Externalizing Problem Behaviors Among Young Adolescents: Potential Links to Having Older Friends

1. Externalizing Problem Behaviors Among Young Adolescents: Potential Links to Having Older Friends Michael P. Flores and Laura D. Pittman Introduction • The Study Group for Very Young Offenders sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice concluded that identification of risk and protective factors for the development of externalizing problem behaviors (EPBs) in childhood and early adolescence is needed to be able to develop an effective set of community resources to address this problem (Loeber, Farrington, & Petechuk, 2003). • Research has shown that EPBs increase across adolescence (Moffitt, 1993) and that young adolescents who feel older than their biological age (i.e., their subjective age) have higher levels of EPBs (Galambos & Tilton-Weaver, 2000). • In addition, adolescents who have friends who are involved in more EPBs have higher levels of EPBs themselves (e.g., Agnew, 1991; Sampson & Laub, 2005). • Collectively, this research suggests that having older friends may be a key piece to understanding the development of EPBs in young adolescents. Thus, this study examines the potential link between EPBs and having older friends, considering the potential mediating role of subjective age and friends’ EPBs. Method Procedures 316 eighth grade students from two middle schools in the Chicago suburbs were asked to rate their own, as well as up to four of their closest friends’ level of engagement in externalizing problem behaviors (EPBs), as well as their own levels of subjective age. Measures • Externalizing problem behaviors were assessed using eight items from the Youth Deviance Scale (YDS; Gold, 1970 and used by Steinberg, Mounts, Lamborn, & Dornbusch, 1991), three items from the delinquency index of the National Longitudinal Study of Youth (NLSY; Borus et al., 1982), and one item from the Self-Reported Delinquency Questionnaire (SRDQ; LeBlanc & Fréchette, 1989). To address skewness in this data, a log transformation was performed on the composite score for both the participants’ and friends’ EPBs. • Subjective age was measured using seven total items, four from Montepare, Rierdan, Koff, and Stubbs (1989), and three from Galambos and Tilton-Weaver (2000). • Participants also filled out a demographic questionnaire to obtain information regarding: gender, ethnicity, parental education level, parental occupation, and parental marital status. • SES was calculated using the Hollingshead SES method (Hollingshead, 1975). Demographics • 57% female, 43% male • 53% Latino/Latina, 29% White, 5% African American, 13% Other • Hollingshead SES levels: 6% Unskilled, 30% Semiskilled, 28% Skilled, 29% Minor Professional, 7% Professional • Average age of participants was 13.56 (SD=0.52) and the average age of their friends was 13.8 (SD=.65) Data Analysis • All analyses controlled for participant gender, ethnicity, SES, and status of biological parents’ marriage. • Partial correlations were run to determine associations between variables of interest controlling for demongraphic characteristics (see Table 1). • A series of OLS regressions were run predicting participants’ EPBs to examine whether having older friends was linked to engaging in more EPBs (see Table 2). • In Model 1, average age of friends was added to the control variables. • In Model 2, subjective age was added to the regression in Model 1. • Finally, in Model 3, friends’ EPBs were added to the regression in Model 2. Table 1. Partial Correlations and Descriptive Statistics (N = 316)† Figure 1. Mediation of Friend’s EPBs on Age of Friends Predicting Young Adolescents’ EPBs. Note. Coefficients presented in both figures are standardized betas. Figure 2. Mediation of Friend’s EPBs on Subjective Age Predicting Young Adolescents’ EPBs. Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001. †Partial correlations controlled for participants’ gender, SES, race/ethnicity, biological parents’ marital status Results • As shown above, partial correlations indicate that all variables were associated positively with each other. Participants reported more EPBs when they reported their friends’ EPBS to more frequent, when the average age of their friends was older, and when they subjectively felt older than they actually were. The correlation between participants’ and friends’ EPBS was particularly strong. • As shown below, average age of friends was found to be positively linked to the participants’ EPBs, but was no longer significant when subjective age of the participants was added, which was itself significantly linked to participants’ EPBs. • In Model 3, when friends’ EPBs were added to the model, which was highly significant, neither average age of friends or participants’ subjective age were significant. • Collectively, these analyses suggest that subjective age, and more strongly the friends’ EPBs, both serve as a mediators on the link between age of friends and participants’ EPBs (see Figures 1 & 2). Conclusions & Discussion • Subjective age of participants mediated the link between age of friends and participants’ EPBs. • However, level of friends’ EPBs mediated the link between both age of friends and subjective age in predicting participants’ EPBs. • These findings suggest that, although there is an association between subjective age, friends’ age, and having higher levels of EPBs, the level of EPBs among ones’ friends is more central to the development of EPBs among young adolescents. • Thus, it appears that programs focused on reducing the engagement of young adolescents in externalizing problem behaviors may do well to closely monitor the mean level of engagement in EPBs by a young adolescent’s peer group, regardless of the friends’ age or the young adolescent’s subjective age. Table 2. OLS Regressions Predicting Young Adolescents’ EPBs References Agnew, R. (1991). The interactive effects of peer variables on delinquent behavior. Criminology, 29, 47-72. Borus, M. E., Carpenter, S. W., Crowley, J. E., Daymont, T. N., Kim, C., Pollard, T. K., et al. (1982). Pathways to the Future, Volume II: A final report on the National Survey of Youth labor market experience in 1980. Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University; Columbus, Ohio. Galambos, N. L., & Tilton-Weaver, L. C. (2000). Adolescents’ psychological maturity, problem behavior, and subjective age: In search of the adultoid. Applied Developmental Science, 4, 178-192. Gold, M. (1970). Delinquent behavior in an American city. Belmont, CA: Brooks and Coleman. Hollingshead A. B. (1975). Four factor index of social status. New Haven, CT: Department of Sociology, Yale University. LeBlanc, M., & Fréchette, M. (1989). Male criminal activity from childhood through youth: Multilevel and developmental perspectives. New York: Springer-Verlag. Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., & Petechuk, D. (2003). Child delinquency: Early intervention and prevention (OJJDP Publication No. NCJ 186162). Washington, DC:  U.S. Government Printing Office. Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674-701. Montepare, J. M., Rierdan, J., Koff, E., & Stubbs, M. (1989, May). The impact of biological events on females’ subjective age identities. Paper presented at the 8th Meeting of the Society for Menstrual Cycle Research, Salt Lake City, UT. Sampson, R. J., & Laub, J. H. (2005). A general age-graded theory of crime: Lessons learned and the future of life-course criminology. In D. P. Farrington (Ed.), Integrated developmental & life course theories of offending (pp. 165-182). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Steinberg, L., N.S. Mounts, S.D. Lamborn, and S.M. Dornbusch. (1991). Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1, 19-36. . Note: *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.; a Female = 0, Male = 1; b Comparison group is Latino/Latina