Social Networks and the Diffusion of Adolescent Problem Behavior: Reliable Estimates of Selection and Influence from Sixth Through Ninth Grades

Abstract

Seeking to reduce problematic peer influence is a prominent theme of programs to prevent adolescent problem behavior. To support the refinement of this aspect of prevention programming, we examined peer influence and selection processes for three problem behaviors (delinquency, alcohol use, and smoking). We assessed not only the overall strengths of these peer processes, but also their consistency versus variability across settings. We used dynamic stochastic actor-based models to analyze five waves of friendship network data across sixth through ninth grades for a large sample of U.S. adolescents. Our sample included two successive grade cohorts of youth in 26 school districts participating in the PROSPER study, yielding 51 longitudinal social networks based on respondents’ friendship nominations. For all three self-reported antisocial behaviors, we found evidence of both peer influence and selection processes tied to antisocial behavior. There was little reliable variance in these processes across the networks, suggesting that the statistical imprecision of the peer influence and selection estimates in previous studies likely accounts for inconsistencies in results. Adolescent friendship networks play a strong role in shaping problem behavior, but problem behaviors also inform friendship choices. In addition to preferring friends with similar levels of problem behavior, adolescents tend to choose friends who engage in problem behaviors, thus creating broader diffusion.

Adolescents’ Friendships, Academic Achievement, and Risk Behaviors: Same‐Behavior and Cross‐Behavior Selection and Influence Processes

“…These inconsistent effects for delinquency are in accordance with findings by Osgood et al. () and may be related to the following arguments.…”

“…We generally found support for same‐behavior selection and influence processes, which is in line with our hypotheses and also matches with findings of previous studies with regard to delinquency (e.g., Knecht, Snijders, Baerveldt, Steglich, & Raub, ), alcohol use (e.g., Osgood et al., , ), and academic achievement (e.g., Flashman, ; Fortuin, van Geel, & Vedder, ). Our results indicate that adolescents select peers as friends who have similar behaviors, as well as that friends’ behaviors become more similar over time.…”

“…As risk behaviors develop in the peer context, it is important to examine the role of friends in these behaviors (Dodge, Coie, & Lynam, ; Osgood, Feinberg, & Ragan, ). Indeed, previous studies have found friendship selection and influence effects on adolescents’ alcohol use and delinquency (Burk, van der Vorst, Kerr, & Stattin, ; Kiuru, Burk, Laursen, Salmela‐Aro, & Nurmi, ; Osgood et al., ; Steglich, Snijders, & West, ). These results indicate that students often select friends based on similarity in risk behaviors as well as become more similar to each other over time.…”

Transactions Between Substance Use Intervention, the Oxytocin Receptor (OXTR) Gene, and Peer Substance Use Predicting Youth Alcohol Use

“…Across the control and intervention conditions, youth with more OXTR ‘risk” alleles are equally prone to affiliate with high-risk peers. These youth follow the general preference for friends who engage in problem behaviors (see Osgood, Feinberg, and Ragan, 2015). In contrast, messages delivered by the intervention appear to reduce the general preference for risky friends, but only among low OXTR risk youth.…”

Peer beliefs and smoking in adolescence: a longitudinal social network analysis

“…Publications by Snijders and by Steglich et al provide a more thorough explanation of SIENA (19–21), Steglich et al provide a nontechnical introduction to the program (22), and Osgood et al explain the application of SIENA to the PROSPER data in more detail (11). …”