Mediation of the link between Popularity and Peer Influence Susceptibility (SRA)

Abstract

Peer influence processes shape adolescents’ attitudes and behaviors (Sandstrom, 2011). Peer status plays an important role in this process. On one hand, adolescents are more influenced by high-status than low-status peers (Cohen & Prinstein, 2006). On the other hand, adolescents’ own status plays a role, although it less clear whether adolescents who are themselves high or low in status are more influenced by peers. Therefore, the first goal of this study was to examine the association between adolescents’ own status and their susceptibility to peer influence. Furthermore, the reasons for possible associations between adolescents’ peer status and their peer influence susceptibility remain unknown. Different characteristics of the influencee may mediate these associations (Brechwald & Prinstein, 2011). Previous research suggests that adolescents who are socially dissatisfied (e.g., high levels of social distress) are more susceptible to peer influence (Dishion & Tipsord, 2011). Influencee characteristics such as social dissatisfaction may explain why low-status adolescents would be more susceptible to peer influence. In contrast, influencee characteristics such as social dominance or social competence may explain why high-status adolescents would be less susceptible to peer influence. The second goal of this study was to examine possible mediators of the association between adolescent peer status (popularity) and conformity to peers. Participants were 809 12- to 15-year-old Dutch adolescents (Mage = 13.77; SD = 0.96; 50.6% boys) who completed computerized sociometric questions, a quiz, and self-report measures (Table 1). The computerized quiz included 30 questions with the answers apparently given by other adolescents presented unobtrusively. An important distinction was made between opinion questions and more factual knowledge questions. We hypothesized that conformity would be higher for opinion questions than for knowledge questions. For each question, the apparent average answer from peers was presented on the computer screen together with a short description of the peer group. Table 1 shows the results of the mediation model (Figure 1). For opinion questions, the negative association between influencee popularity and conformity was mediated by self-reported loneliness (Sobel’s t = -2.59, p < .01) and bullying (t = -3.25, p < .01), and peer-reported bullying (t = -3.05, p < .01), name calling (t = -4.31, p < .001), humor (t = -5.22, p < .001), physical aggression (t = -4.23, p < .001), exclusion (t = -2.97, p < .01), and proactive aggression (t = -2.73, p < .01). More loneliness and less aggression, antisocial behavior, and humor predicted more conformity. For knowledge questions, mediation of the negative association between influencee popularity and peer conformity was found for peer-reported humor (t = -3.91, p < .001). Again, more humor predicted less conformity. Together, the results indicate that: (1) high-status (popular) adolescents conform less than low-status (unpopular) adolescents; (2) heterogeneous reasons for this association: while loneliness of unpopular adolescents may be a reason to conform more, manipulative aggression or a sense of humor (as an indicator of social competence) may be reasons why popular adolescents conform less. This heterogeneity in causal pathways should be addressed in further research.