Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Prevention Science
Published in: Prevention Science 4/2017

01-05-2017

Peer Influence, Peer Selection and Adolescent Alcohol Use: a Simulation Study Using a Dynamic Network Model of Friendship Ties and Alcohol Use

Authors: Cheng Wang, John R. Hipp, Carter T. Butts, Rupa Jose, Cynthia M. Lakon

Published in: Prevention Science | Issue 4/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

While studies suggest that peer influence can in some cases encourage adolescent substance use, recent work demonstrates that peer influence may be on average protective for cigarette smoking, raising questions about whether this effect occurs for other substance use behaviors. Herein, we focus on adolescent drinking, which may follow different social dynamics than smoking. We use a data-calibrated Stochastic Actor-Based (SAB) Model of adolescent friendship tie choice and drinking behavior to explore the impact of manipulating the size of peer influence and selection effects on drinking in two school-based networks. We first fit a SAB Model to data on friendship tie choice and adolescent drinking behavior within two large schools (n = 2178 and n = 976) over three time points using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health. We then alter the size of the peer influence and selection parameters with all other effects fixed at their estimated values and simulate the social systems forward 1000 times under varying conditions. Whereas peer selection appears to contribute to drinking behavior similarity among adolescents, there is no evidence that it leads to higher levels of drinking at the school level. A stronger peer influence effect lowers the overall level of drinking in both schools. There are many similarities in the patterning of findings between this study of drinking and previous work on smoking, suggesting that peer influence and selection may function similarly with respect to these substances.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
The objective function is defined as f(β, x) = ∑ k β k s ik (x), where β k is the log odds multiplier for the kth term in the function of network/behavior s ik (x) and x is the current network/behavioral state. A positive parameter in the objective function implies that the actor prefers options that increase the associated s value, while a negative parameter value implies the avoidance of such changes.
 
2
There are three possibilities for changes in adolescent drinking levels—increasing one unit (+1), maintaining the same level (0), or decreasing one unit (−1). In this study, we assume that the utility changes of initiating alcohol use (i.e., 0 vs. +1) and quitting alcohol use (i.e., 0 vs. −1) are the same and thus the peer influence effect in our models is symmetric. In ancillary analyses, we try to decompose the uptake and suppression processes by including separate initiation and quitting effects in the same model. However, model estimation difficulties emerge with unrealistically large parameter estimates and standard errors for the initiation and quitting effects (e.g., >1000). Examining the correlations among the parameter estimates suggests collinearity issues that make it impossible in practice to separate the two effects. Thus, it is not empirically feasible to decompose the suppression and initiation processes in the same model.
 
3
The goodness-of-fit for the model is assessed for each school by forward simulation of the model from wave 1 to wave 3 based on the estimated parameters 1000 times and comparing the resulting predicted networks with the actual observed data (see Fig. S1 and Fig. S2 in supplemental materials). Given that the observed network values fall within the range of predicted networks for the distribution of in-degree, out-degree, geodesic distances, and the triadic census, the model does a good job reproducing the network for each school (Lospinoso and Snijders 2011). Furthermore, the number of persons at each level of drinking at each time point in the observed network falls within the range of the simulated networks, and the number of transitions of drinking behavior (i.e., the number of persons beginning drinking and stopping drinking) falls within the range of the predicted networks.
 
Literature
Adams, J., & Schaefer, D. R. (2016). How initial prevalence moderates network-based smoking change: Estimating contextual effects with stochastic actor oriented models. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 57, 22–38.CrossRefPubMed
Bailey, S. L. (1992). Adolescents’ multisubstance use patterns: The role of heavy alcohol and cigarette use. American Journal of Public Health, 82, 1220–1224.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Barabási, A. L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286, 509–512.CrossRefPubMed
Bearman, P. S., Moody, J., & Stovel, K. (2004). Chains of affection: The structure of adolescent romantic and sexual networks. American Journal of Sociology, 110, 44–91.CrossRef
Burk, W. J., van der Vorst, H., Kerr, M., & Sattin, H. (2012). Alcohol intoxication frequency and friendship dynamics: Selection and socialization in early, mid- and late adolescent peer networks. Journal of Studies on Alcohol & Drugs, 73, 89–98.CrossRef
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2007). The spread of obesity in a large social network over 32 years. The New England Journal of Medicine, 357, 370–379.CrossRefPubMed
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2008). The collective dynamics of smoking in a large social network. The New England Journal of Medicine, 358, 2249–2258.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
de Solla Price, D. J. (1976). A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 27, 292–306.CrossRef
Dee, T. S. (1999). The complementarity of teen smoking and drinking. Journal of Health Economics, 18, 769–793.CrossRefPubMed
Dishion, T. J., McCord, J., & Poulin, F. (1999). When interventions harm: Peer groups and problem behavior. American Psychologist, 54, 755–764.CrossRefPubMed
Doreian, P. (1989). Network autocorrelation models: Problems and prospects. In D. A. Griffith (Ed.), Spatial statistics: Past, present, future (pp. 369–389). Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Document Services.
Ellickson, P. L., & Hays, R. D. (1991). Antecedents of drinking among young adolescents with different alcohol use histories. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52, 398–408.CrossRefPubMed
Ennett, S. T., Bauman, K. E., Hussong, A., Faris, R., Foshee, V. A., Cai, L., & DuRant, R. H. (2006). The peer context of adolescent substance use: Findings from social network analysis. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 16, 159–186.CrossRef
Fowler, J. H., & Christakis, N. A. (2008). The dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: Longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham heart study. British Medical Journal, 337, a2338.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Giletta, M., Scholte, R. H., Prinstein, M. J., Engels, R. C., Rabaglietti, E., & Burk, W. J. (2012). Friendship context matters: Examining the domain specificity of alcohol and depression socialization among adolescents. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 40, 1027–1043.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Hipp, J. R., Wang, C., Butts, C. T., Jose, R., & Lakon, C. M. (2015). Research note: The consequences of different methods for handling missing network data in stochastic actor based models. Social Networks, 41, 56–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Jackson, J., Henriksen, L., & Foshee, V. A. (1998). The authoritative parenting index: Predicting health risk behaviors among children and adolescents. Health Education & Behavior, 25, 319–337.CrossRef
Kandel, D. B., & Andrews, K. (1987). Processes of adolescent socialization by parents and peers. International Journal of the Addictions, 22, 319–342.CrossRefPubMed
Kandel, D. B., & Logan, J. A. (1984). Patterns of drug use from adolescence to young adulthood: Periods of risk for initiation, continued use, and discontinuation. American Journal of Public Health, 74, 660–666.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Knecht, A. B., Burk, W. J., Weesie, J., & Steglich, C. E. G. (2010). Friendship and alcohol use in early adolescence: A multilevel social network approach. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 475–487.CrossRef
Lakon, C. M., Hipp, J. R., Wang, C., Butts, C. T., & Jose, R. (2015). Simulating dynamic network models and adolescent smoking: The impact of varying peer influence and peer selection. American Journal of Public Health, 105, 2438–2448.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Lakon, C. M., Wang, C., Butts, C. T., Jose, R., Timberlake, D. S., & Hipp, J. R. (2014). A dynamic model of adolescent friendship networks, parental influences, and smoking. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 44, 1767–1786.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Mathys, C., Burk, W. J., & Cillessen, A. H. N. (2013). Popularity as moderator of peer selection and socialization of adolescent alcohol, marijuana, and tobacco use. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23, 513–523.CrossRef
Mercken, L., Candel, M., Willems, P., & De Vries, H. (2007). Disentangling social selection and social influence effects on adolescent smoking: The importance of reciprocity in friendships. Addiction, 102, 1483–1492.CrossRefPubMed
Mercken, L., Steglich, C. E. G., Knibbe, R., & Vries, H. D. (2012). Dynamics of friendship networks and alcohol use in early and mid-adolescence. Journal of Studies on Alcohol & Drugs, 73, 99–110.CrossRef
Orlando, M., Tucker, J. S., Ellickson, P. L., & Klein, D. J. (2005). Concurrent use of alcohol and cigarettes from adolescence to young adulthood: An examination of developmental trajectories and outcomes. Substance Use & Misuse, 40, 1051–1069.CrossRef
Osgood, D. W., Ragan, D. T., Wallace, L., Gest, S. D., Feinberg, M. E., & Moody, J. (2013). Peers and the emergence of alcohol use: Influence and selection processes in adolescent friendship networks. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 23, 500–512.CrossRef
Pearson, M., Steglich, C. E. G., & Snijders, T. A. B. (2006). Homophily and assimilation among sport-active adolescent substance users. Connect, 27, 47–63.
Schaefer, D. R., Adams, J., & Haas, S. A. (2013). Social networks and smoking: Exploring the effects of peer influence and smoker popularity through simulations. Health Education & Behavior, 40, 24S–32S.CrossRef
Shoham, D. A., Tong, L., Lamberson, P. J., Auchincloss, A. H., Zhang, J., Dugas, L., Kaufman, J. S., Cooper, R. S., & Luke, A. (2012). An actor-based model of social network influence on adolescent body size, screen time, and playing sports. PloS One, 7, e39795.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Snijders, T. A. B. (2011). Network dynamics. In J. Scott & P. J. Carrington (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social network analysis (pp. 501–513). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Snijders, T. A. B., van de Bunt, G. G., & Steglich, C. E. G. (2010). Introduction to stochastic actor-based models for network dynamics. Social Networks, 32, 44–60.CrossRef
Steglich, C. E. G., Snijders, T. A. B., & Pearson, M. (2010). Dynamic networks and behavior: Separating selection from influence. Sociological Methodology, 40, 329–393.CrossRef
Urberg, K. A., Degirmencioglu, S. M., & Pilgram, C. (1997). Close friend and group influence on adolescent cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Developmental Psychology, 33, 834–844.CrossRefPubMed
Valente, T. W., Ritt-Olson, A., Stacy, A., Unger, J. B., Okamoto, J., & Sussman, S. (2007). Peer acceleration: Effects of a social network tailored substance abuse prevention program among high-risk adolescents. Addiction, 102, 1804–1815.CrossRefPubMed
Wang, C., Butts, C. T., Hipp, J. R., Jose, R., & Lakon, C. M. (2016a). Multiple imputation for missing edge data: A predictive evaluation method with application to add health. Social Networks, 45, 89–98.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Wang, C., Hachen, D. S., & Lizardo, O. (2013). The co-evolution of communication networks and drinking behaviors. AAAI Fall Symposium Series 2013, Social Networks & Social Contagion, 30–36.
Wang, C., Hipp, J. R., Butts, C. T., Jose, R., & Lakon, C. M. (2015). Alcohol use among adolescent youth: The role of friendship networks and family factors in a multi-school study. PloS One, 10, e0119965.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Wang, C., Hipp, J. R., Butts, C. T., Jose, R., & Lakon, C. M. (2016b). Coevolution of adolescent friendship networks and smoking and drinking behaviors with consideration of parental influence. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 30, 312–324.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Peer Influence, Peer Selection and Adolescent Alcohol Use: a Simulation Study Using a Dynamic Network Model of Friendship Ties and Alcohol Use
Authors
Cheng Wang
John R. Hipp
Carter T. Butts
Rupa Jose
Cynthia M. Lakon
Publication date
01-05-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Prevention Science / Issue 4/2017
Print ISSN: 1389-4986
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6695
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-017-0773-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Prevention Science 4/2017 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Posttraumatic Stress and Problem Drinking at the Transition Out of College

OriginalPaper

The Role of Norms in Marijuana Use Among American Indian Adolescents

OriginalPaper

Prototype Willingness Model Drinking Cognitions Mediate Personalized Normative Feedback Efficacy

OriginalPaper

Prospective Associations Between Peer Victimization and Dispositional Mindfulness in Early Adolescence

OriginalPaper

Preventing Adolescent Substance Use Through an Evidence-Based Program: Effects of the Italian Adaptation of Life Skills Training

OriginalPaper

Reducing Truancy and Fostering a Willingness to Attend School: Results from a Randomized Trial of a Police-School Partnership Program