Examining Youth Critical Consciousness Development Via Latent Transition Analysis

Background and Purpose:

Youth cultivate critical consciousness to resist and transform oppressive systems. Three dimensions – critical reflection, agency, and action – capture how young people develop capacities to challenge structural inequalities (Wray-Lake et al., 2023). According to theory, the most advanced developmental state of critical consciousness is liberation, in which youth have regular critical reflection, sustained agency, and active pursuit of social justice through action (Watts et al., 2003). Yet, critical consciousness varies widely, with some youth acritical and disengaged and others developing reflection before agency and action (Briggs & Hope, 2023; Maker Castro et al., 2025). Research has already identified profiles of youth critical consciousness, yet more longitudinal work is needed. We should further assess opportunity structures – access to organizations and relationships – that support young people’s CC (Pinedo & Kruger, 2025). Drawing from a 3-year longitudinal study, we used Latent Transition Analysis (LTA) to identify profiles of youth critical consciousness, understand their transition patterns, and document the role of opportunity structures in critical consciousness development.

Methods:

Data came from 1231 adolescents (ages 12-18 at time 1) recruited via social media and surveyed in Spring 2023, 2024, and 2025 (81% retention at time 3). The sample was 38% White, 23% Asian/Pacific Islander, 24% Latinx, 25% Black, and 14% multiracial; 63% women, 14% trans/nonbinary, and 51% LGBQ+. We used two measures for each critical consciousness dimension: critical systems thinking and awareness of inequality; competence and collective power; and interpersonal and political critical actions. Opportunity structures were assessed via access and relationship scales.

Results:

A four-profile model best fit the data across waves, and were generally aligned with prior research and named accordingly. Acritical bystanders had below average reflection, agency, and action; acritical political actors had below average reflection, but higher competence and critical political action; critical interpersonal actors had above average reflection, moderate agency, and higher than average interpersonal critical actions. Liberated actors had above average reflection, agency, and action.

Transition probabilities showed that youth often remained in the same group. From time 1 to 2, acritical bystanders had a 16% probability of becoming acritical political actors; liberated actors had a 14% probability of becoming acritical political actors. Critical interpersonal actors and acritical political actors had 12% and 11% probabilities, respectively, of becoming liberated actors from time 1-2. Greater access and stronger relationships in opportunity structures were associated with remaining in more advanced critical consciousness profiles. Analyses also identified differences in profiles by race and ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and family financial security.

Conclusions and Implications:

Adolescents were surprisingly stable in critical consciousness over time. Critical consciousness may develop earlier, and research is needed at younger ages. Sustained critical consciousness is bolstered by access to opportunities and relationships, reflecting actionable ways that practitioners can support critical consciousness development. Profiles demonstrate wide variation in youth’s critical consciousness, highlighting the complexity of sociopolitical development. Results suggest the need to better understand the origins and implications of having reflection without action or agency and action without reflection.