The multidimensionality of peer pressure in adolescence

Abstract

A sample of 689 adolescents (grades 7-12) from two Midwestern communities who had been identified by peers as members of one of three major peer groups responded to a self-report survey measuring perceptions of peer pressure in five areas of behavior: involvement with peers, school involvement, family involvement, conformity to peer norms, and misconduct. Perceived pressures toward peer involvement were particularly strong, whereas peer pressures concerning misconduct were relatively ambivalent. Perceived pressures toward misconduct increased across grade levels and pressures to conform to peer norms diminished; grade differences in perceived peer pressures concerning family involvement were community specific. Compared to druggie-toughs, jock-populars perceived stronger peer pressures toward school and family involvement, and less pressure toward (stronger pressure against) misconduct; patterns of perceived pressure among loners were more variable across communities. Results elaborated the process of peer influence in adolescent socialization and identity development.

Adolescent Susceptibility to Deviant Peer Pressure: Does Gender Matter?

“…De Gaston et al 2006;Nahom et al 2001) or constructed their own scales (e.g., Maslowsky et al 2011), other measures of peer pressure were more widely used. For example, the Peer Pressure Inventory (PPI; Brown et al 1986a, b;Clasen and Brown 1985) assesses perceptions of explicit peer pressure across multiple domains and was used the most frequently in the literature. Other common assessment tools used included the Extreme Peer Orientation (Fuligni and Eccles 1993), the Emerging Adult Peer Pressure Inventory (EAPPI; Bradley and Wildman 2002), and the Resistance to Peer Influence scale (RPI; Steinberg and Monahan 2007).…”

“…In regard to developmental status, several studies grouped early, middle and late adolescents together (Berndt 1979;Brown et al 1986a, b;Clasen and Brown 1985;Crockett et al 2006;Steinberg and Monahan 2007;Sumter et al 2009), making it difficult for the present review to tease apart potential developmental differences in susceptibility to peer pressure between male and female adolescents. Future researchers are encouraged to report age differences in a more structured manner to determine whether susceptibility to deviant peer pressure follows a similar trajectory.…”

Athletic Involvement and Adolescent Delinquency

“…While a handful of researchers have explored possible links between subjective sports involvement and problem drinking, violence, or academic performance (Ashmore et al, 2002;Barber et al, 2001;Brown et al, 1993;Eccles and Barber, 1999;Eccles et al, 2003;Miller et al, 2003;Miller et al, 2006), only one study to date has even tangentially related adolescents' self-identification as a jock or athlete to delinquency. Clasen and Brown (1985) found that compared to "druggie-toughs," adolescents classified as "jock-populars" perceived stronger pressure not to engage in misconduct, a global measure of substance use, sexual activity, and minor delinquency.…”

“…While a handful of researchers have explored possible links between subjective sports involvement and problem drinking, violence, or academic performance (Ashmore et al, 2002;Barber et al, 2001;Brown et al, 1993;Eccles and Barber, 1999;Eccles et al, 2003;Miller et al, 2003;Miller et al, 2006), only one study to date has even tangentially related adolescents' self-identification as a jock or athlete to delinquency. Clasen and Brown (1985) found that compared to "druggie-toughs," adolescents classified as "jock-populars" perceived stronger pressure not to engage in misconduct, a global measure of substance use, sexual activity, and minor delinquency.A small number of studies have attempted to disaggregate the effects of objective athletic participation (what one does) from the effects of subjective jock identity (whom one is perceived to be, by oneself or others). Lantz and Schroeder (1999) critiqued the common tendency to measure athletic involvement using a single, dichotomous "athlete/nonathlete" indicator, noting that this overly simplistic system of classification fails to account for the strength or exclusivity of an adolescent's identification with the athlete or jock role.…”

The cultural context of family-peer linkages in adolescence

“…Most of the teenagers that Clasen and Brown (1985) surveyed perceived more peer pressure to get along well with the family and accede to parental expectations and authority than to oppose these activities, although the strength of such pressures was weaker in older age groups.…”