PEER INFLUENCE AO3

• Supporting evidence is provided by Simons-Morton & Farhat (2010) reviewed 40 prospective studies into the relationship between peers and smoking and found that all but one showed a positive correlation between the two.
• Similar results have also been found for other addictive behaviours – Maxwell (2002). This supports the link between behaviour of peers and engagement in addictive behaviour because the more likely peers were to smoke, the more likely the individual was. This has also been found with other addictions, especially those that are socially acceptable and social in nature, e.g. alcohol use. The fact that this study was prospective provides stronger evidence of a causal relationship.
• However, Ogden (2008) found that children from poorer backgrounds were more likely to smoke. Other factors such as poor performance in class, not being involved in sports and low self-esteem were also contributory factors. Ogden supports the role that environmental and societal factors may play in addiction but questions that it is only as a result of peer influence. Other factors also need to be considered and therefore peer influence cannot offer a complete explanation for addiction.
• Furthermore, defining peer relationships is very difficult. Friendship groups change over time and people may associate with different people for different activities. In research into social norms, for example, it may be that students are more accurate in their perception of their best friends’ drinking habits than they are of others’, and therefore using the term ‘peer influence’ is too broad. This is therefore a limitation of this explanation in that friendship groups do not remain stable, they change and this can pose a problem for research in this field.