Compare the strengths and weaknesses of 2 explanations

• Point: peer influences

  one strength of peer influence as an explanation for addictive behaviours is the strong research evidence supporting it
• Evidence: peer influences

  Simons-Morton and Farhat (2010) reviewed 40 prospective studies and found that all but one showed a positive correlation between peer behaviour and smoking, reinforcing the idea that peers play a role in addiction. Additionally, Neighbors et Al. (2007) found that social norms were a key predictor of alcohol consumption among college students
• Evaluation: peer influences

  However, a key issue is determining whether individuals are influenced by peers (peer influence) or if they select peers based on shared behaviours (peer selection). Ennett and Bauman (1994) found evidence for both processes, suggesting that peer influence is only part of the picture. This highlights a limitation of the explanation, as it oversimplifies social interactions and ignores other factors such as family influence or genetic predispositions.
• Link: peer influences

  This suggests that while peer influence is an important factor in addictive behaviours, it may not be the sole cause, and other social and psychological factors should be considered
• Point: role of media

  A strength of media influence as an explanation for addictive behaviours is the experimental evidence suggesting a causal relationship
• Evidence: role of media

  Pechmann and Shih (1999) demonstrated that participants exposed to a film containing smoking developed more positive attitudes towards smoking, indicating that media exposure can shape behaviour. unlike much of the correlational research in this field, this study provides stronger evidence for a direct causal link
• evaluation: role of media

  However, a key limitation is the lack of population validity in much of the research, as most studies focus on adolescents. Atkinson et al. (2011) found that adolescents were aware that media portrayals of drinking could be exaggerated, suggesting they may not be as easily influenced as assumed
• Link: role of media

  This indicates that media effects may be overstated, and other factors like peer and parental influence could play a more significant role in the development of addictive behaviours
• Conclusion

  Both explanations have strong research support but also face key limitations. Peer influence is well-supported but struggles to distinguish between influence and selection, while media influence has experimental backing but may not generalise across different populations. Ultimately, both explanations contribute to our understanding of addiction, but a more comprehensive approach, integrating multiple social and psychological factors, is likely necessary to fully explain addictive behaviours