Cargando…
Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence
INTRODUCTION: Adolescents are particularly susceptible to social influence and previous studies have shown that this susceptibility decreases with age. The current study used a cross-sectional experimental paradigm to investigate the effect of age and puberty on susceptibility to both prosocial and...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7674583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32858504 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.07.012 |
_version_ | 1783611533770620928 |
---|---|
author | Ahmed, S. Foulkes, L. Leung, J.T. Griffin, C. Sakhardande, A. Bennett, M. Dunning, D.L. Griffiths, K. Parker, J. Kuyken, W. Williams, J.M.G. Dalgleish, T. Blakemore, S.J. |
author_facet | Ahmed, S. Foulkes, L. Leung, J.T. Griffin, C. Sakhardande, A. Bennett, M. Dunning, D.L. Griffiths, K. Parker, J. Kuyken, W. Williams, J.M.G. Dalgleish, T. Blakemore, S.J. |
author_sort | Ahmed, S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Adolescents are particularly susceptible to social influence and previous studies have shown that this susceptibility decreases with age. The current study used a cross-sectional experimental paradigm to investigate the effect of age and puberty on susceptibility to both prosocial and antisocial influence. METHODS: Participants (N = 520) aged 11–18 from London and Cambridge (United Kingdom) rated how likely they would be to engage in a prosocial (e.g. “help a classmate with their work”) or antisocial (e.g. “make fun of a classmate”) act. They were then shown the average rating (in fact fictitious) that other adolescents had given to the same question, and were then asked to rate the same behaviour again. RESULTS: Both prosocial and antisocial influence decreased linearly with age, with younger adolescents being more socially influenced when other adolescents’ ratings were more prosocial and less antisocial than their own initial rating. Both antisocial and prosocial influence significantly decreased across puberty for boys but not girls (independent of age). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that social influence declines with increasing maturity across adolescence. However, the exact relationship between social influence and maturity is dependent on the nature of the social influence and gender. Understanding when adolescents are most susceptible to different types of social influence, and how this might influence their social behaviour, has important implications for understanding adolescent social development. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7674583 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76745832020-11-24 Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence Ahmed, S. Foulkes, L. Leung, J.T. Griffin, C. Sakhardande, A. Bennett, M. Dunning, D.L. Griffiths, K. Parker, J. Kuyken, W. Williams, J.M.G. Dalgleish, T. Blakemore, S.J. J Adolesc Article INTRODUCTION: Adolescents are particularly susceptible to social influence and previous studies have shown that this susceptibility decreases with age. The current study used a cross-sectional experimental paradigm to investigate the effect of age and puberty on susceptibility to both prosocial and antisocial influence. METHODS: Participants (N = 520) aged 11–18 from London and Cambridge (United Kingdom) rated how likely they would be to engage in a prosocial (e.g. “help a classmate with their work”) or antisocial (e.g. “make fun of a classmate”) act. They were then shown the average rating (in fact fictitious) that other adolescents had given to the same question, and were then asked to rate the same behaviour again. RESULTS: Both prosocial and antisocial influence decreased linearly with age, with younger adolescents being more socially influenced when other adolescents’ ratings were more prosocial and less antisocial than their own initial rating. Both antisocial and prosocial influence significantly decreased across puberty for boys but not girls (independent of age). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that social influence declines with increasing maturity across adolescence. However, the exact relationship between social influence and maturity is dependent on the nature of the social influence and gender. Understanding when adolescents are most susceptible to different types of social influence, and how this might influence their social behaviour, has important implications for understanding adolescent social development. Elsevier 2020-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7674583/ /pubmed/32858504 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.07.012 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Ahmed, S. Foulkes, L. Leung, J.T. Griffin, C. Sakhardande, A. Bennett, M. Dunning, D.L. Griffiths, K. Parker, J. Kuyken, W. Williams, J.M.G. Dalgleish, T. Blakemore, S.J. Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence |
title | Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence |
title_full | Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence |
title_fullStr | Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence |
title_full_unstemmed | Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence |
title_short | Susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence |
title_sort | susceptibility to prosocial and antisocial influence in adolescence |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7674583/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32858504 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.07.012 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ahmeds susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT foulkesl susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT leungjt susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT griffinc susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT sakhardandea susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT bennettm susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT dunningdl susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT griffithsk susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT parkerj susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT kuykenw susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT williamsjmg susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT dalgleisht susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence AT blakemoresj susceptibilitytoprosocialandantisocialinfluenceinadolescence |