Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-31T17:31:20.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Peer effects on self-regulation in adolescence depend on the nature and quality of the peer interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2017

Kevin M. King ,
Katie A. McLaughlin Open the ORCID record for Katie A. McLaughlin [Opens in a new window] ,
Jennifer Silk  and
Kathryn C. Monahan
Kevin M. King*
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Katie A. McLaughlin
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Jennifer Silk
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Kathryn C. Monahan
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
*
Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Kevin M. King, Department of Psychology, University of Washington, Box 351525, Seattle, WA 98195-1525; E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Adolescence is a critical period for the development of self-regulation, and peer interactions are thought to strongly influence regulation ability. Simple exposure to peers has been found to alter decisions about risky behaviors and increase sensitivity to rewards. The link between peer exposure and self-regulation is likely to vary as a function of the type and quality of peer interaction (e.g., rejection or acceptance). Little is known about how the nature of interactions with peers influences different dimensions of self-regulation. We examined how randomization to acceptance or rejection by online “virtual” peers influenced multiple dimensions of self-regulation in a multisite community sample of 273 adolescents aged 16–17 years. Compared to a neutral condition, exposure to peers produced increases in cold cognitive control, but decreased hot cognitive control. Relative to peer acceptance, peer rejection reduced distress tolerance and increased sensitivity to losses. These findings suggest that different dimensions of adolescent self-regulation are influenced by the nature of the peer context: basic cognitive functions are altered by mere exposure to peers, whereas more complex decision making and emotion regulation processes are influenced primarily by the quality of that exposure.

Type
Regular Articles
Information
Development and Psychopathology , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , October 2018 , pp. 1389 - 1401
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This research was supported by a Young Scholars Award (to K.M.K., L.A.M., and K.C.M.) from the Klaus J. Jacobs Foundation. Dr. McLaughlin's work was partially supported by National Institute of Mental Health Grant K01-MH092526. A preliminary version of these analyses was presented at the Society for Research on Adolescence Biennial Meeting in Austin, Texas.

References

Albert, D., Chein, J. M., & Steinberg, L. (2013). The teenage brain: Peer influences on adolescent decision making. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 114–120. doi:10.1177/0963721412471347Google Scholar
Barkley-Levenson, E. E., Van Leijenhorst, L., & Galván, A. (2013). Behavioral and neural correlates of loss aversion and risk avoidance in adolescents and adults. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 72–83. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2012.09.007Google Scholar
Barnes, G. M., Hoffman, J. H., Welte, J. W., Farrell, M. P., & Dintcheff, B. A. (2007). Adolescents’ time use: Effects on substance use, delinquency and sexual activity. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9075-0Google Scholar
Bauman, K., & Ennett, S. (1996). On the importance of peer influence for adolescent drug use: Commonly neglected considerations. Addiction, 91, 185–198.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Twenge, J. M. (2005). Social exclusion impairs self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 589–604. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.4.589Google Scholar
Cairns, R. B., Leung, M., Buchanan, L., & Cairns, B. D. (1995). Friendships and social networks in childhood and adolescence: Fluidity, reliability, and interrelations. Child Development, 66, 1330–1345. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1995.tb00938.xGoogle Scholar
Chein, J. M., 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, 1–10. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01035.xGoogle Scholar
Coskunpinar, A., Dir, A. L., & Cyders, M. A. (2013). Multidimensionality in impulsivity and alcohol use: A meta-analysis using the UPPS model of impulsivity. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 37, 1441–1450. doi:10.1111/acer.12131Google Scholar
Cyders, M. A., & Coskunpinar, A. (2011). Measurement of constructs using self-report and behavioral lab tasks: Is there overlap in nomothetic span and construct representation for impulsivity? Clinical Psychology Review, 31, 965–982. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2011.06.001Google Scholar
Cyders, M. A., & Coskunpinar, A. (2012). The relationship between self-report and lab task conceptualizations of impulsivity. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 121–124. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.11.005Google Scholar
Davidson, M. C., Amso, D., Anderson, L. C., & Diamond, A. (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: Evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2037–2078. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.02.006Google Scholar
DeWall, C., Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. (2008). Satiated with belongingness? Effects of acceptance, rejection, and task framing on self-regulatory performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1367–1382. doi:10.1037/a0012632.SatiatedGoogle 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. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100412Google Scholar
Dodge, K. A., Lansford, J. E., Burks, V. S., Bates, J. E., Pettit, G. S., Fontaine, R., & Price, J. M. (2003). Peer rejection and social information-processing factors in the development of aggressive behavior problems in children. Child Development, 74, 374–393. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.7402004Google Scholar
Duckworth, A. L., & Kern, M. L. (2011). A meta-analysis of the convergent validity of self-control measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 45, 259–268. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2011.02.004Google Scholar
Eisenberg, N., Sadovsky, A., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Losoya, S. H., Valiente, C., … Shepard, S. A. (2005). The relations of problem behavior status to children's negative emotionality, effortful control, and impulsivity: Concurrent relations and prediction of change. Developmental Psychology, 41, 193–211. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.1.193Google Scholar
Erdley, C., & Nangle, D. (2001). Children's friendship experiences and psychological adjustment: Theory and research. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 91, 5–24.Google Scholar
Etkin, A., Egner, T., Peraza, D., Kandel, E., & Hirsch, J. (2006). Resolving emotional conflict: A role for the rostral anterior cingulate cortex in modulating activity in the amygdala. Neuron, 21, 871–872.Google Scholar
Fabes, R. A., Eisenberg, N., Jones, S., Smith, M., Guthrie, I., Poulin, R., … Friedman, J. (1999). Regulation, emotionality, and preschoolers’ socially competent peer interactions. Child Development, 70, 432–442. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00031Google Scholar
Figner, B., Mackinlay, R. J., Wilkening, F., & Weber, E. U. (2009). Affective and deliberative processes in risky choice: Age differences in risk taking in the Columbia Card Task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 709–730. doi:10.1037/a0014983Google Scholar
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:10.1037/0012-1649.41.4.625Google Scholar
Geier, C. F., Terwilliger, R., Teslovich, T., Velanova, K., & Luna, B. (2010). Immaturities in reward processing and its influence on inhibitory control in adolescence. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 1613–1629. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp225Google Scholar
Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 549–576.Google Scholar
Hawker, D. S. J., & Boulton, M. J. (2000). Twenty years’ research on peer victimization and psychosocial maladjustment: A meta-analytic review of cross-sectional studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 41, 441–455. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00629Google Scholar
Kim, J., & Cicchetti, D. (2010). Longitudinal pathways linking child maltreatment, emotion regulation, peer relations, and psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 51, 706–716. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02202.xGoogle Scholar
King, K. M., Patock-Peckham, J. A., Dager, A. D., Thimm, K., & Gates, J. R. (2014). On the mismeasurement of impulsivity: Trait, behavioral, and neural models in alcohol research among adolescents and young adults. Current Addiction Reports, 1, 19–32. doi:10.1007/s40429-013-0005-4Google Scholar
Kirby, K. N., & Marakovic, N. N. (1996). Delay-discounting probabilistic rewards: Rates decrease as amounts increase. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 100–104. doi:10.3758/BF03210748Google Scholar
Korkman, M., Kirk, U., & Kemp, S. (2007). NEPSY-II: Clinical and interpretive manual. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Kotchick, B. A., Shaffer, A., Miller, K. S., & Forehand, R. (2001). Adolescent sexual risk behavior: A multi-system perspective. Clinical Psychology Review, 21, 493–519. doi:10.1016/S0272-7358(99)00070-7Google Scholar
Krueger, R. F., Hicks, B. M., Patrick, C. J., Carlson, S. R., Iacono, W. G., & McGue, M. (2002). Etiologic connections among substance dependence, antisocial behavior and personality: Modeling the externalizing spectrum. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 111, 411–424. doi:10.1037//0021-843X.111.3.411Google Scholar
Larson, R. W. (2001). How U.S. children and adolescents spend time: What it does (and doesn't) tell us about their development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 160–164. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00139Google Scholar
Leyro, T., Zvolensky, M., & Bernstein, A. (2010). Distress tolerance and psychopathological symptoms and disorders: A review of the empirical literature among adults. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 576–600. doi:10.1037/a0019712Google Scholar
McLaughlin, K. A., Hatzenbuehler, M. L., & Hilt, L. M. (2009). Emotion dysregulation as a mechanism linking peer victimization to internalizing symptoms in adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 894–904. doi:10.1037/a0015760Google Scholar
Moffitt, T. E., Arseneault, L., Belsky, D., Dickson, N., Hancox, R. J., Harrington, H., … Caspi, A. (2011). A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108, 2693–2698. doi:10.1073/pnas.1010076108Google Scholar
Monahan, K., Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2009). Affiliation with antisocial peers, susceptibility to peer influence, and antisocial behavior during the transition to adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1520–1530.Google Scholar
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus. Statistical analysis with latent variables. Version 6.1 [Computer software]. Los Angeles: Author.Google Scholar
Myers, M. G., Doran, N. M., & Brown, S. A. (2007). Is cigarette smoking related to alcohol use during the 8 years following treatment for adolescent alcohol and other drug abuse? Alcohol and Alcoholism, 42, 226–233. doi:10.1093/alcalc/agm025Google Scholar
Nesdale, D., & Lambert, A. (2008). Effects of experimentally induced peer-group rejection on children's risk-taking behaviour. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5, 19–38. doi:10.1080/17405620600717581Google Scholar
O'Brien, L., Albert, D., Chein, J. M., & Steinberg, L. (2011). Adolescents prefer more immediate rewards when in the presence of their peers. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 747–753. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00738.xGoogle Scholar
Parker, J. G., & Asher, S. P. (1987). Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are low-accepted children at risk? Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357–389.Google Scholar
Peake, S. J., Dishion, T. J., Stormshak, E. A., Moore, W. E., & Pfeifer, J. H. (2013). Risk-taking and social exclusion in adolescence: Neural mechanisms underlying peer influences on decision-making. NeuroImage, 82, 23–34. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.061Google Scholar
Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2000). Developing mechanisms of self-regulation. Development and Psychopathology, 12, 427–441. doi:10.1017/S0954579400003096Google Scholar
Psychology Software Tools. (2012). E-Prime 2.0 [Computer software]. Pittsburgh, PA: Author.Google Scholar
Richards, A., French, C. C., Johnson, W., Naparstek, J., & Williams, J. (1992). Effects of mood manipulation and anxiety on performance of an emotional Stroop task. British Journal of Psychology, 83, 479–491. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1992.tb02454.xGoogle Scholar
Salthouse, T. A. (2014). Why are there different age relations in cross-sectional and longitudinal comparisons of cognitive functioning? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23, 252–256. doi:10.1177/0963721414535212Google Scholar
Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147.Google Scholar
Schonberg, T., Fox, C. R., & Poldrack, R. A. (2011). Mind the gap: Bridging economic and naturalistic risk-taking with cognitive neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 11–19. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.10.002Google Scholar
Sharma, L., Markon, K. E., & Clark, L. A. (2014). Toward a theory of distinct types of “impulsive” behaviors: A meta-analysis of self-report and behavioral measures. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 374–408. doi:10.1037/a0034418Google Scholar
Silk, J. S., Siegle, G. J., Lee, K. H., Nelson, E. E., Stroud, L. R., & Dahl, R. E. (2014). Increased neural response to peer rejection associated with adolescent depression and pubertal development. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9, 1798–1807. doi:10.1093/scan/nst175Google Scholar
Silk, J. S., Stroud, L. R., Siegle, G. J., Dahl, R. E., Lee, K. H., & Nelson, E. E. (2012). Peer acceptance and rejection through the eyes of youth: Pupillary, eyetracking and ecological data from the chatroom interact task. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 7, 93–105. doi:10.1093/scan/nsr044Google Scholar
Smith, G. T., Fischer, S., Cyders, M. A., Annus, A. M., Spillane, N. S., & McCarthy, D. M. (2007). On the validity and utility of discriminating among impulsivity-like traits. Assessment, 14, 155–70. doi:10.1177/1073191106295527Google Scholar
Smith, G. T., Guller, L., & Zapolski, T. C. B. (2013). A comparison of two models of urgency: Urgency predicts both rash action and depression in youth. Clinical Psychological Science, 1, 266–275. doi:10.1177/2167702612470647Google Scholar
Somerville, L. H. (2013). Special issue on the teenage brain: Sensitivity to social evaluation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 121–127. doi:10.1177/0963721413476512Google Scholar
Somerville, L. H., Hare, T., & Casey, B. J. (2011). Frontostriatal maturation predicts cognitive control failure to appetitive cues in adolescents. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23, 2123–2134. doi:10.1162/jocn.2010.21572Google Scholar
Somerville, L. H., Jones, R. M., & Casey, B. J. (2010). A time of change: Behavioral and neural correlates of adolescent sensitivity to appetitive and aversive environmental cues. Brain and Cognition, 72, 124–133. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2009.07.003Google Scholar
Steinberg, L., & Monahan, K. (2007). Age differences in resistance to peer influence. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1531–1541.Google Scholar
Stenseng, F., Belsky, J., Skalicka, V., & Wichstrøm, L. (2015). Social exclusion predicts impaired self-regulation: A 2-year longitudinal panel study including the transition from preschool to school. Journal of Personality, 83, 212–220. doi:10.1111/jopy.12096Google Scholar
Tom, S. M., Fox, C. R., Trepel, C., & Poldrack, R. A. (2007). The neural basis of loss aversion in decision making under risk. Science, 315, 515–518. doi:10.1126/science.1134239Google Scholar
Tombaugh, T. N. (2006). A comprehensive review of the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21, 53–76. doi:10.1016/j.acn.2005.07.006Google Scholar
Waikar, S. V., & Craske, M. G. (1997). Cognitive correlates of anxious and depressive symptomatology: An examination of the helplessness/hopelessness model. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 11, 1–16. doi:10.1016/S0887-6185(96)00031-XGoogle Scholar
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. doi:10.1037/t03592-000Google Scholar
Watson, D., & Walker, L. M. (1996). The long-term stability and predictive validity of trait measures of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 567–577.Google Scholar
Weafer, J., Baggott, M. J., & de Wit, H. (2013). Test-retest reliability of behavioral measures of impulsive choice, impulsive action, and inattention. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 21, 475–481. doi:10.1037/a0033659Google Scholar
Weigard, A., Chein, J. M., Albert, D., Smith, A., & Steinberg, L. (2014). Effects of anonymous peer observation on adolescents’ preference for immediate rewards. Developmental Science, 17, 71–78. doi:10.1111/desc.12099Google Scholar
Wöstmann, N. M., Aichert, D. S., Costa, A., Rubia, K., Möller, H.-J., & Ettinger, U. (2013). Reliability and plasticity of response inhibition and interference control. Brain and Cognition, 81, 82–94. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2012.09.010Google Scholar
Zelazo, P. D., & Carlson, S. M. (2012). Hot and cool executive function in childhood and adolescence: Development and plasticity. Child Development Perspectives, 6, 354–360. doi:10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00246.xGoogle Scholar