A variety of studies provide support for the utility of the biopsychosocial model for examining adolescent risk-taking. For instance, Brooks-Gunn (1988) found that among female adolescents, early maturational timing was associated with a more negative self-image, and with earlier onset of sexual activity. For both males and females, early maturation is a risk factor for the initiation of substance use in adolescents (Tschann et al., 1994). Seminal work by Jessor and Jessor (1977) supports the roles of environment and personal values (i.e., psychosocial factors) in the onset of adolescent risk-taking behavior. Specifically, the predominance of peer influence over parental influence, along with adolescents placing a greater personal value on independence versus achievement resulted in an increased likelihood of adolescents engaging in risk-taking behavior. Moreover, Hughes et al. (1991) conducted a study with urban delinquent youth and concluded that alcohol/substance abuse during adolescence further added to biological predispositions, educational difficulties, and coercive family environments, all of which contribute to their delinquent behavior. While most evidence supporting the biopsychosocial model stems from research in the USA, a study conducted with Japanese students, utilizing structural equation analysis, found that egocentrism contributes directly to health-endangering behaviors while influences of self-esteem and perceived social norms are mediated by risk perception (Omori & Ingersoll, 2005).

Often it is difficult for a single study to collect data for each area emphasized in the biopsychosocial model. Thus, articles which can overview and synthesize studies provide additional support for the utility of the biopsychosocial model. For example, a review by Ricciardelli and McCabe (2004), synthesized the literature and reported that among adolescent males, disordered eating and the pursuit of muscularity are consistently associated biological factors such as body mass index (BMI), psychological factors such as negative affect and self-esteem, and sociocultural factors such as perceived pressure to lose weight by parents and peers (Ricciardelli & McCabe, 2004). Further, Dodge and Pettit (2003) reviewed of the empirical literature pertaining to the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence and conclude that reciprocal influences among biological dispositions, environments, and life experiences lead to recursive iterations across time which either worsen or diminish antisocial development. Additionally, their findings indicate that adolescents’ cognitive and emotional processes mediate the relationship between life experiences and conduct problems. Finally, specific to aggression and delinquency in adolescent girls, a review by Celio, Karnik, and Steiner (2006) found that early maturation is a risk factor for aggression and delinquent behavior. However, the way in which early physical maturation is perceived and treated by others (family, peers, and society) also determines how adolescent girls behave.

Additional support for the biopsychosocial model comes from interventions designed to reduce adolescent risk-taking. For example, Brody et al. (2009) found that youth in the control group of their Strong African American Families (SAAF) intervention program with the polymorphism in the SCL6A4(5HTT) gene at 5-HTTLPR showed significant increases in risk behavior initiation (particularly substance use initiation) across 29 months of follow-up in comparison to youth in the SAAF program with the same genetic risk. These findings demonstrate that despite genetic predispositions, programs that work to intervene at the family level to build supportive family environments, along with increasing self-esteem and improving life skills of youth, can attenuate risk initiation among adolescents.

Thus, across various behavioral domains, research supports the utility of the biopsychosocial model for explaining adolescent risk-taking.

Give the complexity of human behavior, a model must encompass a variety of constructs to more fully explain and understand why some people opt to participate in health-endangering activities. Because the biopsychosocial approach includes various constructs empirically linked to adolescent, it is a more complex model, and until recently it has been incredibly difficult to empirically examine all of the factors comprising the model in one study. However, with recent advances in technology and a concerted effort by researchers (and funding agencies) to engage in interdisciplinary collaborations to more thoroughly examine health-compromising decisions and behaviors, future research may be able to do so more frequently.

For instance, the recent mapping of the human genome has allowed us to explore the biological underpinnings of behavior and cognition in ways not possible even a decade ago. Advances in gene mapping have lead to findings implicating particular genes in alcoholism and substance use disorders (Conner et al., 2005). Also, genetic markers for impulsivity (e.g., DRD4) and depressive symptomatology (e.g., 5HTT and MAOA) are currently being explored, and identifying a multitude of other genetic markers that predispose adolescents towards various risk-taking behaviors is on the horizon.

Advances in brain imaging science have allowed researchers to examine the brain across development and while engaging in problem solving. Many now believe, based upon neuroimaging studies, that mature decision making is composed of two networks: a highly interconnected cognitive-control network that biases decisions in favor of rational outcomes and a socioemotional network that biases decision making toward reward-based demands (Chein, 2008). It is postulated that, in adults, the cognitive-control network can regulate the behavior of the socioemotional network, allowing for people to make rational, utilitarian decisions. However, neither of these systems is fully matured during adolescence, and each one develops along different timetables (Giedd, 2008). Thus, these two underdeveloped networks and their differing rates of development pave the way for heightened risk-taking during adolescence, which, as demonstrated by Gardner and Steinberg’s (2005) work with teen drivers, may be further compounded by social and environmental factors, particularly the presence of peers. In the past decade great scientific advances have been made through neuroimaging studies, but understanding the relationship between neuroimaging findings and behavior is still in its infancy. Although this is an area of great academic interest and active research, demonstrating straight-forward relationships between the size of, neural activity in, or connectedness between particular brain regions and a specific behavior or ability has, to date, been challenging at best (DiFranza, 2011; Giedd, 2008; Rubinstein et al., 2011; Steinberg, 2008).

Technological advances have also bettered researchers’ ability to assess adolescent risk-taking, as well as psychological and environmental influences on risk-taking. For example, it is now possible to detect through self-collected vaginal swab specimens, the presence of semen in vaginal fluid (Yc PCR). This can then be used as a nondisease marker of unprotected vaginal intercourse (Zenilman, Yuenger, Galai, Turner, & Rogers, 2005). Also, novel techniques, such as GeoCoding, allow researchers to spatially place participants in their physical neighborhoods, which are then mapped onto Census data to establish neighborhood profiles (Sales & Irwin, 2009). This provides an objective measure of neighborhood level social conditions including socioeconomic status, racial makeup, population density, as well as access to potentially health-compromising venues (such as fast-food restaurants and liquor stores) or health-promoting venues (such as grocery stories and green spaces). Further, the explosion of social media (e.g., Facebook, MySpace, YouTube) and mobile communication (e.g., cell-phones, iPhones, iPads, Netbooks) among adolescent populations in the USA and around the globe provide teens with nearly unlimited access to information (health promoting and health endangering) and social networks. These advances allow unique opportunities to access and assess adolescents, especially as it relates to decision-making, risk-taking, and health outcomes.

In the coming years it will be possible to explore biological influence on behavior and the interaction between biology, psychology, environment, adolescent risk-taking behavior, and health outcomes in ways never possible before. Thus, just as our society is becoming more and more complex, the utility of complex models of adolescent risk-taking like the biopsychosocial model will prove invaluable in guiding the next generation of adolescent health research.