Positive and Negative Peer Influence in Residential Care
The potential for negative peer influence has been well established in research, and there is a growing interest in how positive peer influence also impacts youth. No research, however, has concurrently examined positive and negative peer influence in the context of residential care. Clinical records for 886 residential care youth were used in a Hierarchical Linear Model analysis to examine the impact of negative and positive peer influence on naturally occurring patterns of serious problem behavior over time. Negative peer influence, where the majority of youth in a home manifested above the average number of serious behavior problems, occurred 13.7% of the time. Positive peer influence, where the majority of youth manifested no serious problem behaviors for the month, occurred 47.7% of the time. Overall, youth problem behavior improved over time. There were significantly lower rates of serious problem behavior in target youth during positive peer influence months. Conversely, there were significantly higher rates of serious problem behaviors in target youth during negative peer influence months. Negative peer influence had a relatively greater impact on target peers’ serious behavior problems than did positive peer influence. Caregiver experience significantly reduced the impact of negative peer influence, but did not significantly augment positive peer influence. Months where negative peer influence was combined with inexperienced caregivers produced the highest rates of serious problem behavior. Our results support the view that residential programs for troubled youth need to create circumstances that promote positive and control for negative peer influence.
KeywordsNegative peer influence Positive peer influence Residential care Incident data Hierarchical linear modeling
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The research protocol for this project was reviewed and approved in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional.
The research protocol for this project was reviewed and approved as exempt from obtaining consent by the Boys Town Social/Behavioral IRB following Federal guidelines, as it used deidentified archival data.
- Adams, R. E., Bukowski, W. M., & Bagwell, C. (2005). Stability of aggression during early adolescence as moderated by reciprocated friendship status and friend's aggression. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 29, 139–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250444000397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Boden, J. M., Sanders, J., Munford, R., Liebenberg, L., & McLeod, G. F. H. (2016). Paths to positive development: a model of outcomes in the New Zealand youth transitions study. Child Indicators Research, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12187-015-9341-3.
- Chamberlain, P., & Reid, J. B. (1987). Parent observation and report of child symptoms. Behavioral Assessment, 9, 97–109.Google Scholar
- Chamberlain, P., Price, J., Leve, L. D., Landsverk, J. A., Reid, J. B., & Laurent, H. (2008). Prevention of behavior problems for children in foster care: outcomes and mediation effects. Prevention Science, 9, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-007-0080-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Choukas-Bradley, S., Giletta, M., Cohen, G. L., & Prinstein, M. J. (2015). Peer influence, peer status, and prosocial behavior: an experimental investigation of peer socialization of adolescents' intentions to volunteer. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44, 2197–2210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0373-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- DeLay, D., Zhang, L., Hanish, L. D., Miller, C. F., Fabes, R. A., Martin, C. L., et al. (2016). Peer influence on academic performance: a social network analysis of social-emotional intervention effects. Prevention Science, 17, 903–913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0678-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dishion, T. J., & Tipsord, J. M. (2011). Peer contagion in child and adolescent social and emotional development. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100412.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Dishion, T. J., Dodge, K. A., & Lansford, J. E. (2006). Findings and recommendations: a blueprint to minimize deviant peer influence in youth interventions and programs. In K. A. Dodge, T. J. Dishion, & J. E. Lansford (Eds.), Deviant peer influences in programs for youth: problems and solutions (pp. 366–394). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Dodge, K. A., & Sherrill, M. R. (2006). Deviant peer group effects in youth mental health interventions. In K. A. Dodge, T. J. Dishion, & J. E. Lansford (Eds.), Deviant peer influences in programs for youth: problems and solutions (pp. 97–121). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Dodge, K. A., Dishion, T. J., & Lansford, J. E. (2006). Deviant peer influences in intervention and public policy for youth. Social Policy Report, 20, 3–19.Google Scholar
- Dozier, M., Kaufman, J., Kobak, R., O'Connor, T. G., Sagi-Schwartz, A., Scott, S., et al. (2014). Consensus statement on group care for children and adolescents: a statement of policy of the American Orthopsychiatric Association. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 84, 219–225. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ellis, W. E., & Zarbatany, L. (2007). Peer group status as a moderator of group influence on children's deviant, aggressive, and prosocial behavior. Child Development, 78, 1240–1254. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01063.x.
- Friman, P. C., Handwerk, M. L., Smith, G. L., Larzelere, R. E., Lucas, C. P., & Shaffer, D. M. (2000). External validity of conduct and oppositional defiant disorders determined by the NIMH diagnostic interview schedule for children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28, 277–286. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005148404980.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-005-3563-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Gottfredson, D. C., Gerstenblith, S. A., Soulé, D. A., Womer, S. C., & Lu, S. (2004). Do after school programs reduce delinquency? Prevention Science, 5, 253–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000045359.41696.02.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Larzelere, R. E. (1996). Inter-coder reliabilities and construct groupings for some important codes on the daily incident report (tech. Report no. 004–96). Boys Town: Father Flanagan's Boys' Home.Google Scholar
- Lochman, J. E., Dishion, T. J., Boxmeyer, C. L., Powell, N. P., & Qu, L. (2017). Variation in response to evidence-based group preventive intervention for disruptive behavior problems: a view from 938 coping power sessions. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 45, 1271–1284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-016-0252-7.
- Mason, M., Mennis, J., Way, T., & Campbell, L. F. (2015). Real-time readiness to quit and peer smoking within a text message intervention for adolescent smokers: modeling mechanisms of change. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 59, 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2015.07.009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Osgood, D. W., & Briddell, L. (2006). Peer effects in juvenile justice. In K. A. Dodge, T. J. Dishion, & J. E. Lansford (Eds.), Deviant peer influences in programs for youth: problems and solutions (pp. 141–161). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Osgood, D. W., Feinberg, M. E., Gest, S. D., Moody, J., Ragan, D. T., Spoth, R., & Redmond, C. (2013). Effects of PROSPER on the influence potential of prosocial versus antisocial youth in adolescent friendship networks. Journal of Adolescent Health, 53, 174–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.02.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Padilla-Walker, L. M., & Bean, R. A. (2009). Negative and positive peer influence: relations to positive and negative behaviors for African American, European American, and Hispanic adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 323–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.02.003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schofield, T. J., Conger, R. D., & Robins, R. W. (2015). Early adolescent substance use in Mexican origin families: peer selection, peer influence, and parental monitoring. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 157, 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2015.10.020.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Somers, C. L., Day, A. G., Chambers, M. M., Wendler, K. A., Culp, H. A., & Baroni, B. A. (2016). Adolescents in residential treatment: caregiver and peer predictors of risk behavior and academic performance. Current Psychology, 35, 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9371-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stoddard, S. A., & Pierce, J. (2016). Alcohol and marijuana use and intentions among adolescents: the role of the reasoned action approach and positive future orientation. Youth & Society, 1–22 https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118X16671610.
- Weaver, S. R., & Prelow, H. M. (2005). A mediated-moderation model of maternal parenting style, association with deviant peers, and problem behaviors in urban African American and European American adolescents. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 14, 343–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-005-6847-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar