, the study provided evidence that school size and school-level future orientation predicted individual-level deviance. Finally, school-level future orientation moderated the relationship between individual-level future orientation and deviance. In conclusion, findings from the current work not only provided novel insights about the longitudinal relationship between future orientation and deviance, but also highlighted the importance of taking impulsivity into account in future work on future orientation. In addition, the findings also provided a number of insights into the effects by the school context on deviance, and therefore the ongoing debate regarding school effects.