Sibling popularity: A moderator of sibling influence for adolescent substance use

Abstract

Sibling substance use is a known correlate of adolescent substance use. Yet, not all siblings are equally influential. Sibling influence has been found to vary by age gap, sex, and birth order. Little research, however, has investigated whether siblings’ peer context is also a source of variation. The present study tested whether more popular siblings were more influential for adolescent use of cigarettes, alcohol, and marijuana. Data were obtained from sibling pairs in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Findings indicate that older siblings have more influence on younger sibling marijuana use when they have more friends. These findings contribute to prior work examining which siblings are more influential and highlight the need to consider siblings as part of a greater peer context.

Big Five personality stability, change, and codevelopment across adolescence and early adulthood.

“…In case of active reinforcement learning, individuals may change if they receive persistent positive or negative reactions from others (e.g., verbal feedback, or a smile or frown) on their personality expressions (Bandura, 1971;Harris, 1995;Hartup, 1996;Hawley, 2006;Moffitt, 1993;Wrzus & Roberts, 2016). These social learning mechanisms might be asymmetrical or unidirectional, as older and more popular dyad members have been found to be more influential than younger and less popular dyad members (Brody, Stoneman, MacKinnon, & MacKinnon, 1985;Dishion & Tipsord, 2011;Wallace, 2015;Zukow, 1989). Social learning processes may not result in correlated change, though they would result in increasing dyadic trait similarity over time.…”

“…Shared norms might be established at the level of dyads or peer groups (Harris, 1995; Reitz et al, 2014) and might result from individuals’ preference for similarity, which facilitates trust and predictability and reduces relationship conflict (Byrne, 1971). Evidence has suggested that socialization effects occur most strongly in same-sex and strongly connected dyads (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011; Rose, Kaprio, Williams, Viken, & Obremski, 1990; Rowe & Gulley, 1992; Slomkowski, Rende, Novak, Lloyd-Richardson, & Niaura, 2005; Trim, Leuthe, & Chassin, 2006; Wallace, 2015). This symmetrical convergence process would result in increasing similarity and positive partner effects.…”

“…Moreover, although growing up together in a shared home environment has been found to be unrelated to personality trait levels in adulthood (Bouchard & Loehlin, 2001), it has often been suggested that older siblings act as important socializing agents (Brody et al, 1985; McHale, Updegraff, & Whiteman, 2012; Whiteman, Bernard, & Jensen, 2011; Zukow, 1989). Indeed, one study has found that changes in some personality traits are positively correlated among siblings (Branje, Van Lieshout, & Van Aken, 2004), and genetically informed studies have found evidence for sibling influence regarding delinquency, substance use, weight gain, and neuroticism (McCaffery et al, 2011; Rose et al, 1990; Slomkowski et al, 2005; Wallace, 2015). In conclusion, there is evidence for social influences among adolescent friends and siblings with respect to various behaviors and traits, which suggests that they may also influence each other’s Big Five personality trait trajectories.…”

Does substance use by family members and community affect the substance use among adolescent boys? Evidence from UDAYA study, India

“…A systematic review of 58 research papers had indicated that smoking use among family members makes adolescents more likely to indulge in smoking behavior [ 20 ]. Further, a study had shown that substance use by older siblings increases the likelihood of substance use among younger siblings [ 26 ]. Extant research has also shown that adolescent substance use has long-term consequences in the form of – deteriorating health status, exhibiting violent behavior, proneness to accidents, loss of employment, a dropout from formal education, poor performance in education and career development, among the people of both developed [ 3 , 27 ] and developing nations [ 28 , 29 ].…”