Elsevier

Addictive Behaviors

Volume 32, Issue 8, August 2007, Pages 1602-1627
Addictive Behaviors

Adolescent peer group identification and characteristics: A review of the literature

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.11.018Get rights and content

Abstract

This study provides an exhaustive review of 44 peer-reviewed quantitative or qualitative data-based peer-reviewed studies completed on adolescent peer group identification. Adolescent peer group identification is one's self-perceived or other-perceived membership in discrete teenage peer groups. The studies reviewed suggest that adolescent peer groups consist of five general categories differentiable by lifestyle characteristics: Elites, Athletes, Academics, Deviants, and Others. We found that the Deviant adolescent group category reported relatively greater participation in drug use and other problem behaviors across studies, whereas Academics and Athletes exhibited the least participation in these problem behaviors. Additional research is needed in this arena to better understand the operation of adolescent group labels.

Introduction

Social scientists have long noted the tendency for people to place themselves and others into consensually recognized and labeled social types (Ashmore, Del Boca, & Beebe, 2002). Adolescents tend to segregate themselves into different peer group types. Adolescents give names to their peer group types, as has been popularly illustrated by movies such as The Breakfast Club (1985) and Clueless (1995). Peer group names that adolescents give themselves or each other suggest the groups' lifestyle characteristics, such as shared beliefs, interests in clothes and music, and preference for specific activities (Brown and Lohr, 1987, Hartup, 1985, Sussman et al., 1990). As discussed by Brown and Lohr (1987), adolescents may identify with groups to develop a sense of identity and a positive self-concept, and an increased sense of personal autonomy from parents. In addition, these group categories may reinforce cultural norms by indicating successful and unsuccessful ways of participating in the culture (Ashmore et al., 2002).

Teens may “place” themselves into peer group types in at least two ways. First, they may simply identify themselves with a certain peer social type regardless of any direct interaction with other peers. In this sense, they are making a statement about the type of teen they are within the culture (i.e., they are stating the name of the reputation-based collective in which they feel they take part). Second, these adolescents may actually participate in peer groups which reflect the larger collective. The peer groups provide a check on whether they view youth as “really” a member of the peer group type or only someone who tries to be part of the group (a “wannabe”). Adolescents are in the process of moving away from the closed environment of the parental home where they are largely influenced by their immediate family to a social world where they are among peers and have to begin to make independent choices. Due to lack of experience they are often not sure about the lifestyle decisions they should make (e.g., balancing their social and school lives, vocational orientation). In need of support and direction they are likely to search for a place among a group of peers by conforming to the group's norms (Larkin, 1979). Peer groups thus either vicariously or directly facilitate the adolescents' transition into the larger social environmental world.

The literature that pertains to the study of adolescent peer group types has been referred to by various names (e.g., peer group association (Sussman et al., 1990), peer group self-identification (Sussman et al., 1994), peer crowd affiliation (Prinstein & La Greca, 2002)). For the remainder of this review, we will label this arena as “peer group identification” (e.g., Mosbach & Leventhal, 1988) because peer group types may be self- or other defined, and may pertain to a larger collective or to actual peer group interactions. This term permits inclusion of that variation. The peer group identification literature began at least four decades ago (Clark, 1962). Several studies have found that peer group identification is related to problem-prone behaviors such as substance use and risk-taking (see Jessor, 1984). Findings across several peer group identification studies also suggest that a social hierarchy exists among adolescent groups with Elites or Athletes at the top, and that this hierarchy is associated with the level of one's social involvement, social acceptance, or self-esteem (e.g., Brown and Lohr, 1987, Cohen, 1979, Eder, 1985, Franzoi et al., 1994, La Greca et al., 2001, Prinstein and La Greca, 2002).

Currently, it is unknown (1) how many data-based peer-reviewed studies on youth peer group identification exist, (2) what the variation of methods are that delineate peer group names, and (3) what the patterns of associations are between peer group identification and behavioral (e.g., drug use) or personality (e.g., self-esteem) variables across studies. The purpose of this review paper is to address these questions. We first attempted to identify all quantitative or qualitative data-based peer-reviewed studies that used peer group names to identify peer groups. Then, we examined the methods used to delineate group names. We also attempted to identify a finite number of general group names that accommodate the studies that were completed. Two recent group type scaling studies (Ashmore et al., submitted for publication, Stone and Brown, 1999) provided direction on what the general group labels might be. We used the results of these two studies and used a sorting procedure, both of which are described below, to identify general groups.

Next, the relations of peer group identification with general group characteristics, personality characteristics, parenting characteristics, substance use (tobacco, alcohol, marijuana and illicit drugs), teen dating/sexual behavior, and violence participation were examined. It was expected that youth who were identified as belonging to a Deviant group (e.g., a Stoner, Tough, Heavy Metaler, Druggie, or Burnout, as examples), would be delineated across studies and would show the greatest prevalence of problem behavior and personality characteristics (Jessor, 1984). On the other hand, we expected that youth that were more involved in school activities or social events, such as the Academics, Elites, or Athletes would show the lowest prevalence of drug use behavior among the groups. Also, we expected that the Others, not falling into a clearly defined group, perhaps lacking peer support to boost their sense of self-worth, would also show higher drug use than Academics, Elites, or Athletes. Finally, limitations of this research and future research directions based on this review were suggested to stimulate continued investigation in the field of group identification.

Section snippets

Selection of studies

Searches of OVID MedINFO (1966 to August, 2005), PsycINFO (1887 to August, 2005), ERIC (1966 to August, 2005), Social Science Abstracts (1983 to August, 2005) and Sociological Abstracts (1963 to August, 2005) databases were completed to identify studies that used peer group identification to delineate adolescent peer groups. All databases were searched by crossing the terms “youth” and “adolescents” with “peer group identification”, “peer group self-identification”, “peer group association”,

The Elites

The Elites category was recognized across studies as being a high status group (i.e., in the 34 studies that delineated this category). An elite-type group was the leading group at school and comprised of members who generally were successful in academic and extracurricular activities, held a high opinion of themselves, and were high in both other-perceived and self-perceived social competence. The 10 studies that failed to delineate Elites included seven which subsumed Elites under an Athlete

Discussion

Moderately high agreement regarding placement of specific names into the general categories – the Elites, Athletes, Academics, Deviants, and Others – was achieved. In addition, these groups generally demonstrated the lifestyle characteristics that they depict. The Deviants perhaps were the most distinct among the groups. Self-identification as part of a Deviant group showed the greatest stability over time (Sussman et al., 1994), and self-other ratings of group identification were highest in

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA07601, DA13814, DA16094, and DA016090).

References (54)

  • D.R. Clasen et al.

    The multidimensionality of peer-pressure in adolescence

    Journal of Youth and Adolescence

    (1985)
  • B. Clark

    Educating the expert society

    (1962)
  • J. Cohen

    High school subcultures and the adult world

    Adolescence

    (1979)
  • S. Demuth

    Understanding the delinquency and social relationships of loners

    Youth & Society

    (2004)
  • M.M. Dolcini et al.

    Perceived competencies, peer group affiliation, and risk behavior among early adolescents

    Health Psychology

    (1994)
  • R.D. Downs et al.

    The relationship of adolescent peer groups to the incidence of psychosocial problems

    Adolescence

    (1991)
  • D.L. Durbin et al.

    Parenting style and peer group membership among European–American adolescents

    Journal of Research on Adolescence

    (1993)
  • P. Eckert

    Beyond the statistics of adolescent smoking

    American Journal of Public Health

    (1983)
  • D. Eder

    The cycle of popularity: Interpersonal relations among female adolescents

    Sociology of Education

    (1985)
  • J.B. Eicher et al.

    Adolescent dress. Part II: A qualitative study of suburban high school students

    Adolescence

    (1991)
  • S.A. Fishkin et al.

    Ingroup versus outgroup perceptions of the characteristics of high-risk youth: Negative stereotyping

    Journal of Applied Social Psychology

    (1993)
  • S. Fordham et al.

    Black students' school success: Coping with the “burden of ‘acting white’”

    Urban Review

    (1986)
  • S.L. Franzoi et al.

    Two social worlds: Social correlates and stability of adolescent status groups

    Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

    (1994)
  • B. Gotlieb

    The contribution of natural support systems to primary prevention among four social subgroups of adolescent males

    Adolescence

    (1975)
  • Hartup, W. W. (1985). Peer relations. In P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.) & E. M. Hetherington (Vol Ed.). Handbook of Child...
  • P.C.L. Heaven et al.

    Adolescent peer crowd self-identification, attributional style and perceptions of parenting

    Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology

    (2005)
  • R. Jessor

    Adolescent development and behavioral health

  • Cited by (153)

    • Peers and psychopathology

      2023, Encyclopedia of Child and Adolescent Health, First Edition
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text