Complex synergies of youth trajectories: a sociocultural, emotional and cognitive view
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The interactions between the internal processes of cognition, metacognition and metaemotion with sociocultural dimensions shape young people's trajectories in contexts that are marked by increasing complexity. This study analyzes how these processes and dimensions configure youth trajectories as adaptive and contextually situated expressions. A method based on weaving complexity was applied. Initially, the hologrammatic path and grounded theory were used to analyze interviews and observations shared by 21 youth leaders. This was followed by the design and application of a questionnaire containing three key dimensions with 1,531 young people (aged 14–28). The results reveal synergies between cognitive processes and the sociocultural environment, highlighting the influence of community recognition on young people's decision-making. Understanding these interactions can contribute to the design of inclusive policies and intercultural studies while generating empirical eviden
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
-
Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
-
NonCommercial - You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
-
ShareAlike - If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions - You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
How to Cite
References
Arias, M. (2022). Principles, scope, and limitations of the methodological triangulation. Investigación y Educación en Enfermería, 40(2), e03. https://doi.org/mwxw
Avedissian, T., & Alayan, N. (2021). Adolescent well-being: A concept analysis. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 30(2), 357-367. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12833
Barbour, R. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ, 322(7294), 1115-1117. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115
Benítez, M., Díaz, V., & Justel, N. (2023). Influencia del contexto en el desarrollo cognitivo infantil: revisión sistemática. Revista Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, Niñez y Juventud, 21(2), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.11600/rlcsnj.21.2.5321
Branje, S., de Moor, E., Spitzer, J., & Becht, A. (2021). Dynamics of identity development in adolescence: A decade in review. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 31(4), 908-927. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12678
Bravo-Valero, A., Nieto-Sánchez, Z., & Cristancho, J. (2023). Metacognición, metadidác-tica, metaafectividad y metatecnología: una reflexión crítica sobre los ambientes de aprendizaje. Mundo FESC, 13(26), 300-312. https://doi.org/10.61799/2216-0388.1538
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. (2006). The bioecological model of human development. En R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human deve-lopment (pp. 793-828). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114
Brown, G. (2022). The past, present and future of educational assessment: A transdisciplinary perspective. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1060633. https://doi.org/grcv4d
Campo-Arias, A., & Pineda-Roa, C. (2022). Instrument validation is a necessary, compre-hensive, and permanent process. Alpha Psychiatry, 23(2), 1-2. https://doi.org/p3z7
Castellanos, S., & Figueroa, C. (2023). Cognitive accessibility in health care institutions. Pilot study and instrument proposal. Data and Metadata, 2(22). https://doi.org/p3z6
Congreso de la República [Colombia]. (2013). Ley 1622 de 2013: por la cual se expide el Estatuto de Ciudadanía Juvenil y se dictan otras disposiciones. https://www.funcionpublica.gov.co/eva/gestornormativo/norma_pdf.php?i=52971
Congreso de la República [Colombia]. (2018). Ley 1885 de 2018: por medio de la cual se modifica la Ley 1622 de 2013. https://www.funcionpublica.gov.co/eva/gestornormativo/norma_pdf.php?i=85540
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage.
Coscioni, V., Portugal, M., Teixeira, M., & Paixão, M. (2023). Theoretical statements on life projects: A scoping review. Theory & Psychology, 34(1), 40-66. https://doi.org/10.1177/09593543231195797
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Creswell, J., Plano Clark, V., Guttman, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research design. En A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209-240). Sage.
Denzin, N. K. (2009). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315134543
de Toni, A., & Comello, L. (2013). Theory of complexity: Guidelines for strategic manage-ment and supply management. En C. Harland, G. Nassimbeni, & E. Schneller (Eds.), The Sage handbook of strategic supply management (pp. 305-328). Sage. https://doi.org/ 10.4135/9781446269886
Dhakal, K. (2022). NVivo. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 110(2), 270-272. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2022.1271
Flavell, J. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition. En F. Weinert, & R. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 21-29). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Flick, U. (2004). Triangulation in qualitative research. En U. Flick, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 178-183). Sage.
Geetha, V., & Sujatha, N. (2024). An overview of descriptive analytics and data visualization. Proceedings of the 2024 5th International Conference on Smart Electronics and Communication. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICOSEC61587.2024.10722273
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
Gottman, J. M., Katz, L. F., & Hooven, C. (1997). Meta-emotion: How families communicate emotionally. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hernández-Albarracín, J. D., Ramírez-Lindarte, M., & Bravo, A. (2023). Hacia un nuevo lugar de enunciación: aportes intersubjetivos sobre la calidad de la educación en Norte de Santander. Una perspectiva desde la teoría fundamentada. Análisis Político, 36(107), 89-108. https://doi.org/10.15446/anpol.v36n107.112547
Ikiz, S., & Houssier, F. (2023). The end of adolescence, becoming an adult: From Reverie to the project. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 76(1), 168-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00797308.2021.2016318
Maldonado, C. E. (2007). Complejidad: ciencia, pensamiento y aplicación. Universidad Externado de Colombia.
Maldonado, C. E. (2021). Las ciencias de la complejidad son ciencias de la vida. Trepen Ediciones.
Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (2004). De máquinas y seres vivos. Autopoiesis: la organización de lo vivo. Lumen.
Mercader-Rubio, I., Oropesa-Ruiz, N., Gutiérrez Ángel, N., & Carrión-Martínez, J. (2023). Parental educational practices and life satisfaction: The role of positive affect and agreeableness in adolescents. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 16, 119-131. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S387768
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage.
Miller, P. (2022). Developmental theories: Past, present, and future. Developmental Review, 66, 101049. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2022.101049
Morin, E. (2012). Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Gedisa.
Nava-Preciado, J. (2022). Proyecto de vida en adolescentes: un ejercicio viable para iniciar la reflexión filosófica. Ixtli. Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofía de la Educación, 9(17), 95-117. https://doi.org/10.63314/VIOX6250
Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
O’Neill, B. (2022). Sample size determination with a pilot study. PLoS ONE, 17(2), e0262804. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262804
Sánchez, E., & Parra, L. R. (2024). La evaluación desde la autopoiesis y el pensamiento complejo. Ensaio. Avaliação e Políticas Públicas em Educação, 32(125). https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-40362024003204220
Scheytt, C., & Pflüger, J. (2024). Ethical challenges in qualitative sociology: A systematic literature review. Frontiers in Sociology, 9, 1458423. https://doi.org/p3z5
Spoto, A., Nucci, M., Prunetti, E., & Vicovaro, M. (2023). Improving content validity evaluation of assessment instruments through formal content validity analysis. Psychological Methods, 30(2), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000545
Witherspoon, D., White, R., Bámaca, M., Browning, C., Leech, T., Leventhal, T., Matthews, S., Pinchak, N., Roy, A., Sugie, N., & Winkler, E. (2023). Place-based developmental research: Conceptual and methodological advances in studying youth development in context. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 88(3), 7-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/mono.12472
Zhu, M., Zhang, W., & Jiang, F. (2024). How to influence and cultivate young adults’ life purpose in the process of education: A systematic review of empirical studies. BMC Psychology, 12, 554-573. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-02003-1