Peer influence processes for youth delinquency and depression

Abstract

This study explores the multiple factors that account for peer influence processes of adolescent delinquency and depression using data from Waves I and II of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health). Random-effects longitudinal negative binomial models were used to predict depression and delinquency, controlling for social connection variables to account for selection bias. Findings suggest peer depression and delinquency are both predictive of youth delinquency, while peer influences of depression are much more modest. Youth who are more connected to parents and communities and who are more popular within their networks are more susceptible to peer influence, while self-regulating youth are less susceptible. We find support for theories of popularity-socialization as well as weak-ties in explaining social network factors that amplify or constrain peer influence. We argue that practitioners working with youth should consider network-informed interventions to improve program efficacy and avoid iatrogenic effects.

Depression and Delinquency: A Review of Research

“…Depression resulting in antisocial conducts is more pronounced for young individuals, though. There is accumulating evidence that depression can be predictors of youth delinquency [9,10]. Similarly, Anderson et al [11] reported that depressed adolescents have a substantially increased probability of involvement in property crime, while there was little evidence concerning the likelihood of engaging in violent crime or the selling of illicit drugs in their study.…”

Activating school bonds: a study of truanting young people in the context of the Ability School Engagement Program (ASEP)

“…Young people's emotional bonds strengthen as they spend time together, be it at school or elsewhere. In the presence of attachment to peers, young people are more willing to modify their behaviours to fit with those of the peer group (Reynolds & Crea, 2015). Through spending time together, the ASEP youth and their peers at times spontaneously decided to engage in truancy, a behaviour that weakens their school bonds but appears as a more attractive alternative to school attendance.…”

“…The task of responding prosocially when faced with bullying can be a daunting call for these youth because the intervention's focus is on changing their behaviour per se and not that of their peers. However, Reynolds and Crea (2015) found that self-regulation is an effective strategy for negotiating peer influence and building resilience. Self-regulation provides the young person with skills to navigate through challenging social contexts (Reynolds & Crea, 2015).…”

“…However, Reynolds and Crea (2015) found that self-regulation is an effective strategy for negotiating peer influence and building resilience. Self-regulation provides the young person with skills to navigate through challenging social contexts (Reynolds & Crea, 2015). Also, considering the format of the intervention, there is limited scope for responding to peers of bullied youth in this context.…”

“…In contrast, truancy is an act of resistance; it is a passive form of behaviour characterised by avoidance of the legal expectations of going to school each day. Reynolds and Crea (2015) have argued that each type of delinquency is driven by different factors and for that reason, they should be examined in isolation from the broader cohort of delinquent behaviours.…”