1. The Role of Close Friendship Dynamics in the Development of Adolescent Depression and Substance Use Initiation. Lauren Molloy & Joseph P. Allen University of Virginia We would like to thank the National Institute of Child Health & Human Development for funding awarded to Joseph P. Allen, Principal Investigator, (2R01HD058305) for this study. Introduction Individuals’ self-attitudes and “relational schemas” have long been theorized to originate from past relationship experiences (Bowlby, 1969; Cooley, 1922) Difficulty establishing positive peer relationships in adolescence is a known risk factor for later adjustment difficulties (e.g., Prinstein & Aikins, 2004) Much less is known about maladaptive patterns of interactions within close friendship dyads that may contribute to youths’ longer-term functioning, both within and outside of the friendship Theories in romantic relationship literature suggest that more invested partner (i.e., the one with “more to lose” if relationship ends) is more susceptible to influence (e.g., Agnew, 1999; Waller & Hill, 1951); asymmetric investment never examined in friendship dyads Present study explores precursors and psychological sequelae of adolescent close friendships that are asymmetric, in which one member of the dyad is more invested and “works harder” than the other Hypotheses 1.Adolescents lower in social status will be more likely to encounter friendship asymmetry 2.Adolescents exposed to friendship asymmetry will be more susceptible to peer influence on their substance use initiation 3.Adolescents exposed to friendship asymmetry will show relative increases in depressive symptoms Methods Implications for Prevention Discussion Participants: 184 adolescents (socioeconomically and racially diverse) and their close friends followed over a five-year period from ages 13-17 Measures: Exposure to friendship asymmetry: Once per year from ages 13-16, observed teens discussing disagreement with close friend, coded for behaviors promoting their connectedness (e.g., warmth, validating) (Allen et al., 1994) Computed difference score representing asymmetry between teens’ and friends’ behaviors Maximum asymmetry score across three years Social acceptance: age 13, sociometric peer nominations (Coie et al, 1982) Cigarette use initiation: ages 15 and 16, teens self-reported whether they had ever used cigarettes (Johnston et al., 1987) Depressive symptoms: age 13 self-report via Childhood Depression Inventory (CDI; Kovacs & Beck, 1977) and age 20 self-report via the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI; Beck & Steer, 1987) Youth who are able to maintain connectedness during a disagreement typically fare better in their peer relationships and overall well-being. Yet the present findings reveal how such efforts can be detrimental when unreciprocated. Thus, while prevention efforts should continue to target the social skills of individual youth, the present findings implicate friendship dynamics as a potentially important additional target for intervention. For instance, teaching youth how to: Choose and establish healthy, reciprocal friendships Recognize unhealthy, asymmetrical friendships Ensure that one’s own needs are being met in relationships Teens were more likely to end up in “one-sided” friendships if they were less socially accepted among their broader peer group Perhaps low social acceptance “primes” these youth to feel that they lack alternative friendship options, and thus they end up “working harder” to maintain these imbalanced friendships. Consistent with hypotheses, findings revealed that exposure to an asymmetric close friendship during early to mid- adolescence may have longer-term “costs” for individuals’ social-emotional development: More susceptible to influence by friends on their cigarette use initiation at age 16 More likely to report depressive symptoms at age 20 Teens in asymmetric friendships may implicitly learn that the burden is on them to be the “relationship keeper” and the “compromiser” – it may be that they carry this role forward into future close friendships, making them generally more susceptible to friends’ influence. To the extent that these teens experience a pattern of valuing and validating their friends’ feelings and views without receiving the same in return, they may implicitly “learn” that they are not valued or valuable – feelings that commonly underlie depression. Thoughts? Questions? Ideas? E-mail: Lauren Molloy at lmolloy@virginia.edu Table 2. Teens exposed to friendship asymmetry were more likely to show relative increases in depressive symptoms Figure 1. Teens exposed to friendship asymmetry were more susceptible to friends’ influence on their cigarette use initiation Results References Agnew, C. R. (1999). Power over interdependent behavior within the dyad: Who decides what a couple does? In L. J. Severy, W. B. Miller (Eds.), Advances in population: Psychosocial perspectives (pp. 163-188). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. attachment. New York: Basic Books. Cooley, C. H. (1922). Human Nature and the Social Order. New York: Scribner & Sons. Prinstein, M. J. & Aikins, J. W. (2004). Cognitive moderators of the longitudinal association between peer rejection and adolescent depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 147-158. Waller, W. & Hill, R. (1951). The family: A dynamic interpretation. New York: Dryden Press. Table 1. Teens lower in social acceptance were more likely to be exposed to friendship asymmetry over next three years