“the Influence Of Peer And Social Pressure On Student Loan Borrowing” – Adolescence is a period of life during which peers play a key role in decision-making. The narrative of social influence during adolescence often revolves around risky and maladaptive choices such as driving under the influence and using illegal substances (Steinberg, 2005). However, research has also shown that social influence can lead to increased prosocial behavior (Van Hoorn et al., 2017) and reduced risk taking (Braams et al., 2019). While many studies support the notion that adolescents are more sensitive to peer influence than children or adults, the developmental processes underlying this sensitivity remain poorly understood. We argue that one important reason for this lack of understanding is the absence of well-formulated models. To take a first step toward formal models of social influence during adolescence, we first identify three prominent verbal models of social influence in the literature: (1) social motivation, (2) reward sensitivity, and (3) distraction. We then illustrate how these can be translated into formal models and how these formal models can inform experimental design and help identify developmental processes. Finally, by applying our formal models to existing datasets, we demonstrate the utility of the formalization by synthesizing different studies with seemingly disparate results. We conclude with a discussion of how formal modeling can be used to better examine the development of peer influence in adolescence.
Peers influence almost all aspects of adolescents’ lives, from the more trivial, such as taste in music and dress, to the more serious, such as illegal drug use or unprotected sex (Steinberg, 2008). These latter, riskier choices can have lifelong consequences for the adolescent and bring significant costs to society. It is empirically well established that the presence of peers influences risky behavior in adolescence (Gardner and Steinberg, 2005; Chein et al., 2011; Pfeifer et al., 2011; Smith et al., 2014), but the underlying developmental processes remain poorly understood. However, understanding these processes is important for at least two reasons. First, empowering adolescents to become more competent decision-makers will be more effective if we succeed in tailoring interventions to their developmental capabilities. Second, we can only identify these differences if we can link adolescent neuronal and cognitive development to adolescent behavior in different social contexts.
“the Influence Of Peer And Social Pressure On Student Loan Borrowing”
Here, we argue that this link cannot be established without formal models of adolescent peer influence. In this article, we therefore seek to take the first steps toward a quantitative and testable framework of adolescent social influence. Adolescence is marked by several developmental changes that offer diverse biological explanations for social influence on adolescent decision-making. We refer to the current theoretical perspectives of these changes as “verbal models”. Verbal models differ from formal models in that they do not make quantitative predictions. To develop formal models that make quantitative predictions, we first review existing verbal models and related empirical findings on adolescent social influence with a focus on risky decision making. We identify three verbal models of social influence that may be subject to developmental change; these are then formalized by embedding them in the theory of expected utility. We further show that our formal models can be recovered reliably and can therefore be used to compare hypotheses using quantitative model comparison. Finally, we fit these models to existing data and reveal previously overlooked patterns of peer influence. We conclude by discussing how the specificity provided by this formal approach contributes to a deeper understanding of the developmental processes behind social influence.
Ways Social Media Affects Teen Mental Health
In the existing literature, we identify three main groups of verbal models, named as follows: (i) the social motivation model, (ii) the reward sensitivity model, and (iii) the distraction model. These three models focus on two distinct neurodevelopmental explanations for altered decision-making during adolescence. Verbal models of social motivation emphasize the importance of the developing “social brain”. The other two verbal models (sensitivity to reward and distraction) both emphasize the relatively slow maturation of cognitive control systems. Previous work that falls within the family of verbal reward sensitivity models often refers to them as “dual system” models because they also emphasize the relatively rapid maturation of reward-processing brain regions and explain adolescent behavior with a maturational imbalance between reward-processing and cognitive-control brain regions (Casey et al., 2008; Steinberg, 2008; Geier et al., 2010; Shulman et al., 2016). In contrast, the distraction model has a single focus on the development of cognitive control. Our subsequent review of existing experimental evidence shows that all three of these families of verbal models are currently equally well supported in the literature, although each model provides a different explanation for similar observations.
The first verbal model we consider states that adolescents have increased social motivation. Exhibiting risky behavior or conforming to peer group behavior are seen as ways to achieve these social goals. In other words, social motivation models posit that situations occur during adolescence in which high social value is attributed to risky behavior (Crone and Dahl, 2012; Ruff and Fehr, 2014), which is independent of the non-social value of the outcome. (eg money).
The verbal reward sensitivity model is based on research suggesting that adolescence is a time when the rapid maturation of the brain’s reward-processing systems coincides with the relatively slow maturation of cognitive control systems. According to the reward sensitivity model, a biological imbalance between these two systems leads to risky adolescent decision-making (Casey et al., 2008; Ernst et al., 2015; Shulman et al., 2016). We will not discuss here the validity debate (Pfeifer and Allen, 2016) or the different variants of these models (Casey et al., 2008; Steinberg, 2008; Larsen and Luna, 2018). Instead, we focus on the element proposed to be most relevant to understanding developmental changes in peer influence: sensitivity to reward. Reward sensitivity states that social influence has such dramatic effects on adolescent risk-taking because the social context “can sensitize the incentive processing system to respond to cues signaling potential rewards for risky behavior” (Chein et al., 2011, p. 2 ). . Chein et al. (2011) demonstrated that, while observed during a risk-taking task, brain regions related to reward processing were more active in adolescents than in adults. This has been interpreted as evidence for the reward sensitivity model, as it suggests that in adolescents the social context alone leads to changes in reward processing in general.
The relatively slow maturation of cognitive control areas of the brain forms the basis of a third verbal model, which we call the “distraction model.” Here, mature disequilibrium and arousal are not only specifically associated with altered reward representations, but more generally with poor self-control and declining cognitive abilities in emotionally salient situations (Dumontheil, 2016). This lack of self-control can lead adolescents to exhibit more erratic or distracted behavior in social settings compared to solitary settings. The dispersion model assumes no changes in value computation, but rather suggests that changes in behavior are due to stochasticity in the decision-making process.
Pdf) The Influence Of Social Influence And Peer Influence On Intention To Purchase In E Commerce
Models of social motivation, reward sensitivity, and distraction do not assume mutually exclusive processes. Although it is likely that the defining processes highlighted in each of these models simultaneously influence peer influence, it is important to examine which are most relevant in a particular context.
This is crucial because different models provide different fulcrums for interventions. For example: if adolescent risk-taking is subject to social motivation, it may be fruitful to provide other, less risky means of gaining social status, for example through meaningful role interventions (Ellis et al., 2016, see also: Yeager et al. ., 2018). Reward sensitivity in adolescents suggests that it is useful to prohibit adolescents from congregating in risky situations. For example, many states in the United States and Canada prohibit teenage drivers from carrying other teenage passengers. Distraction suggests that mindfulness training and meditation have good prospects for increasing desirable behaviors in adolescence (Kuyken et al., 2013). These implications for interventions underscore the importance of understanding the most important determinants of adolescent behavior in a given context. Therefore, we examine experimental work that has manipulated aspects of social contexts with respect to three verbal models of adolescent social influence: (i) social motivation, (ii) reward sensitivity, and (iii) distraction.
Despite the complexity of social exchange, studies investigating social influence can be roughly divided into two types of situations: situations in which the participant observes others and situations in which the participant is observed. In light of this distinction, we review experimental studies on the influence of peers on adolescent risky decision-making.
When you are not sure what to do, observing the behavior of others can help you make decisions. Cash lotteries are often used as experimental settings with uncertain prospects to examine the effect of observing the behavior of others. In such experiments, participants observe others’ previous decisions (Blankenstein et al., 2016; Reiter et al., 2019) or receive explicit advice (Haddad et al., 2014) while making private decisions. These studies suggest that the impact of social information is greatest in early to middle adolescence and then declines with age. Notably, in a recent study, adolescents were more affected by safety than safety
Saut Dar Centre
Student loan social security, peer pressure and influence, the influence of social media on youth, student loan borrowing limits, peer pressure social experiment, student loan borrowing, the influence of peer pressure, peer to peer student loan, federal student loan borrowing limit, the influence of social media on society, loan and borrowing, influence of peer groups