1. Leaders and Followers: Sex, Drug Use, and Friendship Quality Predicted by Observed Susceptibility to Peer Influence Joseph P. Allen F. Christy McFarland University of Virginia Other Collaborators: Maryfrances Porter Penny Marsh Andrea Cole Heather Tencer Sally Kaufman Farah Williams Martin Ho Jess Meyer Mindy Schmidt Copies Today’s Talk & Related Papers are available at: www.faculty.virginia.edu/allen/pubs.html

2. The Paradox of Adolescent-Peer Interactions Strengthening peer relationships are fundamental to normal social development Conformity to negative peer norms creates risks for: delinquent behavior substance abuse risky sexual behavior All adolescents are exposed to at least some negative peer behavior Which Adolescents will best resist? Hypothesis: Adolescents can resist negative peer influences to the extent they have developed a capacity for autonomy in social interactions.

3. Overarching Question: What does it take for an adolescent to be “competent” interacting with peers? Autonomy with peers as one aspect of peer competence

4. Limits of Existing Measures of Susceptibility to Peer Influence Few measures exist Near-exclusive reliance on self-reports (in spite of extreme social desirability problems) Poor psychometric characteristics Confounding susceptibility with willingness to engage in problem behaviors

5. Sample 168 Adolescents, their Parents, Best Friends and Other Friends Equal numbers of Males and Females Assessed Annually, Beginning at Age 13 Community-based Sample from a small urban area. Highly Socio-economically Diverse (Median Family Income= $38,000) 31% African American; 69% European American

6. Goals in Assessing Susceptibility to Peer Influence Develop a Measure that tell us something about social development broadly defined. Avoid Confounding Susceptibility with willingness to engage in problematic behavior. Move beyond reliance upon self-report

7. Measures: Susceptibility to Peer Influence Experimental Paradigm “The Mars Task” 2 best friends separately decide which hypothetical characters will be rescued first following a space accident. Teens are then brought together and come to a “consensus” answer. Susceptibility to Peer Influence = # of Disagreements where the Target Teen’s Position is NOT Adopted X 100% # of Total Disagreements Mean Score = 51% (i.e. teens and friends each change the other’s mind ~ half the time.)

8. Measures: Actual Negative Peer Influence (close-peer report) 5-item Likert-scale Completed by best friend of target teen I am a [Big part/…./No Part] of the reason my friend …… - makes fun of other kids - picks fights - gets bad grades - smokes - cuts class

9. Predicting Actual Peer Influence on Negative Behaviors from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Peer Influence on Negative Behaviors (Close peer report) R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F) -.07.00 II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.19*.04* Note: β weights are from variable’s entry into model. Experimentally-Assessed Susceptibility to Peer Influence is Related to Actual Negative Peer Influence Reported by Close Peers

10. Measures: Problems with Alcohol and Drug Use Target Teen Problems with Alcohol/Drug Use 4 item self-report scale (completed by target teens) “Some teens often get out of control drinking alcohol BUT Other teens never get out of control drinking alcohol.”

11. Predicting Alcohol and Drug Use Problems from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Target Teen Problems with Alcohol and Drug Use R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F).04 Race (1=White; 2= Afr. Amer.).18+.04 II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.24**.06**.10**. More susceptible teens have greater difficulty with alcohol and drug use.

12. Measures: Peer Use of Alcohol & Marijuana PEER REPORT: Incidence of Use of Alcohol & Marijuana in Peer group Yes/No – Have you used Alcohol previously? Have you used Marijuana Previously Data obtained from 2 peers about alcohol & marijuana and summed to yield a 0-4 scale.

13. Predicting Alcohol and Drug Use Problems from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Target Teen Problems with Alcohol and Drug Use R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F).04 Race (1=White; 2= Afr. Amer.).18+.04 II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.24**.06**.10** III. Peer Alcohol & Drug Use (Peer-rpt.).25**.10**.16***

14. Predicting Alcohol and Drug Use Problems from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Target Teen Problems with Alcohol and Drug Use R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F).04 Race (1=White; 2= Afr. Amer.).18+.04 II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.24**.06**.10** III. Peer Alcohol & Drug Use (Peer-rpt.).25**.10**.16*** IV. Peer Use X Teen Susceptibility.19*.03*.19***

15. Interaction of Peer Substance Use & Teen Susceptibility to Peer Influence Predicting Teen Substance Use More susceptible teens more closely mimic their peers’ levels of alcohol and drug use.

16. Predicting Externalizing Behavior Problems from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Teen Externalizing Problems (Maternal report, CBCL) R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F).00 Race (1=White; 2= Afr. Amer.).13+.02 II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.18*.03*.05* Note: β weights are from variable’s entry into model. More susceptible teens display more externalizing behavior

17. Predicting Likelihood of Prior Sexual Intercourse from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Previously Had Sexual Intercourse  χ 2 Odds Ratio Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F) -.40*5.41*0.48* II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.43*5.76*2.20* 11.51** Odds ratios are based on standardized predictor variables. More susceptible teens become are more likely to become precociously sexually active.

18. Measures: Quality of Close Friendship Self Perception Profile for Adolescents (Harter, 1988) 5-item scale rating close friendship competence of target teen. Modified (Allen et al., in press) to also serve as a peer-report measure. Total Close Friendship score for Teen is the Sum of Peer Rating of Teen’s qualities in friendship + Teen’s self-ratings

19. Predicting Quality of Close Friendship from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Close Friendship Quality (Dyadic Assessment) R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F).14+ Race (1=White; 2= Afr. Amer.).14+.04* II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence -.24**.05**.09** Note: β weights are from variable’s entry into model. More susceptible teens are less able to form strong close friendships.

20. Predicting Stability of Close Friendship from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Returned 1 year later with same close friend?  χ 2 Odds Ratio Step I. Gender (1=M; 2=F) Family Income -.07.18+ 0.49 2.99 0.89 1.39 II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence -.23*5.79*.65* 10.32* Odds ratios are based on standardized predictor variables. More susceptible teens display less stable close friendships.

21. Predicting Depressive Symptoms from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Age 13 Depressive Symptoms (CDI) Age 13 R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1= M; 2=F).08.01 Step II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.05.01.02 Note: β weights are from variable’s entry into model. No cross-sectional relation of depression and susceptibility.

22. Predicting Depressive Symptoms from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Age 14 Depressive Symptoms (CDI) Age 14 R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Gender (1= M; 2=F).08.01 Step II. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.19**.04**.05* Note: β weights are from variable’s entry into model. More susceptible teens are more likely to become depressed in the following year.

23. Predicting Changes in Depressive Symptoms from Susceptibility to Peer Influence Depressive Symptoms Age 14 R2R2 Total R 2 Step I. Depression (Age 13).60***.36*** Step II. Gender (1= M; 2=F).05.01.37*** Step III. Susceptibility to Peer Influence.14*.02*.39*** Note: β weights are from variable’s entry into model. Susceptibility predicts increasing levels of depressive symptoms over time

24. Summary Susceptibility to Peer Influence Can be Assessed Experimentally in a neutral context Susceptibility is linked to: Actual experience of negative peer influence Substance abuse, early sexual activity, and externalizing behaviors Broader links to social development: Instability and poorer quality close friendships Proneness to develop depressive symptoms over time

25. Summary Low susceptibility scores (i.e. “leadership”) appear as a potent buffer of risk linked to fewer problem behaviors, better friendships and less depression.

26. Conclusions & Theoretical Speculations All teens are exposed to negative peer behaviors Susceptibility to peer influence may determine which teens go on to adopt these negative behaviors Susceptibility may mark broader difficulties in learning to think autonomously in key relationships. Prior research suggested autonomy in families is critical. Establishing autonomy with peers may be equally critical in adolescence. (Copies of this paper are available at: www.faculty.virginia.edu/allen/pubs.html)