Prior to the COVID-19 Pandemic, the authors of various papers in the Journal of Research on Adolescence Decade of Review issue collectively described an optimistic and positive view of adolescence. A unifying theme was a collective interpretation of adolescent development in terms of opportunities for experience and exploration that lead to healthy growth and developmental progress. For example, Icenogle and Cauffman (2021) suggested that researchers stop viewing adolescent risk taking as a “categorically harmful phenomenon”.  Instead, they proposed a more “holistic conceptualization of risk taking” that confers certain benefits to the developing individual” (p. 1,006). Similarly, Galvan (2021) pointed out that early research on teen brains promoted ideas of problematic behavior whereas more recent studies better appreciate the opportunities, innovation, and adaptability that characterize adolescent brain development. Even peer influence, often seen in terms of pressure and coercion, was being reframed. Laursen and Veenstra (2021) argued that researchers should separate harmful peer pressure from a more progressive view of peer influence, which can include sharing good skills and abilities. These approaches reflected an optimistic treatment of adolescence, recognizing it as a developmental “window ripe with opportunity and creativity” (Galvan, 2021, p. 843).

Since the publication of the Decade in Review issue, however, teens have weathered a global pandemic that brought increased isolation and loneliness, learning disruptions, and family economic strain. Researchers also have examined the ways that digital media has fundamentally changed how teens interact socially (Lenhart, Smith, et al., 2015). It has been argued that that adolescents who frequently use social media may be missing important face-to-face interactions, which may lead to increases in depressive symptoms, loneliness, and suicide (Twenge et al., 2018). Indeed, adolescent suicide rates have nearly tripled in the past decade (Curtin & Heron, 2019). This sudden, rapid decline of adolescent mental health has been described in detail in the popular book, The Anxious Generation (Haidt, 2024).

A challenge for today’s researchers, therefore, is to balance the opportunities for positive adolescent development and growth in the context of the mental health declines associated with the pandemic and social media. It may be unclear whether it is possible to remain focused on ‘normal’ developmental growth or whether the focus should move to remediation of all that been lost over the past few years.  

Piaget’s constructivist approaches are particularly well-suited to explore this dilemma. Whereas socialization research often describes how various external forces, such as parents, peers, and societal influences, act upon adolescents, Piaget’s constructivist approach allows researchers to understand how adolescents actively interact with their changing surroundings to construct understandings of their social world. On the one hand, cognitive conflict can be seen to drive growth. It compels individuals to refine their thinking, leading to advances in cognitive abilities and achievement of higher developmental stages (Piaget, 1971). On the other hand, the limited environmental interactions that occurred during the pandemic and increased reliance on digital media decreased opportunities for adolescent growth. Without a sufficient level of social interaction beyond the family, teens may lack the raw materials needed for social-cognitive construction.