Content uploaded by Ashley Ebbert
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ashley Ebbert on Mar 28, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
COMPLEXITIES IN ADJUSTMENT PATTERNS
AMONG THE “BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST”: RISK
AND RESILIENCE IN THE CONTEXT OF HIGH
ACHIEVING SCHOOLS
Ashley M. Ebbert
Arizona State University
Nina L. Kumar
Authentic Connections
Suniya S. Luthar
Arizona State University
Youth in high achieving schools (HAS) are at elevated risk for serious adjustment problems—
including internalizing and externalizing symptoms and substance use—given unrelenting pres-
sures to be “the best.”For resilience researchers, successful risk evasion in these high-pressure
settings should, arguably, be defined in terms of the absence of serious symptoms plus behaviorally
manifested integrity and altruism. Future interventions should target that which is the fundamental
basis of resilience: Dependable, supportive relationships in everyday settings. These must be
promoted between adults and children and among them, toward enhancing positive development
among youth and families in these high stress environments.
Our central contention in this article is that children attending high achieving schools (HAS),
predominated by upper middle class families, are an “at-risk”group and warrant systematic
studies by scholars concerned with the construct of resilience. In developmental science, family
socioeconomic status has traditionally been thought of as inversely linked with adjustment
problems—with the affluent showing fewer problems than the poor—but accumulating evi-
dence shows that this is not necessarily the case. We present here programmatic research
evidence showing that youth from well-educated, upper-middle-class families, a demographic
that is over-represented in HAS, are in fact an “at-risk”group and warrant systematic attention
in future work on resilience. We will also discuss associated constructs of competence and
culture-specific vulnerability and protective processes.
Correspondence should be addressed to Suniya S. Luthar, Department of Psychology, Arizona State University, 950
South McAllister Avenue, Tempe, AZ, 85287. E-mail: sluthar@asu.edu
Research in Human Development, 00: 1–14, 2018
Copyright © 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1542-7609 print / 1542-7617 online
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15427609.2018.1541376
We begin this article by summarizing existing evidence establishing that youth in high-
achieving communities are in fact an at-risk group. Next, we describe how competence as
conventionally defined (academic excellence) tends to coexist with significant problems in
other areas (substance use, internalizing problems), demonstrating as has been shown with
other at-risk populations, the multidimensional nature of resilience. We then review subculture-
specific risk processes as well as risk modifiers: processes that tend to confer high levels of
maladjustment as well as those that exacerbate or reduce these risks, that is, vulnerability and
protective processes, respectively. In the final section of the article, we consider why HAS
youth merit further research by developmental scientists and consider implications for future
community-based interventions with a central focus on the quality of their socializing
environments.
EVIDENCE INDICATING THAT HAS STUDENTS ARE “AT RISK”
At the outset, we clarify that in our programmatic research we have deliberately chosen to
discontinue using terms such as “privileged”and “affluent”that we have commonly used in the
past (Luthar, 2003; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005) and instead refer now more simply to youth in
HAS (Luthar & Kumar, 2018). The reasons for this are threefold. First, the new descriptor
precisely captures the samples we have studied over the years; our samples have been recruited
based on the schools they attended, which have been those with high standardized test scores,
rich extracurricular and academic offerings, and graduates heading for the most selective
colleges and universities. Second, terms such as “affluent”might connote the top 1% in the
minds of some readers; however, in reality, the majority of families in our HAS samples is not
nearly as wealthy, with many family incomes in the range of $100,00 to $150,000. These
include children of clinicians, researchers, and educators; likely families of anyone reading this
article. Third, though these schools generally serve white-collar professional, well-educated
families, some students do come from families of relatively low socioeconomic status (SES).
Recent findings from large nationally representative samples have shown that it is not family
level of affluence that connotes elevated risks to adolescents (Coley, Sims, Dearing, &
Spielvogel, 2018; Lund, Dearing, & Zachrisson, 2017). Instead, risks are associated with
school-level affluence, that is, having a high proportion of schoolmates from high-income
families (see further discussions on this later in the article, under “The Role of Peers”).
These clarifications noted, it has now recurrently been established that considered collectively
children from HAS communities are in fact an “at-risk”group (Koplewicz, Gurian, & Williams,
2009; Luthar, Barkin, & Crossman, 2013; Luthar & Kumar, 2018). In the Executive Summary of
a recent Robert Wood Johnson report on adolescent wellness, today’s top four high-risk environ-
ments listed, in turn, are exposure to poverty, to trauma, to discrimination or racism, and to
“Excessive pressure to excel or to outdo everyone else—often, but not exclusively, occurring in
affluent communities”(Geisz & Nakashian, 2018, p. 5). A recent study corroborated the risks of
HAS across decades; being at a high achieving school was linked with relatively poor adult
outcomes including lower educational expectations, educational achievement, income, and occu-
pational prestige, likely reflecting long-term effects of negative social comparisons in selective
high schools (Gollner et al, 2018).
2EBBERT ET AL.
What this implies is an Collectively, the aforementioned results imply elevated likelihood of
disturbance in the HAS demographic as a whole. In studies of risk and resilience, the concept of
risk is defined in terms of statistical probabilities (Luthar, Cicchetti, & Becker, 2000; Masten,
2001), wherein those exposed to potentially problematic conditions (e.g., parent depression) are
statistically more likely than others to show adjustment problems. This does not mean that all
children exposed to these conditions are distressed; rather, that overall, their odds of difficulties
are higher. Thus, though not all students in HAS communities show adjustment problems, a
substantially higher proportion of them have significant difficulties compared to national
averages.
Elevated adjustment problems in comparison to norms have been documented across diverse
internalizing symptoms. In early research (Luthar & D’Avanzo, 1999), one in five girls in an
affluent suburban community reported clinically significant levels of depressive symptoms, mea-
sured by the Children’s Depression Inventory (CDI; Kovacs, 1992). In our subsequent program-
matic research, we have used the Youth Self Report (Achenbach & Rescorla, 2001), a widely used
measure with excellent, nationally representative norms based on thousands of schools across the
country. As compared to these national norms, HAS youth have repeatedly shown elevations in
prevalence of serious internalizing problems such as depressive, anxiety, and somatic symptoms
(for reviews, see Luthar et al., 2013; Luthar & Kumar, 2018).
Students in HAS samples also report elevated rates of rule breaking. Although delinquency is
commonly assumed to be a problem unique to youth in poverty, HAS samples show comparable
levels (Luthar & Ansary, 2005), with differences in the particular types of rule breaking in the two
sets of students. HAS youth tend to endorse random acts of delinquency, such as stealing from
parents of peers, whereas inner-city teensindicate behaviors that could involve self-defense, such as
carrying a weapon. Additionally, cheating among HAS students has also been found to be proble-
matic, encompassing not only isolated cheating on examinations, but also larger, organized schemes
(e.g., Minarcik & Bridges, 2015; Pérez-Peña & Bidgood, 2012).
Substance abuse is a significant problem: Rates of alcohol and drug use are significantly
elevated among students in HAS settings (Luthar & Kumar, 2018). Compared to their econom-
ically disadvantaged counterparts, HAS students were higher in reported use of cigarettes,
alcohol, marijuana, and hard drugs, with the lowest levels of abstinence reported among high-
SES girls (Luthar & D’Avanzo, 1999; Luthar & Goldstein, 2008). Studies from other research
laboratories have yielded consistent findings, indicating high use of marijuana and alcohol, as
well as binge drinking, in areas with mostly well-educated, White, high-income, two-parent
families (Botticello, 2009; Patrick, Wightman, Schoeni, & Schulenberg, 2012; Song et al.,
2009). Previously noted analyses from the United States and Norway have shown that more
than family or neighborhood affluence, it is attendance at schools with a high proportion of
affluent students that is linked with elevated risk for substance use (Coley et al., 2018; Lund
et al., 2017).
This elevated substance use is not simply an adolescent-limited problem in HAS commu-
nities. Multiwave longitudinal data from the New England Study of Suburban Youth (NESSY;
Luthar, Small, & Ciciolla, 2018) have shown that these trends tend to persist and even worsen
through college. Prospective, annual assessments of teens from suburban communities showed
substantial elevations for frequency of drunkenness and using marijuana, stimulants, and
cocaine across gender. More importantly, relative to national norms, rates of clinical diagnoses
of alcohol and drug dependence were twice as high among the sample of NESSY men assessed
YOUTH IN HIGH ACHIEVING SCHOOLS 3
throughout college, and three and two times as high for women and men, respectively, assessed
after college across ages 23 to 27 (Luthar et al., 2018).
Most students in our prior HAS samples have been of White backgrounds, precluding
separate analyses by ethnicity, but recent evidence suggests that problems do generalize beyond
White students. In a HAS sample in the Northwest, for example (Warikoo, Chin, Zillmer, &
Luthar, 2018), rates of clinically significant levels of internalizing symptoms (that are 7% in
national norms) were 20% vs. 28% among White and Asian American boys respectively;
parallel numbers for girls were 26% and 22%. Similarly, recent analyses from the Family and
Community Health Study (FACHS; Assari, Gibbons, & Simons, 2018) showed that African
American males from relatively high socioeconomic backgrounds had particularly high scores
on perceived racial discrimination, with associated vulnerability to adjustment problems includ-
ing depression and substance use.
In summary, evidence thus far clearly indicates that HAS students are an at-risk group. This
has been recurrently documented in our own studies across HAS samples from different parts
of the country, including independent and public schools, day and boarding schools, and
schools in cities and suburbs. Findings from other research laboratories, using different
sampling strategies, are consistent.
DEFINITIONS OF COMPETENCE, AND COEXISTENCE WITH SIGNIFICANT
PROBLEMS IN OTHER AREAS
In developmental research on resilience, the notion of competence in childhood and adoles-
cence has long been defined in terms of behaviorally manifested and observable domains of
meeting stage-salient societal expectations, particularly indices of academic success and effec-
tive functioning at school (Garmezy, Masten, & Tellegen, 1984; Masten, 2001). The logic
behind this operationalization is sound: getting a good education in high school is critical for
future occupational success and financial stability.
As was established in early development research on low-SES teens (Luthar, Doernberger, &
Zigler, 1993), however, resilience is not a unidimensional construct. Among inner-city high
school students exposed to high levels of life stress, a total of 74% were labeled “resilient”
when the outcome measure was school-based social competence. At the same time, when also
considering coexisting difficulties in other indicators of competence—such as ratings by peers
and emotional adjustment—a far lower proportion of youth (16%) met criteria for “doing well”
(Luthar et al., 1993). Findings were seen as reflecting overall disparagement, among the peer
group, for sustained academic effort and conversely, their approval for counter-conventional
behaviors including disruptiveness in the classroom.
In recent years, studies on resilience in adulthood have established similar findings. Among
adults who had experienced spousal bereavement, for example, “doing well”was examined
across five key indicators: life satisfaction, negative affect, positive affect, general health, and
physical functioning (Infurna & Luthar, 2017). Considering cross-domain adjustment, less then
10% of the bereaved participants were resilient across all five of these self-reported measures of
adjustment. In other words, successful adjustment in one or more domains tended to coexist
with significant problems in another important area.
4EBBERT ET AL.
Recurrent findings such as these have led resilience researchers to caution that the selection
of domains of competence that are used to define risk evasion must be conceptually linked to
the particular type of adversity experienced. Among youth growing up in crime-ridden neigh-
borhoods where high school dropout rates are high, for example, it makes sense to focus on
evasion of delinquency and maintaining a decent grade point average. Among bereaved
individuals, the most relevant domains of focus would include evasion of prolonged grief,
depression, and loneliness, rather than the presence of high overall life satisfaction.
Collectively, these issues raise some serious questions about how competence should be
defined in studies of resilience among HAS students, and we would argue that academic
success should not be at the forefront in this case. The nature of the risks facing these youth
is clear; they are linked to high pressures to achieve that come from multiple sources (as
described further below). Admirably high Grade Point Average (GPA) and Scholastic Aptitude
Test (SAT) scores coexist with alarmingly high rates of depression, anxiety, self-harm, and
substance use (Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Luthar & Becker, 2002; Luthar & Goldstein, 2008).
With regard to the latter, what is more, misuse of drugs and alcohol is linked with high levels of
popularity among classmates, again reflecting peer approval of those with the courage to “buck
the system,”as was previously noted among inner-city youth (Luthar & D’Avanzo, 1999).
Thus, in future research on resilience among this particular at-risk group, we would argue
that it would be useful to focus centrally on understanding how it is that some teens are able to
avoid excessive perfectionism, unremitting anxiety, high depression, and frequent substance
use, even as they (like their peers and families in this subculture of high achievement) maintain
creditable academic and extracurricular performance. Obviously, their levels of academic
achievements are not irrelevant when operationalizing overall competence. However, this is
not the area of adjustment that is the greatest cause for concern when seeking to understand
(and then foster) “successful risk evasion.”Within the context of these highly competitive,
high-octane settings, of most pressing importance is disentangling what allows for healthy
overall development of the whole child, reflecting good social-emotional adjustment, and
positive attributes such as integrity and altruism, without necessarily having multiple distinc-
tions in academic and extracurricular pursuits.
CULTURE-SPECIFIC FACTORS LEADING TO ELEVATED PROBLEMS IN HAS
COMMUNITIES: CENTRAL MECHANISMS OR “CONDUITS”OF RISK
In resilience research, once a broad risk factor has been identified, the next step is to understand
“why or how”risks are conferred, and subsequently, consider mechanisms occurring in that
context, in particular, that might mitigate and exacerbate these risks. It is important to not only
consider well-known risks that affect all children (such as harshness from adults) but also
subculture-specific risks (Garcia Coll et al., 1996), with deliberate incorporation of youths’own
perceptions and “meaning making”of salient influences in their lives (Cunningham & Rious,
2015; Spencer & Swanson, 2013). As indicated by contemporary theories on effects of culture
on development (Rogoff, 2003; Vélez-Agosto, Soto-Crespo, Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, Vega-
Molina, & Garcia Coll, 2017; Weisner, García Coll, & Chatman-Nelson, 2010), this implies
salient ways in which membership in a particular group plays out in everyday actions and
YOUTH IN HIGH ACHIEVING SCHOOLS 5
routines—including bedtimes, video games, homework, child care, cooking dinner, day care,
sports practices, other after-school activities, and so on.
The single greatest challenge for youth in HAS, deriving itself from multiple sources, is high
and ongoing pressures to achieve (Luthar & Kumar, 2018). Growing up in an affluent context,
where parents are financially well off and peers are experiencing similar pressures to succeed,
can create a developmental environment when youth are constantly striving to distinguish
themselves from their (also highly distinguished) schoolmates. Students and adults alike tend
to endorse the belief that success in multiple spheres at school is essential to gain admission to
a prestigious college, and in turn, secure a well-paying, high-status job in the future. As a result,
students in HAS contexts are encouraged to begin enhancing their “resumes”beginning as early
as junior high school. Furthermore, these pressures are particularly acute in HAS communities
as extra tutoring and coaching are readily available. With this extra help, students believe that
exceptionally lofty goals (such as getting into top tier colleges) should be well within their
reach, thus buying into the credo, “I can, therefore I must”(Luthar et al., 2013).
Chronic exposure to such pressures has multiple negative effects on children’s development.
Among HAS students, the motivation to excel, that could have been fueled by personal desires,
is replaced with an internally controlled, driven form of motivation, limiting feelings of
autonomy and satisfaction with achievements (e.g., Ryan & Deci, 2017), and unhealthy
perfectionism (Flett, Nepon, Hewitt, Molnar, & Zhao, 2016). In addition to frequent daily
stressors, these ongoing pressures can become overwhelming, presaging serious internalizing
and externalizing disorders, as well as substance use to provide relief from distress (Luthar &
Kumar, 2018). In summary, unrelenting achievement pressures in HAS settings derive from
multiple sources, internal and external, and in turn, compromise well-being in diverse psycho-
logical and behavioral domains.
THE ROLE OF PARENTS: AFFECTIVE DIMENSIONS
As a group, parents in HAS communities are neither neglectful nor disparaging (Luthar & Barkin,
2012; Luthar & Latendresse, 2005). At the same time, it appears that in affluent communities just as
in low-income communities, some children feel quite distant from their parents, suggesting
pressures faced by some families in both cases. Compared to very-low-income youth from mostly
single-mother-led families, affluent youth from mostly two-parent families did not report feeling
any closer, on average, to their parents (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005).
In terms of effects of parenting on children, in HAS communities, there are two general
themes around affective parenting dimensions that are similar to those in other sociodemo-
graphic groups. First, in general, effects of negative parenting dimensions are likely to be
stronger than those of positive ones, as “bad is stronger than good”(Baumeister, Bratslavsky,
Finkenauer, & Vohs, 2001). Harsh and critical words from parents tend to have much stronger
effects than words of praise or affection (Fredrickson & Losada, 2005; Luthar, Crossman, &
Small, 2015). Second, the quality of relationships with mothers as opposed to fathers has shown
stronger associations with teens’adjustment outcomes (Ebbert, Infurna, & Luthar, 2018; Luthar
et al., 2013). Intuitively, this makes sense because in these families as in most others, it is
mothers who are typically most responsible for child-rearing activities so that youth generally
6EBBERT ET AL.
have more frequent interactions, and intimate relationships, with their mothers as compared to
their fathers (Collins & Russell, 1991; Ebbert et al., 2018).
Salient Parenting Processes in HAS Subculture: Achievement Emphasis and
Containment
Aside from the aforementioned “universals”(e.g., harshness from parents hurts, as love
generally helps), there are a few aspects of parenting that are especially important in high-
achieving contexts, and one of these is parents’own emphasis on extrinsic versus intrinsic
values. In high-achieving, affluent settings where the push toward accomplishments pervades
the school climate, peer group, and community, it can be protective for children to perceive
their home environments as insulating them somewhat from the reverberating cultural messages
of “achieve more”at any and all costs. Just as a contextually salient task for inner-city parents
is to shield youth from the risks of street violence and gangs (Romich, 2009), in high-achieving
contexts, it is especially beneficial for parents to maintain a sense of balance in their emphasis
on personal success and status. It is important that parents ensure that there is as much, if not
more, emphasis on decency and kindness (Luthar & Becker, 2002). Conversely, when children
believe that parents value them more for what they can do rather than for who they are, they
tend to rely on their accomplishments for their sense of self-worth (Luthar & Becker, 2002).
This, in turn, places them at high risk for maladjustment, resulting from disproportionate
pursuit of extrinsic goals (e.g., wealth and image) relative to intrinsic goals (e.g., affiliation
and person growth) (Kasser, 2002; Lekes, Hope, Gouveia, Koestner, & Philippe, 2012). In a
study of HAS sixth graders’perceptions of each parent’s values separately, findings showed
that the highest levels of adjustment problems among children were those who felt that both
parents were high on emphasis relative to personal decency or integrity (Ciciolla, Curlee,
Karageorge, & Luthar, 2017). Importantly, children’s actual academic performance did not
suffer when both parents were seen as low or moderate on achievement emphasis (Ciciolla
et al., 2017).
Aside from achievement emphasis, a second critical culture-specific protective factor in
HAS communities is laxness in limit -setting, especially around use of drug and alcohol use.
Rule-breaking behaviors are not always treated seriously (Luthar & Kumar, 2018); in fact,
some parents even bail their children out of trouble with authorities in efforts to avoid
damaging the teens’“resumes”and thus their chances of getting into prestigious colleges.
Across several studies, we have recurrently seen significant ramifications for the notion of
parent’s perceived “containment”for substance use, that is, students’perceptions of the
seriousness of repercussions if parents discovered use of drugs or alcohol. Compared to other
errant behaviors such as rudeness, academic indolence, and delinquency HAS students’antici-
pated repercussions were the lowest for behaviors involving substance abuse (Luthar & Barkin,
2012; Luthar & Goldstein, 2008). In turn, low levels of perceived containment for substance
use is linked with high self-reported substance use across HAS samples we have studied, and
frequent use in high school is related to heightened risk for diagnoses of addiction in early
adulthood (Luthar Small, & Ciciolla, 2017). In sum, the findings suggest that affluent students
do not perceive the repercussions for substance use to be serious, especially when compared to
other errant behaviors; these laissez-faire attitudes toward substance use are linked with
potentially serious problems of drug and alcohol dependence over the years.
YOUTH IN HIGH ACHIEVING SCHOOLS 7
THE ROLE OF PEERS
Although parents have an important role in culturally specific protective and vulnerability pro-
cesses, peers also play a vital role. To illustrate, the important studies by Coley, Dearing, and their
colleagues (Coley et al., 2018;Lund&Dearing,2013) showed that HAS youth are not at risk
because of the wealth of their own families, but rather, because their schools have a large proportion
of affluent students. School income was most significantly associated with adolescents’likelihood
of engaging in numerous risk behaviors, including substance use, and property crime, with the
highest likelihood of engagement seen among affluent youth (Coley et al., 2018). These findings
suggest that schools and peersplace a centralrole in driving social norms and expectations affecting
mental and behavioral health among HAS students (Luthar et al., 2013; Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017),
in part, possibly reflecting the negative peer contagion effects (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011).
In HAS settings, ongoing competition among peers is a troubling issue that can impair
closeness and intimacy with friends—a critically important developmental task at this life
stage. As a result of constantly trying to be “the best,”envy is a common, and unfortunate,
destructive occurrence (Marano, 2008). Students from HAS, especially girls, have been found
to report significantly more envy of peers whom they felt surpassed them across the realms of
popularity, attractiveness, academics, and athletics (Lyman & Luthar, 2014). Being highly
envious of others, especially with regard to physical appearance, was significantly associated
with negative ramifications for maladjustment (Lyman & Luthar, 2014).
Aside from envy, negative forces from the peer group include active endorsement of negative
behavior patterns, especially students’use of drugs and alcohol (e.g., Luthar & D’Avanzo, 1999).
As most families are relatively affluent in HAS contexts, youth are more easily able to buy drugs
and alcohol and have them freely available at parties. Thus, those who are invited to (or host) major
parties are inevitably more likely to start experimenting with substances at an early age. In addition
to the ready availability of drugs and perceived lack of parent repercussions (described earlier),
peers can actively endorse problematic substance use. For example, among boys in affluent
suburban schools, high self-reported substance use was significantly linked with many “liked
most”nominations by their classmates (Becker & Luthar, 2007; Luthar & D’Avanzo, 1999).
Links between substance abuse and peer nominations were also seen among girls; however, with
girls, substance abuse was also linked with frequent “liked least”peer nominations, indicating
gender-based double standards in peers’perceptions of substance use (see also Chase, 2008).
High peer status among girls has also, unfortunately, been seen to be associated with relational
aggression and also with their physical attractiveness. We have found that HAS girls who were
rated by peers as aggressive toward others were also rated as being highly admired by them (Becker
&Luthar,2007); this admiration of “mean girls”helps to perpetuate their dominance (LaFontana &
Cillessen, 2002;Simmons,2002). Additionally, associations between peer admiration and physical
attractiveness is much stronger among HAS girls as compared to their male counterparts and as
compared to inner-city girls and boys, so that it is unsurprising that some of these young women are
excessively preoccupied with their physical attractiveness (Luthar et al., 2013).
From peers as well as parents, these girls face high expectations across multiple realms
including high achievements at school while at the same time being kind, caring, and attractive
(Hinshaw & Kranz, 2009). In addition, they are expected to manage all these competing
demands with ease, presenting an exterior image of self-perfection. The result is an underlying
sense of anxiety, self-criticism, and conviction that no matter how hard they try, they will never
8EBBERT ET AL.
be successful enough, attractive enough, popular enough, or admired enough (Ruane, 2012;
Simmons, 2018; Wyler, 2003).
Although more research is needed on the risks faced by HAS boys, they may also be at risk
because of what it takes to achieve high peer status. Aside from attractiveness and athleticism, high
peer status for HAS boys is linked with frequent substance abuse as previously noted, and also with
being desired as sexual partners by many girls (Becker & Luthar, 2007;Chase,2008; Khan, 2011).
Striving to attain high status may be accompanied by low capacity for true intimacy with others, as
these boys are motivated by frequent hookups, and overly high investment in power and status
(Luthar et al., 2013). HAS boys have been found to be high, relative to norms, on exhibitionistic
narcissism, answering positively to items such as, “I like it when others brag about good things I’ve
done”(Coren & Luthar, 2014).
In highly competitive settings, it is beneficial when personal decency and integrity are prioritized
in comparison to personal success, not only by parents, but also by peers . Our research has shown
that middle schoolers who were often named by peers as decent and kind and who exemplified
prosocial values (e.g., being polite, fair, and helpful) were those who fared the best, as high school
seniors, on outcomes that are sohighly valued in these communities: high academic GPAs and SAT
scores (Curlee, Aiken, & Luthar, 2018). Paradoxically, therefore, it was commitment to doing for
others that presaged high personal success over the long term. In these highly competitive settings,
it is being decent and kind to others, and maintaining a balanced set of aspirations, that are likely to
bring any number of rewards in the children’s lives, over time.
MALLEABLE VULNERABILITY AND PROTECTIVE PROCESSES: APPLICATIONS IN
INTERVENTIONS
When significant adjustment problems are identified along with the nature of salient risk
processes, the next task in resilience research is to identify those environmental factors that
are amenable to change and most likely to yield long-lasting benefits (Luthar et al., 2015). A
review of accumulated evidence across at-risk circumstances has corroborated that the single
most important priority is to ensure the psychological well-being—and thus the everyday
caregiving and socializing behaviors—of adults who are charged with the care of the children,
that is, their parents as well as adults at their schools.
Among parents, we have identified behaviors that can be particularly important in HAS context
but much remains to be done in considering parents’well-being “as a dependent variable.”As noted
earlier, high perceived criticism hurts (a lot), affection helps, as does accepting children for the
people they are (rather than the splendor of their accomplishments), and appropriate limit-setting,
especially around substance use. Yet there is much that needs attention on the parents themselves, in
particular, factors that affect their own well-being as individuals and as parents.
This generation of HAS parents is acutely aware that with globalization, competition is
much more stiff than it was when they applied to college, as is maintaining their standards of
living. Entire HAS communities can get caught up in intense anxiety that if their children do
not make it into the best colleges, they will be left behind forever. This intense worry can make
for contentiousness between parents and schools—with each blaming the other for any per-
ceived failings on the child’s resume—as well as a sense of envy and competition among
families. In turn, such ongoing competition can work against genuine investment in the well-
YOUTH IN HIGH ACHIEVING SCHOOLS 9
being of others in the community, reducing mutual support of and kindness toward each other.
Additionally, adults in these communities (parents, teachers, administrators) generally tend to
work long hours and in high-stakes jobs, where failures can be costly. And unhappy, burned-out
adults are not optimal caregivers for their children.
As has been clearly established for at-risk children in general (Luthar & Eisenberg, 2017), it
would seem that a critical task at hand, therefore, is to foster well-being, equanimity, and a
sense of balanced values among the adults in HAS communities. For adults as for children,
resilience rests on relationships. Thus, there is much value in promoting community-based,
sustainable efforts to foster the well-being of adults in salient caregiving roles, who serve as
“first responders”to these highly stressed students in HAS contexts.
In our own work, we have used this approach of “tending the caregivers”in randomized
clinical trials years, beginning years ago with low-SES mothers under high stress (Luthar,
Suchman, & Altomare, 2007), and more recently, with mothers at the opposite end of the
socioeconomic spectrum who themselves are in high-achieving contexts (Luthar, Curlee, Tye,
Engelman, & Stonnington, 2017). The latter intervention, called Authentic Connections
Groups (AC Groups), was designed to facilitate authentic, supportive relationships among
mothers, using an overall approach and specific strategies based in respect, empathy, and
empowerment. We found that intervention versus control mothers showed significant improve-
ments across central psychological indices including depression, global distress symptoms, and
parenting stress, as well as levels of the stress hormone, cortisol. Taken together, our results
provided strong support for the use of this relationally based 12-week intervention. In exten-
sions of this work, we have now also conducted groups with administrators, counselors, and
advisors at high-pressure schools (Authentic Connections, 2018).
We are also focused on illuminating specific dimensions of school climate that are most
important in particular communities. In a recent study, we established that HAS students’overall
feelings of emotional engagement with the school were significantly linked with students’symptom
levels even after considering multiple aspects of their relationships with mothers and with fathers
(Zillmer, Phillipson, & Luthar, 2018). These findings led us to try to determine factors about a
school that help children feel emotionally engaged with it; in other words, what makes students say,
with enthusiasm, that they like their schools? In our ongoing collaborative work with HAS school
communities, therefore, our goals are to examine diverse aspects of school climate and test the
relative strength of their links with students’adjustment outcomes. We have examined over a dozen
indices, ranging from the number of Advanced Placement classes to the school’s perceived
tolerance of bullying and respect for diversity. Disentangling the relative strength of these associa-
tions can be important for schools because they will indicate which should be the top two or three
dimensions that, in their particular school, most urgently warrant change via efforts by the
administrators, parents, and faculty (e.g., Luthar & Eisenberg, 2017).
Finally, as we develop future interventions for youth in HAS contexts, it is critical to take
into account what the children themselves might view as optimal priorities for change, as
well routes to reaching them. As Cunningham and Rious (2015) have persuasively argued,
adolescents in general tend to be stereotyped as lazy, self-centered, and uninvolved in
community issues, but in reality, most of them desire to be actively involved in social
change, and especially in activities and pursuits that shape their own futures. Yet develop-
mental research “has historically focused on young people from a top-down approach, in
which experts collect data and draw conclusions without necessarily engaging young people
10 EBBERT ET AL.
in the process”(Cunningham & Rious, 2015, p.586). These authors urge deliberate incor-
poration of adolescents’own perspectives in diverse communities by any developmental
scientists aiming to make positive differences in their life circumstances (see also Spencer &
Swanson, 2013).
In future research, it will also be important to determine the degree to which findings on
HAS groups generally extend to subgroups based on factors such as ethnicity or sexual
identity. As previously noted, for example, African American boys at higher SES were at
greater risk for problems as compared to their less well-off peers, possibly due to greater
discrimination experienced in their mostly White communities (Assari et al., 2018).
Similarly, our previously mentioned norms of what is valued and reinforced by peers tacitly
assume a largely heterosexual group of students; the findings, however, may not be equally
true for students who are sexual minorities. Thus, in future studies of HAS youth, it will be
important to systematically examine salient within-group risk and resilience processes
among different minority subgroups within these upwardly mobile school and community
settings.
SUMMARY
To summarize, our programmatic research on youth in HAS communities has led to the
following major messages relevant to the constructs of risk and resilience. First, youth in
these schools, from predominantly well-educated, white-collar families, have impressive aca-
demic achievements on average; yet they are at significantly elevated risk, compared to national
norms, for serious problems of maladjustment including internalizing and externalizing symp-
toms as well as substance use. In several instances, rates of problems are comparable to those
documented in youth whom we in developmental science are accustomed to thinking of as
being “at high risk,”that is, those from low-SES families and communities. Second, attesting
again to the fact that resilience is not an across-the board phenomenon, there can be sharp
dissonance even among just behaviorally manifested indices of social competence at school;
just as with inner-city teens, acceptance by peers (an important stage-salient task) can coexist
with rule-breaking, aggressive behaviors.
Third, in future research on resilience among youth in these highly pressured and stressed
settings, conceptually, the most pertinent indicators of “risk evasion”include absence of serious
symptoms and minimal substance use, and the presence of concern for and altruism toward others
(with at least average academic effort and grades). Fourth, efforts to foster resilience, in turn, would
likely benefit from enhancing close, supportive networks that bolster the (highly stretched) adults
who care for these highly stressed children, and similar relational interventions for the children
themselves. Finally, as we have long learned from work with economically disadvantaged school
communities, there are dangers in assuming that “one size fits all”; needs and challenges vary across
communities, as do areas of strength. In the years ahead, we would urge careful research-based
illumination, within individual HAS communities, of potent risk modifiers that are amenable to
change, have substantial effects, and are likely to touch off other beneficial changes, improving the
well-being of a generation of high achieving youth who at present are simply hurting way too much.
YOUTH IN HIGH ACHIEVING SCHOOLS 11
FUNDING
We gratefully acknowledge support from Authentic Connections, the Rodel Foundation, and the
Templeton Foundation. The contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not
necessarily represent official views of the organizations providing funding support.
REFERENCES
Achenbach, T. M., & Rescorla, L. A. Manual for the aseba school-age forms and profiles Achenbach, T. M., &
Rescorla, L. A. (2001). Burlington, vt: university of vermont, research center for children. and Families: Youth.
Assari, S., Gibbons, F. X., & Simons, R. L. (2018). Perceived Discrimination among Black Youth: An 18-year
longitudinal study. Behavioral Sciences,8(5), 44. doi:10.3390/bs8050044
Authentic Connections Groups (2018). Retrieved from http://www.authenticconnectionsgroups.org/pages/acgroups.html
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General
Psychology,5, 323–370. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323
Becker, B. E., & Luthar, S. S. (2007). Peer-Perceived admiration and social preference: Contextual correlates of
positive peer regard among suburban and urban adolescents. Journal of Research on Adolescence,17(1), 117–144.
doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2007.00514.x
Botticello, A. L. (2009). School contextual influences on the risk for adolescent alcohol misuse. American Journal of
Community Psychology,43,85–97. doi:10.1007/s10464-008-9226-4
Chase, S. A. (2008). Perfectly prep: Gender extremes at a New England prep school. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Ciciolla, L., Curlee, A. S., Karageorge, J., & Luthar, S. S. (2017). When mothers and fathers are seen as disproportio-
nately valuing achievements: Implications for adjustment among upper middle class youth. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence,46(5), 1057–1075. doi:10.1007/s10964-016-0596-x
Coley, R. L., Sims, J., Dearing, E., & Spielvogel, B. (2018). Locating economic risks for adolescent well-being: Poverty
and affluence in families, schools, and neighborhoods. Child Development,89(2), 360–369. doi:10.1111/cdev.12771
Collins, W. A., & Russell, G. (1991). Mother-child and father-child relationships in middle childhood and adolescence:
A developmental analysis. Developmental Review,11,99–136. doi:10.1016/0273-2297(91)90004-8
Coren, S. A., & Luthar, S. S. (2014). Pursuing perfection: Distress and interpersonal functioning among adolescent boys in
single-sex and co-educational independent schools. Psychology in the Schools,51,931–946. doi:10.1002/pits.21795
Cunningham, M., & Rious, J. B. (2015). Listening to the voices of young people: Implications for working in diverse
communities. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry,85(6S), S86. doi:10.1037/ort0000132
Curlee, A. S, Aiken, L. S, & Luthar, S. S. (2018). Middle school peer reputation in high-achieving schools:
ramifications for maladjustment versus competence by age 18. Development and psychopathology (pp. 1-15).
doi:10.1017/S0954579418000275
Dishion, T. J., & Tipsord, J. M. (2011). Peer contagion in child and adolescent social and emotional development.
Annual Review of Psychology,62, 189–214. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100412
Ebbert, A. M., Infurna, F. J., & Luthar, S. S. (2018). Mapping developmental changes in perceived parent-adolescent
relationship quality during the transition from middle school to high school. Development and Psychopathology,1–
16, doi:10.1017/S0954579418001219.
Flett, G. L., Nepon, T., Hewitt, P. L., Molnar, D. S., & Zhao, W. (2016). Projecting perfection by hiding effort:
Supplementing the perfectionistic self-presentation scale with a brief self-presentation measure. Self and Identity,
15, 245–261. doi:10.1080/15298868.2015.1119188
Fredrickson, B. L., & Losada, M. F. (2005). Positive affect and the complex dynamics of human flourishing. American
Psychologist,60, 678–686. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.60.7.678
Garcia Coll, C. T., Crnic, K., Lamberty, G., Wasik, B. H., Jenkins, R., Garcia, H. V., & McAdoo, H. P. (1996). An
integrative model for the study of developmental competencies in minority children. Child Development,67,
1891–1914. doi:10.2307/1131600
Garmezy, N., Masten, A. S., & Tellegen, A. (1984). The study of stress and competence in children: A building block
for developmental psychopathology. Child Development,97–111. doi:10.2307/1129837
12 EBBERT ET AL.
Geisz, M. B., & Nakashian, M. (2018). Adolescent wellness: Current perspectives and future opportunities in research,
policy, and practice: A learning report. Retrieved from https://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/
2018/rwjf445935/subassets/rwjf445935_1
Göllner, R., Damian, R. I., Nagengast, B., Roberts, B. W., & Trautwein, U. (2018). t’s not only who you are but who
you are with: High school composition and Individuals’attainment over the life course. Psychological Science, (1-
12). doi: org/10.1177/0956797618794454
Hinshaw, S., & Kranz, R. (2009). The triple bind: Saving our teenage girls from today’s pressures. New York:
Ballantine Books.
Infurna, F. J., & Luthar, S. S. (2017). The multidimensional nature of resilience to spousal loss. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology,112(6), 926. doi:10.1037/pspp0000095
Kasser, T. (2002). The high price of materialism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Khan,M.(2011). Privilege: The making of an adolescent elite at St. Paul’s School. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Koplewicz, H. S., Gurian, A., & Williams, K. (2009). The era of affluence and its discontents. Journal of the American
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,48, 1053–1055. doi:10.1097/CHI.0b013e3181b8be5c
Kovacs, M. (1992). Children’s Depression Inventory Manual. North Tonawanda, NY: Multi Health Systems.
LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. (2002). Children’s perceptions of popular and unpopular peers: A multimethod
assessment. Developmental Psychology,38(5), 635. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.38.5.635
Lekes, N., Hope, N. H., Gouveia, L., Koestner, R., & Philippe, F. L. (2012). Influencing value priorities and increasing
well-being: The effects of reflecting on intrinsic values. The Journal of Positive Psychology,7(3), 249–261.
doi:10.1080/17439760.2012.677468
Lund, T. J., & Dearing, E. (2013). Is growing up affluent risky for adolescents or is the problem growing up in an
affluent neighborhood? Journal of Research on Adolescence,23(2), 274–282. doi:10.1111/jora.2013.23.issue-2
Lund, T. J., Dearing, E., & Zachrisson, H. D. (2017). Is affluence a risk for adolescents in Norway? Journal of Research
on Adolescence,27(3), 628–643. doi:10.1111/jora.12304
Luthar, S. S. (2003). The culture of affluence: Psychological costs of material wealth. Child Development,74(6),
1581–1593.
Luthar, S. S., & Ansary, N. S. (2005). Dimensions of adolescent rebellion: Risks for academic failure among high- and
low-income youth. Development and Psychopathology,17, 231–250.
Luthar, S. S., & Barkin, S. H. (2012). Are affluent youth truly “at risk”? Vulnerability and resilience across three
diverse samples. Development and Psychopathology,24, 429–449. doi:10.1017/S0954579412000089
Luthar, S. S., Barkin, S. H., & Crossman, E. J. (2013). “I can, therefore I must”: Fragility in the upper-middle classes.
Development and Psychopathology, 25th Anniversary Special Issue,25,1529–1549. doi:10.1017/S0954579413000758
Luthar, S. S., & Becker, B. E. (2002). Privileged but pressured? A study of affluent youth. Child Development,73,
1593–1610. doi:10.1111/cdev.2002.73.issue-5
Luthar, S. S., Cicchetti, D., & Becker, B. (2000). The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for
future work. Child Development,71(3), 543–562.
Luthar, S. S., Crossman, E. J., & Small, P. J. (2015). Resilience and adversity. In R. M. Lerner & M. E. Lamb
(Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science (Vol. III, 7th ed., pp. 247–286). New York,
NY: Wiley.
Luthar, S. S., Curlee, A., Tye, S. J., Engelman, J. C., & Stonnington, C. M. (2017). Fostering resilience among mothers
under stress: “Authentic Connections Groups”for medical professionals. Women’s Health Issues,27(3), 382–390.
doi:10.1016/j.whi.2017.02.007
Luthar, S. S., & D’Avanzo, K. (1999). Contextual factors in substance use: A study of suburban and inner-city
adolescents. Development and Psychopathology,11, 845–867. doi:10.1017/S0954579499002357
Luthar, S. S., Doernberger, C. H., & Zigler, E. (1993). Resilience is not a unidimensional construct: Insights from a
prospective study of inner-city adolescents. Development and Psychopathology,5(4), 703–717. doi:10.1017/
S0954579400006246
Luthar, S. S., & Eisenberg, N. (2017). Resilient adaptation among at risk children: Harnessing science toward
maximizing salutary environments. Child Development,88(2), 337–349. doi:10.1111/cdev.12737
Luthar, S. S., & Goldstein, A. S. (2008). Substance use and related behaviors among suburban late adolescents: The
importance of perceived parent containment. Development and Psychopathology,20, 591–614. doi:10.1017/
S0954579408000291
YOUTH IN HIGH ACHIEVING SCHOOLS 13
Luthar, S. S., & Kumar, N. L. (2018). Youth in high-achieving schools: Challenges to mental health and directions for
evidence-based interventions. In A. W. Leschied, D. H. Saklofske, & G. L. Flett (Eds.), Handbook of School-Based
Mental Health Promotion: An Evidence-Informed Framework. (pp. 441-458). New York, NY: Springer.
Luthar, S. S., & Latendresse, S. J. (2005). Children of the affluent: Challenges to well-being. Current Directions in
Psychological Science,14(1), 49–53. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00333.x
Luthar, S. S., Small, P. J., & Ciciolla, L. (2018). Adolescents from upper middle class communities: Substance misuse
and addiction across early adulthood. Development and Psychopathology,30(1), 315–335. doi:10.1017/
S0954579417000645
Luthar, S. S., Suchman, N. E., & Altomare, M. (2007). Relational Psychotherapy Mothers’Group: A randomized
clinical trial for substance abusing mothers. Development and Psychopathology,19(1), 243–261. doi:10.1017/
S0954579407070137
Lyman, E. L., & Luthar, S. S. (2014). Further evidence on the “costs of privilege”: Perfectionism in high achieving
youth at socioeconomic extremes. Psychology in the Schools,51, 913–930. doi:10.1002/pits.21791
Marano, H. E. (2008). A nation of wimps: The high cost of invasive parenting (1st ed.). New York, NY: Broadway
Books.
Masten, A. S. (2001). Ordinary magic: Resilience processes in development. American Psychologist,56, 227–238.
doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.227
Minarcik, J., & Bridges, A. J. (2015). Psychology graduate students weigh in: Qualitative analysis of academic
dishonesty and suggestion prevention strategies. Journal of Academic Ethics,13(2), 197–216. doi:10.1007/
s10805-015-9230-x
Patrick, M. E., Wightman, P., Schoeni, R. F., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2012). Socioeconomic status and substance use
among young adults: A comparison across constructs and drugs. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs,73,
772–782. doi:10.15288/jsad.2012.73.772
Pérez-Peña, R., & Bidgood, J. (2012). Harvard says 125 students may have cheated on a final exam. The New York
Times. 30.
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Romich, J. (2009). Trying to keep children out of trouble: Child characteristics, neighborhood quality, and
within-household resource allocation. Children and Youth Services Review,31(3), 338–345. doi:10.1016/j.
childyouth.2008.08.002
Ruane, I. (2012). Effortless Perfection. Harvard Magazine. Retrieved from http://harvardmagazine.com/2012/07/effort
less-perfection
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development,
and wellness. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Simmons, R. (2002). Odd girl out: The hidden culture of aggression in girls (Revised, 1st Mariner Books ed.).
New York, NY: Mariner Books.
Simmons, R. (2018). Enough as she is: How to help girls move beyond impossible standards of success and live
healthy, happy and fulfilling lives. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
Song, E. Y., Reboussin, B. A., Foley, K. L., Kaltenbach, L. A., Wagoner, K. G., & Wolfson, M. (2009). Selected community
characteristics and underage drinking. Substance Use & Misuse,44,179–194. doi:10.1080/10826080802347594
Spencer, M., & Swanson, D. (2013). Opportunities and challenges to the development of healthy children and youth living
in diverse communities. Development and Psychopathology,25(4pt2), 1551–1566. doi:10.1017/S095457941300076X
Vélez-Agosto, N. M., Soto-Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, M., Vega-Molina, S., & Garcia Coll, C. (2017).
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on
Psychological Science,12(5), 900–910. doi:10.1177/1745691617704397
Warikoo, N., Chin, M. J., Zillmer, N., & Luthar, S. S. (2018). The relationship between parenting and mental health
outcomes among Asian-American and white youth at a suburban high school. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Weisner, T. S., García Coll, C., & Chatman-Nelson, C. (2010). Theoretical perspectives on the macrosystem. In H.
Kreider, M. E. Lopez, H. B. Weiss, & C. Chatman-Nelson (Eds.), Preparing educators to engage families: Case
studies using an ecocultural systems framework (pp. 84–96). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wyler, L. (2003). Variations on effortless perfection.Chronicle. Retrieved from http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/
variations-effortless-perfection
Zillmer, N., Phillipson, B., & Luthar, S. S. (2018). Extending findings on high-achieving contexts: Evidence from the
South and school climate benefits. Manuscript submitted for publication.
14 EBBERT ET AL.
