Prevention Science

, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 842–849 | Cite as

Analogue Study of Peer Influence on Risk-Taking Behavior in Older Adolescents

  • Elizabeth K. Reynolds
  • Laura MacPherson
  • Sarah Schwartz
  • Nathan A. Fox
  • C. W. Lejuez
Article

Abstract

This experimental study aimed to examine whether adolescents act in a riskier manner in the presence of peers and whether peer presence alone influences risk behavior or if a direct influence process is necessary. Utilizing a behavioral task assessing risk-taking, 183 older adolescents (18–20 year olds) came to the laboratory alone once and then were randomized to one of three conditions as follows: alone, peers present, and peers encouraging. An interaction was found such that at baseline, there were no significant differences between the three conditions, but at the experimental session, there was a significant increase in risk task scores particularly for the encouraging condition. These findings challenge proposed models of the interaction between peer influence and risk taking by providing evidence that adolescents take more risks when being encouraged by peers, but that the presence of peers on its own does not lead to more risks than when completing the task alone.

Keywords

Peer influence Risk-taking Older adolescent Behavioral task 

References

  1. Aklin, W. M., Lejuez, C. W., Zvolensky, M. J., Kahler, C. W., & Gwadz, M. (2005). Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking propensity with inner-city adolescents. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 43, 215–228. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2003.12.007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, J. P., Porter, M. R., & McFarland, C. (2006). Leaders and followers in adolescent close friendships: Susceptibility to peer influence as a predictor of risky behavior, friendship instability, and depression. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 155–172. doi:10.1017/S0954579406060093.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Borsari, B., & Carey, K. B. (2001). Peer influence on college drinking: A review of the research. Journal of Substance Abuse, 13, 391–424. doi:10.1016/S0899-3289(01)00098-0.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP). (2001). National school-based Youth Risk Behavior Survey. Public-use data documentation. Atlanta, GA: Author.Google Scholar
  5. Chein, J., Albert, D., O’Brien, L., Uckert, K., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain's reward circuitry. Developmental Science, 14, F1–F10. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01035.x.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Deaux, K., & Major, B. (1987). Putting gender into context: An interactive model of gender-related behavior. Psychological Review, 94, 369–389. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dishion, T. J., Andrews, D. W., & Crosby, L. (1995). Antisocial boys and their friends in early adolescence: Relationship characteristics, quality, and interactional process. Child Development, 66, 139–151. doi:10.2307/1131196.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Gardner, M., & Steinberg, L. (2005). Peer influence on risk-taking, risk preference, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: An experimental study. Developmental Psychology, 41, 625–635. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.4.625.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Harrison, J. D., Young, J. M., Butow, P., Salkeld, G., & Soloman, M. J. (2005). Is it worth the risk? A systematic review of instruments that measure risk propensity for use in the health setting. Social Science & Medicine, 60, 1385–1396. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.07.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Jacquin, K. M., Harrison, M. L., & Alford, S. M. (2006). Gender and peer presence influence responses to aggressive provocation. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 24, 29–44. Retrieved from http://www.forensicpsychology.org/journal.htm.Google Scholar
  12. Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E. (2005). Monitoring the future: National survey results on drug use, 1975-2004. Volume I: Secondary school students. NIH Publication 05-5727. Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.Google Scholar
  13. Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Daughters, S. B., Zvolensky, M. J., Kahler, C. W., & Gwadz, M. (2007). Reliability and validity of the youth version of the balloon analogue risk task (BART-Y) in the assessment of risk-taking behavior among inner-city adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 36, 106–111. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3601_11.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Jones, H. A., Richards, J. R., Strong, D. R., Kahler, C. W., & Read, J. P. (2003). The balloon analogue risk task differentiates smokers and nonsmokers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11, 26–33. doi:10.1037//1064-1297.11.1.26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Lejuez, C. W., Read, J. P., Kahler, C. W., Richards, J. B., Ramsey, S. E., Stuart, G. L., Strong, D. R., & Brown, R. A. (2002). Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk-taking: The balloon analogue risk task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 8, 75–84. doi:10.1037//1076-898X.8.2.75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Nawa, N. E., Nelson, E. E., Pine, D. S., & Ernst, M. (2008). Do you make a difference? Social context in a betting task. Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, 3, 367–376. doi:10.1093/scan/nsn032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Plante, T. G. (2010). Contemporary Clinical Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.Google Scholar
  18. Prinstein, M. J., & Dodge, K. A. (2008). Current issues in peer influence research. In M. J. Prinstein & K. A. Dodge (Eds.), Understanding peer influence in children and adolescents (pp. 3–13). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  19. Rabow, J., & Duncan-Schill, M. (1995). Drinking among college students. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 40, 52–64. Retrieved from http://vlex.com/source/journal-alcohol-drug-education-3082.Google Scholar
  20. Regan, M.A., & Mistopoulos, E. (2003). Understanding passenger influences on driver behaviour: Implications for road safety and recommendations for countermeasure development. Victoria, Australia: Accident Research Center, Monash University. Report #180.Google Scholar
  21. Steinberg, L. (2007). Risk taking in adolescence: New perspectives from brain and behavioral science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 55–59. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00475.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Steinberg, L. (2008). A social neuroscience perspective on adolescent risk-taking. Developmental Review, 28, 78–106. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2007.08.002.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Steinberg, L. (2009). Adolescent development and juvenile justice. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5, 47–73. doi:10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.032408.153603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.Google Scholar
  25. Wood, M. D., Read, J., Palfai, T., & Stevenson, J. F. (2001). Social influence processes and college student drinking: The mediation role of alcohol outcome expectancies. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62, 32–43. Retrieved from http://www.jsad.com/.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Prevention Research 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elizabeth K. Reynolds
    • 1
    • 4
  • Laura MacPherson
    • 1
  • Sarah Schwartz
    • 1
    • 3
  • Nathan A. Fox
    • 2
  • C. W. Lejuez
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Addictions, Personality, and Emotion Research and the Department of PsychologyUniversity of MarylandBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of Human DevelopmentUniversity of MarylandBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.George Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Division of Child and Adolescent PsychiatryJohns Hopkins School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations