This article investigated how the development of deviant behavior in adolescence is influenced by the variability of deviant behavior in the peer group. Based on the social information-processing (SIP) model, we predicted that peer groups with a low variability of deviant behavior (providing normative information that is easy to process) should have a main effect on the development of adolescents’ deviant behavior over time, whereas peer groups in which deviant behavior is more variable (i.e., more difficult to process) should primarily impact the deviant behavior of initially nondeviant classroom members. These hypotheses were largely supported in a multilevel analysis using self-reports of deviant behavior in a sample of 16,891 adolescents in 1,308 classes assessed at two data waves about 1-year apart. The results demonstrate the advantages of studying cross-level interactions to clarify the impact of the peer environment on the development of deviant behavior in adolescence.
BauerD.CurranP. (2005). Probing interactions in fixed and multilevel regression: Inferential and graphical techniques. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 373–400. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4003_5
2.
BaumertJ.StanatP.WatermannR. (2006). Schulstruktur und die Entstehung differenzieller Lern- und Entwicklungsmilieus. In BaumertJ.StanatP.WatermannR. (Eds.), Herkunftsbedingte Disparitäten im Bildungswesen: differenzielle Bildungsprozesse und Probleme der Verteilungsgerechtigkeit. Vertiefende Analysen im Rahmen von PISA 2000 ( ed., pp. 95–188). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verl. für Sozialwiss.
3.
BowmanM. A.PrelowH. M.WeaverS. R. (2007). Parenting behaviors, association with deviant peers, and delinquency in African American adolescents: A mediated-moderation model. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 36, 517–527. doi:10.1007/s10964-006-9117-7
4.
BrookJ. S.WhitemanM.FinchS. J.CohenP. (1996). Young adult drug use and delinquency: Childhood antecedents and adolescent mediators. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 35, 1584–1592. doi:10.1097/00004583-199612000-00009
5.
BuschingR.KrahéB. (2015). The girls set the tone: Gendered classroom norms and the development of aggression in adolescence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41, 659–676. doi:10.1177/0146167215573212
6.
ChunH.MobleyM. (2010). Gender and grade-level comparisons in the structure of problem behaviors among adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 33, 197–207. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.03.010
7.
CrickN. R.DodgeK. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 74–101. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74
8.
CrosnoeR.EricksonK. G.DornbuschS. M. (2002). Protective functions of family relationships and school factors on the deviant behavior of adolescent boys and girls: Reducing the impact of risky friendships. Youth & Society, 33, 515–544. doi:10.1177/0044118X02033004002
9.
DishionT. J.TipsordJ. M. (2011). Peer contagion in child and adolescent social and emotional development. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 189–214. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100412
10.
DodgeK. A.DishionT. J.LansfordJ. E. (2006). Deviant peer influences in intervention and public policy for youth. Social policy report. Society for Research in Child Development, 20, 3–19.
11.
EverittB.SkrondalA. (2010). The Cambridge dictionary of statistics (4th ed.). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
12.
FarrellA. D.HenryD. B.MaysS. A.SchoenyM. E. (2011). Parents as moderators of the impact of school norms and peer influences on aggression in middle school students. Child Development, 82, 146–161. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01546.x
13.
FarrellA. D.KungE. M.WhiteK. S.ValoisR. F. (2000). The structure of self-reported aggression, drug use, and delinquent behaviors during early adolescence. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 29, 282–292. doi:10.1207/S15374424jccp2902_13
14.
FreyK. S.Higheagle StrongZ.OnyewuenyiA. C. (2016). Individual and class norms differentially predict proactive and reactive aggression: A functional analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology. doi:10.1037/edu0000118
15.
FurthmüllerP. (2015). Methodenbericht Dokumentation der Scientific-Use-Files: Erhebungsverfahren und Datensätze von 2005 bis 2009. München, Germany: Deutsches Jugendinstitut e.V.
16.
HaynieD. L. (2001). Delinquent peers revisited: Does network structure matter?American Journal of Sociology, 106, 1013–1057. doi:10.1086/320298
17.
HedgesL. V.HedbergE. C. (2007). Intraclass correlation values for planning group-randomized trials in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29, 60–87. doi:10.2307/30128045
18.
HeinzeH. J.ToroP. A.UrbergK. A. (2004). Antisocial behavior and affiliation with deviant peers. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33, 336–346. doi:10.1207/s15374424jccp3302_15
19.
HillJ. (2002). Biological, psychological and social processes in the conduct disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 43, 133–164. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00007
20.
HuesmannL. R. (1988). An information processing model for the development of aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 14, 13–24. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1988)14:1<13:: AID-AB2480140104>3.0.CO;2-J
21.
HuesmannL. R. (2012). The contagion of violence: The extent, the processes, and the outcomes. In PatelD. M. & TaylorR. M. (Eds), Social and economic costs of violence: Workshop summary (pp. 63–69). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
22.
IsaacsJ.VoetenM.SalmivalliC. (2013). Gender-specific or common classroom norms? Examining the contextual moderators of the risk for victimization. Social Development, 22, 555–579. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2012.00655.x
23.
JungJ.KrahéB.BondüR.EsserG.WyschkonA. (2016). Dynamic progression of antisocial behavior in childhood and adolescence: A three-wave longitudinal study from Germany. Applied Developmental Science, 22, 1–15. doi:10.1080/10888691.2016.1219228
24.
KellamS.LingX.MeriscaR.BrownC.IalongoN. (1998). The effect of the level of aggression in the first grade classroom on the course and malleability of aggressive behavior into middle school. Development and Psychopathology, 10, 165–185. doi:10.1017/S0954579498001564
25.
LacourseE.NaginD. S.TremblayR. E.VitaroF.ClaesM. (2003). Developmental trajectories of boys’ delinquent group membership and facilitation of violent behaviors during adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 15, 183–197. doi:10.1017/S0954579403000105
26.
LansfordJ. E.DodgeK. A.FontaineR. G.BatesJ. E.PettitG. S. (2014). Peer rejection, affiliation with deviant peers, delinquency, and risky sexual behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1742–1751. doi:10.1007/s10964-014-0175-y
27.
ManerJ. K.DeWallC. N.BaumeisterR. F.SchallerM. (2007). Does social exclusion motivate interpersonal reconnection? Resolving the “porcupine problem”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 42–55. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.42
28.
MathysC.HydeL. W.ShawD. S.BornM. (2013). Deviancy and normative training processes in experimental groups of delinquent and nondelinquent male adolescents. Aggressive Behavior, 39, 30–44. doi:10.1002/ab.21456
29.
MyersR. H. (1990). Classical and modern regression with applications (2nd ed.). Duxbury classic series. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury/Thomson Learning.
30.
PattersonG. R.ReidJ. B.DishionT. J. (1992). A social learning approach: IV. Antisocial boys. Eugene, OR: Castalia Pub Co.
31.
PetersonR. A.BrownS. P. (2005). On the use of beta coefficients in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 175–181. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.175
32.
RohlfH.KrahéB.BuschingR. (2016). The socializing effect of classroom aggression on the development of aggression and social rejection: A two-wave multilevel analysis. Journal of School Psychology, 57–72. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2016.05.002
33.
SalmivalliC.VoetenM. (2004). Connections between attitudes, group norms, and behaviour in bullying situations. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 28, 246–258. doi:10.1080/01650250344000488
34.
SnyderJ.DishionT. J.PattersonG. R. (1986). Determinants and consequences of associating with deviant peers during preadolescence and adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 6, 29–43. doi:10.1177/0272431686061003
35.
StEG-Konsortium. (2011). Studie zur Entwicklung von Ganztagsschulen (StEG). Datensatz der Längsschnitterhebungen von 2005, 2007 und 2009 (Version: 1). IQB - Institut zur Qualitätsentwicklung im Bildungswesen. doi:10.5159/IQB_StEG_v1.
36.
TillmannK.-J.Holler-NowitzkiB.HoltappelsH. G.MeierU.PoppU. (1999). Schülergewalt als Schulproblem. Verursachende Bedingungen, Erscheinungsformen und pädagogische Handlungsperspektiven. Weinheim/München, Germany: Juventa.
37.
VitaroF.BoivinM.TremblayR. E. (2007). Peers and violence: A two sided developmental perspective. In FlanneryD. J.VazsonyiA. T.WaldmanI. D. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression (pp. 361–387). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
YarnellL. M.PaschK. E.BrownH. S.PerryC. L.KomroK. A. (2014). Cross-gender social normative effects for violence in middle school: Do girls carry a social multiplier effect for at-risk boys?Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43, 1465–1485. doi:10.1007/s10964-014-0104-0
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
