Abstract
In commenting on the similarity of findings about adolescent problem behavior emerging from comparative, cross-national studies in markedly different societies, this chapter provides a brief exegesis on the difference between description and explanation. While description is an account at the observable, apparent, or phenotypic level and emphasizes obvious differences, explanation requires an account at the underlying, causal, or genotypic level. It is the latter that can reveal that, despite apparent differences in mean levels of, say, problem behavior, in different societies, and of apparent differences in mean levels of its theoretical predictors, the underlying relations of the theoretical predictors to variation in problem behavior should be invariant across the different societies. The chapter argues for greater theory-oriented rather than descriptive cross-national, comparative research.
Reprinted with permission from:
Jessor, R. (2008). Description versus explanation in cross-national research on adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 43(6), 527–528.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Dmitrieva, J., Chen, C. S., Greenberger, E., & Gil-Rivas, V. (2004). Family relationships and adolescent psychosocial outcomes: Converging findings from Eastern and Western cultures. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14(4), 425–447.
Greenberger, E., Chen, C. S., Beam, M., Whang, S. M., & Dong, Q. (2000). The perceived social contexts of adolescents’ misconduct: A comparative study of youths in three cultures. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10(3), 365–388.
Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., Costa, F. M., Dong, Q., Zhang, H., & Wang, C. (2003). Adolescent problem behavior in China and the United States: A cross-national study of psychosocial protective factors. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 13(3), 329–360.
Lewin, K. (1931). The conflict between Aristotelian and Galileian modes of thought in contemporary psychology. Journal of General Psychology, 5(2), 141–177.
Link, T. C. (2008). Youthful intoxication: A cross-cultural study of drinking among German and American adolescents. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 69(3), 362–370.
Rowe, D. C., Vazsonyi, A. T., & Flannery, D. J. (1994). No more than skin deep: Ethnic and racial similarity in developmental process. Psychological Review, 101(3), 396–413.
Vazsonyi, A. T., Chen, P., Young, M., Jenkins, D., Browder, S., Kahumoku, E., et al. (2008). A test of Jessor’s problem behavior theory in a Eurasian and a Western European developmental context. Journal of Adolescent Health, 43(6), 555–564.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jessor, R. (2017). The Cross-National Generality of Theoretical Explanation. In: Problem Behavior Theory and the Social Context . Advancing Responsible Adolescent Development. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57885-9_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57885-9_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-57884-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-57885-9
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)