Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19575606›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of psychology2011

Peer contagion in child and adolescent social and emotional development.

Thomas J Dishion, Jessica M Tipsord

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of psychology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 261 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
261citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
24.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

261 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 812 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

201 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas J DishionChild and Family Center, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97401, USA. dishion@uoregon.edu
Jessica M Tipsord
University of Oregon · US

Funding

Understanding and Preventing Childhood Drug Use RiskR01DA016110 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI DISHION, THOMAS J. · 2002 to 2012
$15.8M
UNDERSTANDING AND PREVENTING ADOLESCENT DRUG ABUSER37DA007031 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI DISHION, THOMAS J · 1997 to 2005
$7.2M
Understanding and Preventing Early Adult Drug AbuseR01DA007031 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI LEMERY-CHALFANT, KATHRYN · 1991 to 2015
$6.2M
CORE--METHODOLOGYP30DA018760 · NIDA · OREGON RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI BIGLAN, ANTHONY · 2005 to 2009
$3.4M
Development and Psychopathology Research Trng GrantT32MH020012 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI STORMSHAK, ELIZABETH A · 1999 to 2013
$2.5M
NIDA NIH HHS DA018760NIDA NIH HHS DA07031NIDA NIH HHS DA16110NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA018760NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA007031NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA016110NIDA NIH HHS R37 DA007031NIMH NIH HHS MH20012NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH020012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, we examine the construct of peer contagion in childhood and adolescence and review studies of child and adolescent development that have identified peer contagion influences. Evidence suggests that children's interactions with peers are tied to increases in aggression in early and middle childhood and amplification of problem behaviors such as drug use, delinquency, and violence in early to late adolescence. Deviancy training is one mechanism that accounts for peer contagion effects on problem behaviors from age 5 through adolescence. In addition, we discuss peer contagion relevant to depression in adolescence, and corumination as an interactive process that may account for these effects. Social network analyses suggest that peer contagion underlies the influence of friendship on obesity, unhealthy body images, and expectations. Literature is reviewed that suggests how peer contagion effects can undermine the goals of public education from elementary school through college and impair the goals of juvenile corrections systems. In particular, programs that "select" adolescents at risk for aggregated preventive interventions are particularly vulnerable to peer contagion effects. It appears that a history of peer rejection is a vulnerability factor for influence by peers, and adult monitoring, supervision, positive parenting, structure, and self-regulation serve as protective factors.

Indexed as

EmotionsInterpersonal RelationsPeer GroupSocial BehaviorSocial EnvironmentAdolescentAdolescent DevelopmentAggressionChildChild DevelopmentHumansJuvenile DelinquencyMaleViolence

Identifiers

PMID19575606
PMCPMC3523739
OpenAlexW2106170520

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.