collaborators : maryfrances porter, ph.d. penny marsh kathleen mcelhaney, ph.d

Predicting Who Will be Most Susceptible to Peer Influence Regarding Substance Use:

Individual, Familial, and Peer Risk Factors

Joseph P. AllenJoanna ChangoMegan Schad

David E. SzwedoUniversity of Virginia

Collaborators:Maryfrances Porter, Ph.D.Penny MarshKathleen McElhaney, Ph.D.F. Christy McFarland, Ph.D.Jessica Meyer, Ph.D.

Farah Williams, Ph.D.Katie LittleJill Antonishak, Ph.D.Katy Higgins

Claire StephensonMindy Schmidt, Ph.D.Glenda Insabella, Ph.D.Erin MigaAmanda Hare

Copies of this and related papers are available at:WWW.TEENRESEARCH.ORG

Characteristics of Peer Influence in Adolescence

Inevitable

Not Restricted to Low Functioning Teens

Can be Positive or Negative

Questionable Magnitude: Selection vs. Influence

Key Premise

Peer Influence Processes May Only Show Up Powerfully Under Certain conditions.

Key Question

When Will a Teen be MOST likely to be influenced by Peers?

Theoretical Framework

Managing Peer Influence as an Autonomy Process

As teens gain autonomy from parents, at first they sacrifice some autonomy with peers

Autonomy development will be key to understanding peer influence

Autonomy development must be viewed in context

Hypotheses

Susceptibility to Peer Influence Will be Linked to:

Susceptibility to Peer

Influence

Autonomy/Relatedness Struggles

Refusal Skills with

Peers

Peer Social Status

Family Context Individual Skills Peer Context

Sample

184 Adolescents, their Parents, Best Friends, and Other Friends

Intensive Interviews and Observations with all parties (Total N over first 10 years ~ 1600).

Equal numbers of Males and Females

We’ll focus on period of peak influence: ages 15 to 16

Socio-economically Diverse (Median Family Income= $40- $60K)

31% African American; 69% European American

Very Low Attrition (< 1%)

Defining Influence

Becoming More Like One’s Peers Focus on Actual Behavior

We focused on Substance Use Problematic Quintessential example of peer influence concerns

Measures: Substance Use

• Alcohol and Drug Use Questionnaire (Johnston, O’Malley, & Bachman, 1987, “Monitoring the Future” surveys)

• Combined Frequency of Alcohol & Marijuana Use in Past 30 days

• Self-report measure obtained from both target teen and the target teen’s closest friend.

Assessing Peer Influence

Examine Change in Substance Use from Age 15 to 16 for Target Teen

Can this Change be Predicted from Close Friend’s Baseline Substance Use at Age 15?

In other words: Does a teen’s level of use change to become more like what their friend’s use was at 15?

In context of general pattern of increasing substance use in the sample as a whole during this period.

Hypothetically Modeling Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

Baseline Peer Substance Use

Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use Flat Line =

No Prediction from Baseline Peer Use toChange in Target Teen

Use

Hypothetically Modeling Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use

Positive Slope = Baseline Peer Use Predicts Future

Change in Target Teen Use (i.e., Peer

Influence)

Actual Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use

Baseline Peer Use Predicts Future

Change in Target Teen Use (i.e., Peer Influence

is Present)

Teen Substance

Use

Teen Substance

Use

Age 15 Age 16.70***

Predicting Target Teen Substance Use

Gender & Income

Peer Substance

Use

.46***

.28***

Key Question

Will some youths be more susceptible to this peer influence process? Which youths?

Hypotheses



Influence


Refusal Skills with

Peers

Peer Social Status


Autonomy Measures: Recantations with Mother (Undermined Autonomy at Age 13)

• Autonomy & Relatedness Coding System (Allen et al., 2000)

• Observed 8-minute parent-teen interaction

• Focus is resolving an actual ongoing disagreement

• Adolescent Recantations – A teen backs down without having been given any reasons to do so, and without appearing convinced.

• A marker of fundamental autonomy difficulties

Teen Substance

Use

Teen Substance

Use

Age 15 Age 16.70***


Gender & Income

Peer Substance

Use

.46***

.28***

Recantations

-.00

Recantations X Peer Use

.-19**

Recantations with Mother as a Moderator of Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use

Low Teen Recantations

High Teen Recantations

Measures: Maternal Support(Teen Age 13)

• Supportive Behavior Task Coding System– (Allen, et al., 2001; Crowell, et al., 1998; Julie et al., 1997)

• Observed 6-minute parent-teen interaction

• Teen asks for help with a problem

Maternal Support Score: Maternal demonstration of warmth, positivity, and valuing of the teen during the interaction

Maternal Support as a Moderator of Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use

Low Maternal Support

High Maternal Support

Hypotheses



Influence


Refusal Skills with

Peers

Peer Social Status


Measures: Refusal Skills

• Adolescent Problem Inventory (Freedman & McFall, 1978)• Analogue measure

• Coded competence of teen responses to hypothetical problems

• Administered in two ways• 5 items administered with no prompts followed by:• 5 items administered AFTER telling teen of a deviant

hypothetical peer response.

• Peer Refusal Skills Score: How much does the teen’s competence-score deteriorate from the first to the second 5 items

Measures: Refusal SkillsSample Item

• UNPROMPTED ITEM:• Your with a friend in a department store who suggests stealing a

sweater.• What would you do?

• PROMPTED ITEM:• Describes a similar situation but teen is told:• Another teen said that in this situation, they would take the sweater

and run, • What would you do?

• Peer refusal skills score: The DIFFERENCE between responses on the two different types of items.

Refusal Skills as a Moderator of Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use

High Refusal Skills

Low Refusal Skills

Hypotheses



Influence


Refusal Skills with

Peers

Peer Social Status


Measures: Best Friend’s Popularity

• Sociometric Assessment –

• List 10 kids with whom you would most like to spend time on a Saturday night.

• A preference-based, not status-based measure.• i.e., who other teens would like to spend time with rather

than who they view as high in popularity/status.

Best Friend Popularity: Number of times best friend named by other peers as someone with whom they would like to spend time.

Peer Popularity as a Moderator of Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use

Less Popular Peer

More Popular Peer

Creating a Composite Measure of Susceptibility to Peer Influence

Summing Standardized Scores


Influence

Recantations

Maternal Support (-)

Refusal Skills with Peers (-)

Peer Social Status


Composite Marker of Susceptibility to Peer Influence

-1 0 1-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8


Rel

ativ

e C

hang

e in

Tar

get

Ado

lesc

ent S

ubst

ance

Use

Low Susceptibility

High Susceptibility

Teen Substance

Use

Teen Substance

Use

Age 15 Age 16.70***


Gender & Income

Peer Substance

Use

.46***

.28***

Composite Susceptibility

-.05

Susceptibility X Peer Use

.33***

Interaction accounts for 11% of Variance in Teen Substance Use (and 22% of Change Variance)Main effect + Interaction accounts for16% of variance (32% of change variance)

Limitations

Error/random variation “noise” in assessing substance use

Only looking at one peer’s influence

One-year time frame

Susceptibility may not be all bad

Influence ≠ Negative Influence

Findings apply to one period in adolescence (age15-16)

Copies of this and related papers are available at:www.TeenResearch.org

Conclusions

We CAN identify predictors of susceptibility to peer influence

Need to consider susceptibility contextually

Not just individual factors (e.g., refusal skills)

But family factors (lack of autonomy, maternal support)

And Peer factors (friend popularity within the peer group)

Susceptibility to Peer Influence Can Explain Significant Additional Variance in Teen Substance Use

Copies of this and related papers are available at:www.TeenResearch.org

collaborators : maryfrances porter, ph.d. penny marsh kathleen mcelhaney, ph.d

Documents