The Two Faces of Adolescents' Success With Peers: Adolescent Popularity, Social Adaptation, and Deviant Behavior

Abstract

This study assessed the hypothesis that popularity in adolescence takes on a twofold role, both marking high levels of concurrent psychosocial adaptation, but also predicting increases over time in both positive and negative behaviors sanctioned by peer norms. This hypothesis was tested with multi-method, longitudinal data obtained on a diverse community sample of 185 adolescents. Sociometric popularity data were examined in relation to data from interview-based assessments of attachment security and ego development, observations of mother-adolescent interactions, and repeated self-and peer-report assessments of delinquency and alcohol use. Results indicated that popular adolescents displayed higher concurrent levels of ego development, secure attachment and more adaptive interactions with mothers and best friends. Longitudinal analyses supported a "popularity-socialization" hypothesis, however, in which popular adolescents were more likely to increase in behaviors that receive approval in the peer group (e.g., minor levels of drug use and delinquency) and decrease in behaviors unlikely to be well-received by peers (e.g., hostile behavior with peers). The Two Faces Of Adolescents' Success With Peers: Adolescent Popularity, Social Adaptation, and Deviant BehaviorAt no other stage of the lifespan is peer socialization as fraught with tension, ambiguity, and strain as during adolescence. Extrapolations from childhood research suggest that popularity in adolescence should be a positive marker of adaptation to be encouraged and promoted (Parker & Asher, 1987;Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 1998). Yet, adolescents who are popular, and hence well-socialized into their peer groups, would also appear vulnerable to being socialized into the increasing levels of delinquent and drug-using behavior that become normative in peer groups during this period. As compared to research in childhood, far less research has been conducted on popularity in adolescence. Yet, becoming popular is a prime goal for many adolescents and requires adaptation to a far broader and less supervised peer group than is found in the contained classrooms and geographically limited neighborhoods of childhood (Brown & Klute, 2003;Collins & Laursen, 2004). The potential dual role of popularity in adolescence--as both a marker of adaptation but also as a risk factor for increases in deviant behavior--has never previously been examined.Correspondence concerning this study should be sent to the first author at Department of Psychology, University of Virginia, Box 400400, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4400 (Email: allen@virginia.edu).. NIH Public Access Author ManuscriptChild Dev. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2006 August 22. Published in final edited form as:Child Dev. 2005 ; 76(3): 747-760. NIH-PA Author ManuscriptNIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author ManuscriptSelf-report research has linked perceived acceptance by one's peers in adolescence to better academic performance and to lower levels of substance abuse (Diego, Field, & Sanders, 2003). Unfortu...

Peer Standing and Substance Use in Early-Adolescent Grade-Level Networks: A Short-Term Longitudinal Study

“…Although others have concluded, quite reasonably, that early users have greater cache and centrality in young adolescent peer networks (Allen et al, 2005;Engels et al, 2005;Valente et al, 2005), we find that that current use per se does not confer power on young adolescents. Rather, such use appears to be an instance of norm-breaking behavior exhibited by those adolescents who for some other (unmeasured) reason are already distinctive in their social environment.…”

“…These spring users are no more central or popular than are abstainers. These findings suggest that popularity and peer standing in this age group are neither driven by nor maintained solely by early substance use, and lead us to believe that there's something about the timing of regular use that's quite important in this particular age group.Although others have concluded, quite reasonably, that early users have greater cache and centrality in young adolescent peer networks (Allen et al, 2005;Engels et al, 2005;Valente et al, 2005), we find that that current use per se does not confer power on young adolescents. Rather, such use appears to be an instance of norm-breaking behavior exhibited by those Killeya-Jones et al …”

Gene-Environment Correlation and Interaction in Peer Effects on Adolescent Alcohol and Tobacco Use

“…The recognition of bidirectional peer effects introduces an alternative explanation for the similarity evident between best friends and targets at the highest level of genetic risk: Adolescents with genetic liabilities for substance use are more effective at influencing their best friends. Although substance use is considered deviant by adult authority figures (or, perhaps, because substance use is considered deviant), experience with smoking and drinking may be a "coveted social asset" (Moffitt 1993) and is associated with adolescent popularity (Allen et al 2005). The adolescents at genetic risk for substance use, then, may wield considerable social influence.…”

Detrimental psychological outcomes associated with early pubertal timing in adolescent girls

“…With regard to the delinquency and early maturation association, support for a selection effect comes from research demonstrating that early maturing girls with childhood behavior difficulties are more likely to exhibit delinquent adolescent behavior than peers who have matured at a comparably advanced rate, but who have no previous history of behavioral difficulties (Caspi & Moffitt, 1991). Moreover, antisocial behavior is accentuated both by familial predisposition (see Rhee & Waldman, 2002, for a review) and by social and family environmental factors, such as friend characteristics (e.g., Allen, 2005;Scaramella, 2002). A pertinent focus for future research would be to examine the extent early puberty influences delinquency independent of these predilections and confounding factors for antisocial behavior.…”