Looking Ahead: How Adolescents’ Consideration of Future Consequences Shapes Their Developmental Outcomes

Looking Ahead: How Adolescents’ Consideration of Future Consequences Shapes Their Developmental Outcomes

Introduction: Considering the Future During Adolescence

Adolescence is a critical developmental stage marked by important decisions affecting youths’ long-term academic, psychological, and social outcomes (Nakkula & Toshalis, 2020). At the core of adolescents’ decision-making is their Consideration of Future Consequences (CFC), defined as the degree to which individuals take into account future versus immediate consequences of their present behaviors (Strathman et al., 1994). Although previous research has established that higher CFC is related to healthier behaviors and improved academic performance in adults and adolescents internationally (Alvarez-Nuñez et al., 2022; McKay et al., 2022), few studies have examined how different patterns of CFC influence adolescent outcomes within the U.S. context.

Our recent research (Luo et al., 2025) aimed to address this gap, examining distinct profiles of CFC among U.S. adolescents and their associations with academic performance, perceived stress, and perceived life chances.

Not Just One Type: Profiles of Adolescent CFC

Rather than treating CFC as a single trait where adolescents are either high or low, our study adopted a person-centered approach called latent profile analysis (LPA). This method allowed us to explore whether adolescents naturally group into distinct profiles based on their patterns of immediate versus future considerations.

Participants included 301 adolescents (Mage = 16.07, SD = 1.25; 59.80 percent male) recruited from public high schools and an academic summer program in the Western and Mountain regions of the United States. Before identifying CFC profiles, we confirmed that the CFC scale (Strathman et al., 1994) measured two related but distinct dimensions: Immediate and Future considerations and is valid to be used to measure CFC among the current sample. Our analyses revealed three distinct CFC profiles:

• CFC-Indifferent (64.7%): Adolescents who displayed low consideration of both immediate and future consequences.

• Future-Focused (5.7%): Adolescents who showed low immediate but high future considerations.

• Dual-Focused (29.6%): Adolescents with high levels of concern for both immediate and future consequences.

Profiles and Associations with Adolescent Outcomes

Significant differences emerged among the three profiles, highlighting distinct associations with academic achievement, perceived life chances, and perceived stress:

• Academic Achievement: Adolescents in the Dual-Focused profile had the highest average GPA (M = 3.71). Those in the Future-Focused group had a slightly lower GPA (M = 3.25), while those in the Indifferent group had the lowest (M = 3.20). These findings suggest that adolescents who balance both immediate and future considerations tend to perform better academically.

• Perceived Life Chances: Adolescents in the Future-Focused profile reported the highest perceptions of their future life opportunities (M = 4.47). Those in the Dual-Focused profile also had relatively high perceptions of their future opportunities (M = 4.24), whereas adolescents in the Indifferent profile had the lowest perceived life chances (M = 3.88).

• Perceived Stress: There were no statistically significant or meaningful differences in perceived stress among the three profiles (CFC-Indifferent: M = 2.95; Future-Focused: M = 2.98; Dual-Focused: M = 2.90). This finding suggests that adolescents’ stress levels might be influenced more strongly by other psychosocial factors rather than their patterns of considering immediate versus future consequences alone.

Why Does This Matter? Practical Implications

Understanding how adolescents weigh immediate and future consequences has important implications for parents, educators, and policymakers. Our findings confirm that the CFC scale is a valid tool for measuring adolescents’ decision-making tendencies. Adolescents who effectively balance both immediate and future considerations perform better academically, suggesting that schools and educators can support students by teaching strategies for managing short-term demands while maintaining a long-term vision.

Additionally, adolescents in the Future-Focused profile demonstrated the most optimistic perceptions of their future opportunities, underscoring the importance of cultivating a future-oriented mindset. However, this group may also need support in addressing immediate challenges without losing sight of their goals. Finally, the large proportion of adolescents in the Indifferent profile is concerning, as they had lower academic achievement and less optimism about their future opportunities. These adolescents may benefit from school-based programs that promote goal-setting, long-term planning, and strategies for integrating both present and future considerations into their decision-making.

Looking Forward: Recommendations for Future Research

Although this study provides valuable insights into how adolescents think about the future, several questions remain. One of the most surprising findings was that perceived stress did not significantly differ among the three profiles. This suggests that stress levels may be shaped more by factors such as coping strategies, peer relationships, and social support rather than by how much adolescents consider future consequences. Future research should explore these interactions to better understand how different psychosocial factors influence adolescent decision-making and well-being.

Longitudinal studies could also provide insights into how these CFC profiles change over time. Examining how adolescents’ tendencies to consider future consequences evolve as they transition into adulthood could help researchers and educators develop targeted interventions that support balanced decision-making. Understanding how CFC interacts with peer, family, and school environments will also be essential for creating interventions that guide adolescents toward healthier, more future-oriented choices.

Conclusion

Adolescents differ significantly in how they consider immediate versus future consequences, and these differences have meaningful implications for their academic success and perceptions of their future opportunities. By identifying three distinct profiles (i.e., Indifferent, Future-Focused, and Dual-Focused), our study highlights the various ways adolescents engage with future-oriented thinking. Promoting balanced future-oriented decision-making may help adolescents navigate their academic and personal lives more effectively, leading to better long-term outcomes.

References

1. Alvarez-Nuñez, L., Vásquez-Echeverría, A., & Antino, M. (2023). Consideration of future consequences: Evidence of weekly fluctuations and domain-specificity in association with health, academic, and work outcomes. Current Psychology, 42(32), 28406–28416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03910-5

2. Luo, H., Carlos, E., Jin, S., Worrell, F C. & Mello, Z. R. (2025, February 14–17). Profiles of Consideration of Future Consequences: Associations with Adolescent Outcomes [Poster presentation]. National Association for School Psychologists, Seattle, WA, United States.

3. McKay, M. T., Perry, J. L., & Cole, J. C. (2022). Domain-specific consideration of future consequences and early alcohol use: A bivariate and person-centered analysis. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 29(2), 160–167.https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2021.1872497

4. Murphy, L., Cadogan, E., & Dockray, S. (2020). The Consideration of Future Consequences: Evidence for Domain Specificity Across Five Life Domains. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 46(5), 663–678.https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219873478

5. Nakkula, M. J., & Toshalis, E. (2020). Understanding Youth: Adolescent Development for Educators. Harvard Education Press.

6. Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D. S., & Edwards, C. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 742–752.https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742