You know when young people are asked for solutions to a complex community issue, their ideas often fall into one of two categories: proposals that simply tweak existing programs, or at the other extreme, radical reforms. Experts and seasoned professionals can become frustrated by what they perceive as a knowledge gap—ideas that seem either too incremental or too far-fetched.
But emerging neuroscience reveals a powerful new method for helping young people gain a wider lens—one that ignites deeper ideation. Although this research targets educators, it’s highly relevant for any organization that relies on younger minds to imagine fresh solutions.
“Transcendental adolescent thinking” may sound like the latest meditation trend, but it deserves serious attention from anyone trying to harness young people’s unique perspectives and innovative problem-solving capacities. It supports my recommendation to delay skill-based training and instead first invest time in expanding a young person’s aperture of exposure—beyond their immediate ecosystem.
Especially in an age when AI delivers information in the flicker of a second, this research carries even more weight. Mary Helen Immordino-Yang, a professor of education, psychology, and neuroscience at the University of Southern California, conducted a remarkable study with 65 low-income individuals between the age of 14 to 18 from high-crime neighborhoods. She spent two hours—yes, real time—with each participant as they watched 40 compelling true stories and then they discussed “how did that story make you feel?”
This broad infusion of human experiences produced strong “transcendental thinking…beyond the here and now” – outside their firsthand experiences and assumptions. Two years later, this same cohort remained deeply motivated to contribute to their communities. As young adults, they reported high life satisfaction.
Watch a short overview of her work.
This level of intentional information sharing and reflection is something people of all ages could benefit from. Here are several impacts of this cognitive processing among young people.
Read the full research article.
(i) SYSTEMS-LEVEL ANALYSIS or moral judgements, or curiosities about how and why systems work as they do, e.g., “I also find it unfair that the people get undocumented. It’s kind of weird how it’s like a label how like just ‘cause you are from some other place, um, you can’t do certain things in another place. It’s like a question.It’s like something I’ve always wondered…”;
(ii) DISCUSSION OF BROAD IMPLICATIONS and morals and moral emotions, perspectives, personal lessons or values derived from the story, e.g., “I think back to the idea that because children are the future […] we have to be able to inspire people who are growing and have the potential to improve the societies”;“it makes me happy for humanity”;or
(iii) ANALYSIS OF THE PROTAGONIST’S QUALITIES of character, mind, or perspective, e.g.,“[she is] thinking, ‘oh, you’re not alone. You have others who are dependent on you’.”Importantly, it was not relevant whether the participant endorsed a value or lesson or agreed with the protagonist, e.g.,“I wouldn’t react that way. I’d just be really mad at the kid instead of, you know, selfless like that and trying to help him. Like I wouldn’t be able to put myself in someone’s shoes like that like he did.”
The potential for intergenerational collaboration is immense. A workshop or brainstorming session will not reach this high level of emotional engagement and cognitive output. Please share how your nonprofit or government agency is experimenting with this type of knowledge exchange with much younger minds who see the future in ways adults cannot fathom. The result is everyone gains a wider lens.
— Wendy S. Lesko
Youth Infusion 