Skip to main content

Peer pressure and adolescent substance use

Abstract

Peer influence is regarded as one of the strongest determinants of juvenile delinquency and particularly adolescent substance use. A commonly held view is that social pressure from friends to use drugs and alcohol is a major contributor to substance use. Yet the notion of peer pressure, implied by the association between peer-group associations and drug behavior, is seldom tested empirically. As a crucial test of the group pressure model, this research examines the role of peer pressure in mediating the effect of differential association on individual use. Moreover, few studies examine the nature of the relationship between peers and substance use as it relates to the processes leading toand from use. Drawing on differential association and social learning theories, our research specifies the social processes (socialization, group pressure, social selection, and rationalization) which dictate particular causal pathways leading to and from substance use and then estimates the reciprocal influences among differential association, social pressure from peers, attitudes favorable toward substance use, and individual use. Using the 1977–1979 National Youth Survey panel data, we estimate a covariance structural equation model allowing for correlated measurement error. In the cross-sectional analyses, we find no main effects of overt peer pressure on substance use. Estimation of the reciprocal effects model also reveals that overt peer pressure does not significantly influence substance use and does not mediate the effect of differential association. Instead, the influences of socialization, social selection, and rationalization play significant roles in understanding substance use.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Agnew, R. (1991a). The interactive effects of peer variables on delinquency.Criminology 29: 47–72.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Agnew, R. (1991b). A longitudinal test of social control theory and delinquency.J. Res. Crime Delinq. 28: 126–156.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Akers, R. L. (1977).Deviant Behavior: A Social Learning Approach, 2nd ed., Wadsworth, Belmont.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Akers, R. L. (1985).Deviant Behavior: A Social Learning Approach, 3rd ed., Wadsworth, Belmont.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Akers, R. L. (1992).Drugs, Alcohol, and Society: Social Structure, Process and Policy, Wadsworth, Belmont.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Akers, R. L. (1994).Criminological Theories: Introduction and Evaluation, Roxbury, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Akers, R. L., and Cochran, J. K. (1985). Adolescent marijuana use: A test of three theories of deviant behavior.Deviant Behav. 6: 323–346.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Akers, R. L., Krohn, M. D., Lanza-Kaduce, L., and Radosevich, M. (1979). Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory.Am. Soc. Rev. 44: 636–655.

    Google Scholar 

  9. AMA Board of Trustees (1991). Drug abuse in the United States: Strategies for prevention.JAMA 265: 2102–2107.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bandura, A. (1977).Social Learning Theory, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Briar, S., and Piliavin, I. (1965). Delinquency, situational inducements, and commitment to conformity.Soc. Problems 13: 35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Brown, B. B., Clasen, D. R., and Eicher, S. A. (1986). Perceptions of peer pressure, peer conformity dispositions, and self-reported behavior among adolescents.Dev. Psychol. 22: 521–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Burgess, R., and Akers, R. (1968). Differential association-reinforcement theory of criminal behavior.Soc. Problems 14: 128–147.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Burkett, S. R. and Warren, B. O. (1987). Religiosity, peer associations, and adolescent marijuana use: A panel study of underlying causal structures.Criminology 25: 109–131.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cohen, L. E., and Felson, M. (1979). Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activities approach.Am. Sociol. Rev. 44: 588–608.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen, L. E., Kluegel, J. R., and Land, K. C. (1981). Exposition and test of a formal theory.Am. Sociol. Rev. 46: 505–524.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cressey, D. R. (1953).Other People's Money: A Study in the Social Psychology of Embezzlement, Free Press, Glencoe, Il.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Cullen, F. T. (1983).Rethinking Crime and Deviance Theory, Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Dielman, T. E., Shope, J. T., Butchart, A. T., Campanelli, P. C., and Caspar, R. A. (1989). A covariance structure model test of antecedents of adolescent alcohol misuse and a prevention effort.J. Drug Educ. 19: 337–361.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dielman, T. E., Butchart, A. T., Shope, J. T., and Miller, M. (1991). Environmental correlates of adolescent substance use and misuse: Implications for prevention programs.Int. J. Addict. 25: 855–880.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Elliott, D. S. (1976).National Youth Survey [United States]: Wave I, 1976, InterUniversity Corsortium for Political and Social Research, Ann Arbor, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Elliott, D. S., and Menard, S. (1996). Delinquent friends and delinquent behavior: Temporal and developmental patterns. In Hawkins, J. D. (ed.),Delinquency and Crime: Current Theories, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, pp. 28–67.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Elliott, D. S., Knowles, B. A., and Canter, R. J. (1981).The Epidemiology of Delinquent Behavior and Drug Use Among American Adolescents. Vol. 1. The National Youth Survey Project Report No. 14, Behavioral Research Institute, Boulder, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Elliott, D. S., Huizinga, D., and Ageton, S. S. (1985).Explaining Delinquency and Drug Use, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Flannery, D. J., Vazsonyi, A. T., Torquati, J., and Fridrich, A. (1994). Ethnic and gender differences in risk for early adolescent substance use.J. Youth Adolesc. 23: 195–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fromme, K. (1983). Peer influence on social drinking.Bull. Soc. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 2: 50–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gibbons, D. C. (1971). Observations on the study of crime causation.Am. J. Soc. 77: 262–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Giordano, P. C., Cernkovich, S. A., and Pugh, M. D. (1986). Friendships and delinquency.Am. J. Sociol. 91: 1170–1201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Giordano, P. C., Cernkovich, S. A., and DeMaris, A. (1993). The family and peer relations of black adolescents.J. Marriage Fam. 55: 277–287.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Glueck, S., and Glueck, E. (1950).Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, The Commonwealth Fund, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gonet, M. M. (1994).Counseling the Adolescent Substance User: School-Based Intervention and Prevention, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gottfredson, M., and Hirschi, T. (1987). The methodological adequacy of longitudinal research on crime.Criminology 25: 581–614.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gottfredson, M., and Hirschi, T. (1990).A General Theory of Crime, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hayduk, L. (1987).Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL: Essentials and Advances, John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hirschi, T. (1969).Causes of Delinquency, University of California Press, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Huizinga, D. (1978). Description of the national youth sample. Project Report Number 2. HEW Grant Number MH27552.The Dynamics of Delinquent Behavior: A National Survey, Behavioral Research Institute, Boulder, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jackson, D. F., Tittle, C. R., and Burke, M. J. (1986). Offense-specific models of the differential association process.Soc. Problems 33: 335–356.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Jacquith, S. M. (1981). Adolescent marijuana and alcohol use: An empirical test of differential association theory.Criminology 19: 271–280.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Jensen, G. F. (1972). Parents, peers, and delinquent action: A test of the differential association perspective.Am. J. Sociol. 78: 562–575.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Johnson, R. E. (1979).Juvenile Delinquency and Its Origins: An Integrated Theoretical Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Johnson, R. E., Marcos, A. C., and Bahr, S. J. (1987). The role of peers in the complex etiology of adolescent drug use.Criminology 25: 323–340.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Johnston, L. D., O'Malley, P. M., and Bachman, J. G. (1995).Monitoring the Future Study [press release 13], National Institute on Drug Abuse, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Joreskog, K. G., and Sorbom, D. (1989).LISREL VII: Analysis of Linear Structural Relationships by Maximum Likelihood, Instrumental Variables, and Least Squares Methods, 4th ed., Scientific Software, Mooresville, IN.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kandel, D. B., Kessler, R. C., and Margulies, R. Z. (1978). Antecedents of adolescent initiation into stages of drug use: A developmental analysis.J. Youth Adolesc. 7: 13–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kercher, K. (1988). Criminology. In Borgatta, E. F., and Cook, K. S. (eds.),The Future of Sociology, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 294–316.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Krohn, M. D., Akers, R. L., Radosevich, M. J., and Lanza-Kaduce, L. (1982). Norm qualities and adolescent drinking and drug behavior.J. Drug Issues 12: 343–359.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Krohn, M. D., Skinner, W. F., Massey, J. L., and Akers, R. L. (1983). Social learning theory and adolescent cigarette smoking: A longitudinal study.Soc. Problems 32: 455–471.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Krohn, M. D., Lanza-Kaduce, L., and Akers, R. L. (1984). Community context and theories of deviant behavior: An examination of social learning and social bonding theories.Sociol. Q. 25: 353–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Liska, A. E. (1969). Interpreting the causal structure of differential association theory.Soc. Problems 16: 485–492.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Liska, A. E. (1973). Causal structures underlying the relationship between delinquent involvement and peers.Soc. Sociol. Res. 58: 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Liska, A. E. (1978). Deviant involvement, associations and attitudes: Specifying the underlying causal structures.Soc Sociol. Res. 63: 73–88.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Liska, A. E. (1987).Perspectives on Deviance, 2nd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Liska, A. E., and Reed, M. D. (1985). Ties to conventional institutions and delinquency: Estimating reciprocal effects.Am. Sociol. Rev. 50: 547–560.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Lofland, J. (1969).Deviance and Identity, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  55. MacDonald, D. I. (1989).Drugs, Drinking and Adolescents, 2nd ed. Year Book Medical, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Mann, P. (1980). Marijuana: The myth of harmlessness goes up in smoke.Sat. Eve. Post July/Aug. 32–43.

  57. Marcos, A. C., Bahr, S. J., and Johnson, R. E. (1986). Test of a bonding/association theory of adolescent drug use.Soc. Forces 65: 135–161.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Matsueda, R. L. (1982). Testing control theory and differential association: A causal modeling approach.Am. Sociol. Rev. 47: 489–504.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Matsueda, R. L. (1989). The dynamics of moral beliefs and minor deviance.Soc. Forces 68: 428–457.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Matsueda, R. L., and Heimer, K. (1987). Race, family structure, and delinquency: A test of differential association and social control theories.Am. Sociol. Rev. 52: 826–840.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Menard, S., and Elliott, D. S. (1990). Longitudinal and cross-sectional data collection and analysis in the study of crime and delinquency.Just. Q. 7: 11–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Menard, S., and Elliott, D. S. (1994). Delinquent bonding, moral beliefs, and illegal behaviors: A three-wave panel model.Just. Q. 11: 173–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Pisano, S., and Rooney, J. F. (1988). Children's changing attitudes regarding alcohol: A cross-sectional study.J. Drug Educ. 18: 1–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Reiss, A. J., Jr., and Rhodes, A. L. (1964). An empirical test of differential association theory.J. Res. Crime Delinq. 1: 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Short, J. F., Jr. (1957). Differential association and delinquency.Soc. Problems 4: 233–239.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Short, J. F., Jr. (1958). Differential association with delinquent friends and delinquent behavior.Pac. Sociol. Rev. 1: 20–25.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Short, J. F., Jr., and Strodtbeck, F. L. (1965).Group Process and Gang Delinquency, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Spear, S., and Akers, R. L. (1988). Social learning variables and the risk of habitual smoking among adolescents: The Muscatine study.Am. J. Prev. Med. 4: 336–348.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Stafford, M. C., and Ekland-Olson, S. (1982). On social learning and deviant behavior: A reappraisal of the findings.Am. Sociol. Rev. 47: 167–169.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Strickland, D. E. (1982). “Social learning and deviant behavior: A specific test of a general theory”: A comment and critique.Am. Sociol. Rev. 47: 162–167.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Sutherland, E. H. (1924).Criminology, Lippincott, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Sutherland, E. H. (1934).Principles of Criminology, 2nd ed., Lippincott, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Sutherland, E. H. (1939).Principles of Criminology, 3rd ed., Lippincott, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Sutherland, E. H. (1947).Principles of Criminology, 4th ed., Lippincott, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Sutherland, E. H. (1973).On Analyzing Crime, edited with an Introduction by Schuessler, K., University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Sutherland, E. H.. and Cressey, D. R. (1970).Criminology, J. B. Lippincott, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Sykes, G. M., and Matza, D. (1957). Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency.Am. Sociol. Rev. 22: 664–670.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Farnworth, M., and Jang, S. J. (1994). Delinquent peers, beliefs, and delinquent behavior: A longitudinal test of interactional theory.Criminology 32: 47–83.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Tittle, C. R. (1985). The assumption that general theories are not possible. In Meier, R. F. (ed.).Theoretical Methods in Criminology, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 93–121.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Tittle, C. R., Burke, M. J., and Jackson, E. F. (1986). Modeling Sutherland's theory of differential association: Toward an empirical clarification.Soc. Forces 65: 405–432.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Turner, R. H., and Killian, L. M. (1987).Collective Behavior, Prentice-Hall, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Warr, M., and Stafford, M. (1991). The influence of delinquent peers: What they think or what they do?Criminology 29: 851–866.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1994 American Society of Criminology meetings in Miami, Florida.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reed, M.D., Rountree, P.W. Peer pressure and adolescent substance use. J Quant Criminol 13, 143–180 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02221306

Download citation

Key words

  • adolescent substance use
  • peer pressure
  • structural equation methods
  • differential association
  • social learning