Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 395–400 | Cite as

Peer Contagion in Interventions for Children and Adolescents: Moving Towards an Understanding of the Ecology and Dynamics of Change

Article

Abstract

The influence of deviant peers on youth behavior is of growing concern, both in naturally occurring peer interactions and in interventions that might inadvertently exacerbate deviant development. The focus of this special issue is on understanding the moderating and mediating variables that account for peer contagion effects in interventions for youth. This set of nine innovative papers moves the field forward on three fronts: (1) Broadening the empirical basis for understanding the conditions under which peer contagion is more or less likely (that is, moderators of effects); (2) Identifying mechanisms that might account for peer contagion effects (mediators); and (3) Forging the methodological rigor that is needed to study peer contagion effects within the context of intervention trials. We propose an ecological framework for disentangling the effects of individuals, group interactions, and program contexts in understanding peer contagion effects. Finally, we suggest methodological enhancements to study peer contagion in intervention trials.

Keywords

peer contagion peer influences deviant peers 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Boxer, P., Guerra, N. G., Huesman, L. R., & Morales, J. (2005). Proximal peer-level effects of small group selected prevention on aggression in elementary school children: An investigation of the peer contagion hypothesis. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 325–338.Google Scholar
  2. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and by design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development, Vol. 6. Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and current issues (pp. 187–249). London: Jai.Google Scholar
  4. Bryant, K. J., Windle, M., & West, S. G. (1997). The science of prevention. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  5. Cho, H., Halfors, D., & Sanchez, V. (2005). Evaluation of a high school peer group intervention for at risk youth. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 363–374.Google Scholar
  6. Dennis, M., Godley, S. H., Diamond, G., Tims, F. M., Babor, T., Donaldson, J., et al. (2004). The Cannabis Youth Treatment (CYT) study: Main findings from two randomized trials. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 27, 197–213.Google Scholar
  7. Dishion, T. J. (in press). Deviant peer contagion within interventions and programs: An ecological framework for understanding influence mechanisms. In K. Dodge & T. Dishion (Eds.), Deviant by design: Interventions and policies that aggregate deviant youth and strategies to optimize outcomes. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  8. Dishion, T. J., & Andrews, D. W. (1995). Preventing escalation in problem behaviors with high-risk young adolescents: Immediate and 1-year outcomes. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 538–548.Google Scholar
  9. Dishion, T. J., Burraston, B., & Poulin, F. (2001). Peer group dynamics associated with iatrogenic effects in group interventions with high-risk young adolescents. In C. Erdley & D. W. Nangle (Eds.), Damon’s new directions in child development: The role of friendship in psychological adjustment (pp. 79–92). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  10. Dishion, T. J., McCord, J., & Poulin, F. (1999). When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem behavior. American Psychologist, 54, 755–764.Google Scholar
  11. Dishion, T. J., Spracklen, K. M., Andrews, D. W., & Patterson, G. R. (1996). Deviancy training in male adolescent friendships. Behavior Therapy, 27, 373–390.Google Scholar
  12. Duncan, G. J., Boisjoly, J., Kremer, M., Levy, D. M., & Eccles, J. (2005). Peer effects in drug use and sex among college students. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 375–385.Google Scholar
  13. Feldman, R. A., Caplinger, T. E. & Wodarski, J. S. (1983). The St. Louis conundrum: The effective treatment of antisocial youths. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Gifford-Smith, M., Dodge, K. A., Dishion, T. J., & McCord, J. (2005). Peer influence in children and adolescents: Crossing the bridge from developmental to intervention science. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 255–265.Google Scholar
  15. Hanish, L. D., Martin, C. L., Fabes, R. A., Leonard, S., & Herzog, M. (2005). Exposure to externalizing peers in early childhood: Homophily and peer contagion processes. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 267–281.Google Scholar
  16. Kellam, S., Ling, X., Merisca, R., Brown, H., & Ialongo, N. (1998). The effect of the level of aggression in the first grade classroom on the course and malleability of aggressive behavior into the middle school. Development and Psychopathology, 10, 165–185.Google Scholar
  17. Kelly, J. G. (1987). An ecological paradigm: Defining mental health consultation as a preventive service. In J. G. Kelly & R. E. Hess (Eds.), The ecology of prevention: Illustrating mental health consultation (pp. 1–36). New York: Haworth.Google Scholar
  18. Lavallee, K. L., Bierman, K. L., Nix, R. L., & The Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2005). The impact of first-grade “friendship group” experiences on child social outcomes in the Fast Track Program. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 307–324.Google Scholar
  19. Leve, L. D., & Chamberlain, P. (2005). The effects of gender and intervention context on delinquency for youth in the juvenile justice system. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 339–347.Google Scholar
  20. Lipsey, M. (in press). The effects of community-based group treatment for delinquency: A meta-analytic search for cross-study generalizations. In K. Dodge & T. Dishion (Eds.), Deviant by design: Interventions and policies that aggregate deviant youth and strategies to optimize outcomes. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  21. Lochman, J. E. (1992). Cognitive-behavioral intervention with aggressive boys: Three-year follow-up and preventive effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 426–432.Google Scholar
  22. Mager, W., Milich, R., Harris, M. J., & Howard, A. (in press). Intervention groups for adolescents with conduct problems: Is aggregation harmful or helpful? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.Google Scholar
  23. McCord, J. (1978). A third-year follow-up of treatment effects. American Psychologist, 37, 1477–1486.Google Scholar
  24. McCord, J. (1981). Consideration of some effects of a counseling program. In S. E. Martin, L. B. Sechrest, & R. Redner (Eds.), New directions in the rehabilitation of criminal offenders (pp. 394–405). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  25. McCord, J. (1992). The Cambridge-Somerville Study: A pioneering longitudinal-experimental study of delinquency prevention. In J. McCord & R. E. Tremblay (Eds.), Preventing antisocial behavior: Interventions from birth through adolescence (pp. 196–206). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  26. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2001). Mplus statistical analysis with latent variables. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  27. Patterson, G. R., Littman, R. A., & Bricker, W. (1967). Assertive behavior in children: A step toward a theory of aggression. Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development, 32, 1–43.Google Scholar
  28. Prinstein, M. J., & Wang, S. S. (2005). False consensus and adolescent peer contagion: Examining discrepancies between perceptions and actual reported levels of friends’ deviant and health risk behaviors. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 293–306.Google Scholar
  29. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  30. Snyder, J., Schrepferman, L., Oeser, J., Patterson, G., Stoolmiller, M., Johnson, K. (in press). Peer deviancy training and affiliation with deviant peers in young children: Occurrence and contributions to early-onset conduct problems. Development and Psychopathology.Google Scholar
  31. Snyder, J., West, L., Stockemer, V., Givens, S., & Almquist-Parks, L. (1996). A social learning model of peer choice in the natural environment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 17, 215–237.Google Scholar
  32. Waldron, B., Sharry, J., Fitzpatrick, C., Behan, J., & Carr, A. (2002). Measuring children’s emotional and behavioural problems: Comparing the Child Behaviour Checklist and the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire. Irish Journal of Psychology, 23(1/2), 18–26.Google Scholar
  33. Warren, K., Schoppelrey, S., Moberg, D. P., & McDonald, M. (2005). A model of contagion through competition and aggressive behavior of elementary students. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 33, 283–292.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Child and Family Center and Department of PsychologyUniversity of OregonEugene
  2. 2.Center for Child and Family PolicyDuke UniversityDurham
  3. 3.Child and Family CenterUniversity of OregonEugene

Personalised recommendations