ArticleJournal of adolescence2026
The Social Sources Adolescents Consult for Daily Life Choices: Variations in Age and Decision Domains.
Article in Journal of adolescence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Social Sources Adolescents Consult for Daily Life Choices: Variations in Age and Decision Domains.Journal of adolescence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPrevious research has investigated the impact of peers on adolescents' decision-making across various domains. However, adolescents are not just passive receivers of information; they actively seek advice from peers. Yet, there is limited understanding of whom adolescents turn to within their peer networks to guide their decisions.
methodsThis study explored adolescents' preferences for seeking advice within their peer network when making decisions across different decision domains: risky, prosocial, and academic. Dutch youth (N = 748, ages 11-19) were presented with hypothetical scenarios and asked which classmates they preferred to consult. Peer nominations were used to examine the characteristics of consulted peers.
resultsPrimarily, adolescents seek information from their (best) friends-accounting for 70%-85% of cases-and peers they like and trust, with friends serving as the most important source of guidance across all domains. We also found that consulted peers were more likely to be perceived as cool, admirable, smart, influential, or as leaders, rather than lacking these characteristics. With increasing age, adolescents demonstrated an increased reliance on friends for prosocial and risky decisions and a greater bias for smart peers when making academic decisions.
conclusionThis study emphasises adolescents' active role in seeking advice from peers to inform their decisions related to risky-, prosocial-, and academic behaviour. Across all domains, adolescents prioritise guidance from (close) friends and peers they trust. Characteristics related to the social status of a peer, and perceived intelligence, also contribute to someone being consulted for advice. The type of peers adolescents prefer to consult appears to be more consistent across domains than highly domain-specific. However, the increased bias for friends with age was absent for academic choices. Future studies should aim to better understand adolescents' motives for consulting certain peers and should investigate the extent to which a peer's knowledge and skills play a role. These insights are essential for evaluating the suitability of peers as information sources across various decision domains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.