Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Res Adolesc. 2015 Jul 14;26(3):538–551. doi: 10.1111/jora.12212

Harsh Parenting, Deviant Peers, Adolescent Risky Behavior: Understanding the Meditational Effect of Attitudes and Intentions

Tricia K Neppl 1, Jui Dhalewadikar 2, Brenda J Lohman 3
PMCID: PMC5193236  NIHMSID: NIHMS701254  PMID: 28042227

Abstract

Although research supports the influence of parents and peers on adolescent risky behavior, less is known about mechanisms proposed to explain this relation. This study examined the influence of adolescent attitudes and intentions about such behaviors. Prospective, longitudinal data came from rural youth who participated throughout adolescence (n= 451). Observed harsh parenting and relationship with deviant peers was assessed in early adolescence, attitudes and intentions were measured during middle adolescence, and risky behavior was assessed in late adolescence. Results indicated that parenting and deviant peers was related to engagement in tobacco use, alcohol use, and risky sexual behaviors. Moreover, attitudes and intentions mediated this relationship even after parent use and adolescent early involvement in these behaviors were taken into account.

Adolescence is a period of experimentation with a variety of socially proscribed activities such as tobacco use, alcohol use, and engagement in risky sexual behaviors (Conger, Rueter, & Conger, 1994). Indeed, while such experimentation may be viewed as a normative part of adolescence (Muuss & Porton, 1998), studies show that youth who engage in risky behaviors are at increased risk of long–term health issues as well as problems in the areas of academics, work disruptions, and overall family life (Jessor, 1998; Crosnoe & Johnson, 2011). For example, early alcohol use places adolescents at greater risk for adult alcohol use disorders (Englund, Egeland, Oliva, & Collins, 2008) and early sexual initiation can lead to unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases (Kincaid, Jones, Sterrett, & McKee, 2012). Therefore, it is important to understand factors that may influence adolescent substance use and engagement in risky sexual behavior. Studies show that both parents and peers may effect an adolescent's likelihood of engaging in such behaviors (Elkington, Bauermeister, & Zimmerman, 2011; Maxwell, 2002; Whitaker & Miller, 2000). Specifically, exposure to harsh parenting (Alati et al., 2014; Conger et al., 1994; Guilamo-Ramos et al., 2012) as well as interactions with deviant peers (Cruz, Emery, & Turkheimer, 2012; Kaplow, Curran, & Dodge, 2002; Osgood et al., 2013) may influence an adolescent's decision to engage in these behaviors.

Less is known, however, about the mechanisms proposed to explain the association between the influence of parents and peers on subsequent adolescent engagement in risky behaviors (Chaplin et al., 2012; Trucco, Colder, & Wieczorek, 2011). One possibility is that based on information received from parents and peers, an adolescent develops their own intentions and attitudes about their involvement in these behaviors (Vitoria, Salgueiro, Silva, & de Vries, 2011). Therefore, it may be that the development of a particular set of attitudes mediates the relationship between parental and peer influences and actual engagement in risky behaviors. However, relatively few studies have prospectively evaluated how an adolescent's development of intentions to engage in risky behavior may ultimately influence the development of such behaviors (Halgunseth, Perkins, Lippold, & Nix, 2013). Moreover, minimal research has investigated the association of both parents and peers on a multitude of adolescent risky behaviors within the same model (Mak, Ho, & Day, 2012). In addition, most studies which have investigated parenting and adolescent substance use do not include parental use (Alati et al., 2014). For example, Halgunseth, et al. (2013) found a mediating influence of delinquent-oriented attitudes on the association between parental inconsistent discipline and adolescent substance initiation. Mares, Lichtwarck-Aschoff, and Engels (2013) found that the association between both parental alcohol-specific communication and disclosure of alcohol use on subsequent adolescent alcohol use was mediated by adolescent negative alcohol-related expectancies. In terms of smoking behavior, Mak, Ho, and Day (2012) examined the effects of parent and peer tobacco use on adolescent intention to initiate such behavior. They found that smoking of parents and peers was independently related to intentions to smoke in nonsmoking adolescents. For sexual behavior, studies show that parental control inhibits the development of adolescent mature decision-making skills which increases their risk to engage in sexual behaviors (see Kincaid et al., 2012).

Based on these studies, it is imperative to disentangle the unique effects that parents, peers, and adolescent intentions have on both substance use and risky sexual behavior. Therefore, the present study addresses this gap by prospectively evaluating how adolescent attitudes and intentions about risky behaviors may help to explain the association between parenting and peer relationships on engagement in risky behaviors in a sample of rural adolescents. This is important as rural adolescents may be at greater risk for substance use disorders than adolescents from more urban settings (Rueter, Holm, Burzette, Kim, & Conger, 2007). To our knowledge, no study has yet examined the association between harsh parenting and involvement with deviant peers on adolescent engagement in tobacco use, alcohol use, and risky sexual behaviors. Moreover, to be sure of such an association, this study also takes into account parental engagement in these risky behaviors, as well as youth risky behavior during early adolescence.

Harsh Parenting and Adolescent Risky Behavior

It has been suggested that parenting is one of the primary components responsible for predicting adolescent involvement in substance use (Cohen, Richardson, & LaBree, 1994). Indeed, research shows that harsh parenting is associated with both adolescent tobacco use (Mercken, Sleddens, de Vries, & Steglich, 2013; Shelton et al., 2008) and alcohol use (Alati et al., 2014; Conger et al., 1994; Conger & Conger, 2002). Specifically, Lamis, Malone, Lansford, and Lochman (2012) found that harsh parental discipline was associated with adolescent alcohol use onset, and Zucker, Donovan, Masten, Mattson, and Moss (2008) found that harsh and inconsistent parenting during early adolescence significantly predicted adolescent involvement in both tobacco and alcohol use, especially among adolescents 16 years and older. Similarly, Kim-Spoon, Farley, Holmes, and Longo (2014) found that adolescents were more likely to engage in substance use when raised by parents who used psychological and physical aggression. Other studies suggest that adolescents raised by harsh parents are at greater risk for involvement in risky behaviors than those youth who experience a more supportive style of parenting (Adalbjarnardottir & Hafsteinsson, 2001). Moreover, Eisenberg et al., (2005) concluded that positive and supportive parenting, as opposed to harsh parenting practices, decreased adolescent involvement in risky behavior.

Similar to findings regarding smoking and alcohol use, harsh parenting is considered to be one of the most important predictors of adolescent involvement in risky sexual behaviors (Baker et al., 1999; Jacobson & Crockett, 2000; Kotchick, Shaffer, Miller, & Forehand, 2001; Longmore, Manning, & Giordano, 2001). For example, emotional qualities of the parent-adolescent relationship, as well as communication about sex, may be associated with increased sexual behavior in adolescence (Guilamo-Ramos et al., 2012). One explanation is that sexually active adolescents who are raised by harsh parents reject or ignore any information regarding prevention of sexual activity provided by their parents (Meschke, Bartholomae, & Zentall, 2002). It may also be that adolescents raised by harsh parents do not receive any information regarding sexual behaviors from their parents at all. Therefore, adolescents may seek out such information from their peers, especially as peers become an integral part of an adolescent's life.

Involvement with Deviant Peers and Adolescent Risky Behavior

Research suggests that during adolescence, parental influences decrease while peer influences increase (Stanton et al., 2002). Therefore, adolescent involvement with deviant peers may result in their engagement in risky behaviors (Chapman & Werner-Wilson, 2008). For the purpose of the current study, involvement with deviant peers was defined as friends of the adolescent who have engaged in tobacco use, alcohol use, and risky sexual activity. In some cases, the adolescent participates in risky behavior to secure their position in the peer group (Rubin et al., 1998); while in other instances, the adolescent may choose peers who are already engaging in similar risky activities (Irwin, Igra, Eyre, & Millstein, 1997; Musher-Eizenman, Holub, & Arnett, 2003; Rubin, Bukowski, & Parker, 1998).

Many researchers have found that when peers are involved in negative behaviors, then chances are the adolescent is also involved in the same behaviors (Rubin et al., 1998; Urberg, Deirmenciolu, & Pilgrim, 1997). That is, there is a direct association between adolescent involvement with deviant peers and their involvement in risky behaviors. For example, Maxwell (2002) found that adolescent involvement in smoking increased if they received approval from their peers about smoking. Similarly, adolescents who initiated smoking at an early age interacted with peers who were already involved in smoking (Ennett et al., 2008). Other studies have found that youth who do not smoke are more likely to initiate smoking if they do not have a supportive parent and are associated with peers who smoke (Chassin, Presson, Montello, Sherman, & McGrew, 1986; Kiuru, Burk, Laursen, Salmela-Aro, & Nurmi, 2010). In terms of alcohol use, there is a strong tendency for adolescents to seek out friends who engage in similar drinking patterns as themselves (Osgood et al., 2013). Indeed, Trucco, et al. (2011) found that affiliating with deviant peers was associated with a higher likelihood of alcohol use initiation. It was concluded that deviant peers model drinking behaviors which influences subsequent use. Similarly, in a study examining early adolescents, Light, Greenan, Rusby, Nies, and Snijders (2013) found evidence for both selection of friends based on alcohol use onset as well as risk of onset for those with friends already engaging in alcohol use.

In the same way that peers influence tobacco and alcohol use, they may also have a similar impact on sexual activity. For example, Potard, Courtois and Rusch (2008) found that when adolescents perceived that their peers had more liberal attitudes towards sexuality, then adolescent engagement in sexual activities increased. Indeed, Ali and Dwyer (2011) maintain that adolescents who have a higher proportion of peers who initiate sex and an increased number of sexual partners, then the likelihood of their own sexual behavior increases. Furthermore, it has been suggested that even though older adolescents have more knowledge about the risks of unprotected sex, they still engage in such behaviors if their peers are supportive of this activity (Potard et al., 2008). Taken together, results of these studies highlight the important role of both parents and peers in the process of adolescent engagement in substance use and risky sexual behaviors.

Influence of Adolescent Attitudes and Intentions

The theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 2005) posits that intentions to participate in a particular behavior develop from specific attitudes regarding those behaviors. That is, individual attitudes about involvement in certain behaviors depend on his/her positive and negative evaluations about such behaviors. For example, if an adolescent has positive attitudes and intentions about achieving success in academics or obtaining future job security, then the likelihood of engaging in risky behaviors decreases (McLoyd et al., 2009). The same may be true regarding intentions to engage in risky behaviors during adolescence. It may be that if an adolescent has no intention of engaging in behaviors such as smoking, using alcohol, or having sex, then actual engagement in those behaviors may decrease. To be sure, Van De Ven, Engles, Otten and Van Den Eijnden, (2007) examined adolescent intentions of using tobacco in the future. They found a significant association between adolescent attitudes and intentions about tobacco use and actual engagement in smoking. Similarly, studies have shown that adolescents who have a positive perception about drinking alcohol engage in drinking behavior. In other words, adolescent alcohol use is dependent on their intention to consume it (Ajzen, 2005; Cooke, Sniehotta, & Schuez, 2007; Grazioli et al., 2015). Finally, in terms of sexual behavior, Albarrcin, Johnson, Fishbein, and Muellerleile (2001) conducted a meta–analysis which concluded that adolescent condom use depended in large part on their intention of engaging in protected sex. Hennessy, Bleakley, & Fishbein (2012) also found that it is possible to predict future involvement in risky sexual encounters based on specific attitudes or intentions about that activity. Likewise, Akers et al. (2011) maintain that an adolescent's personal values oriented toward abstinence was associated with engagement in sexual activity, even after controlling for perceived peer attitudes.

In light of such general findings about parent and peer influences on adolescent engagement in risky behavior, we propose that they also influence adolescent intention to engage in such activities (Albarrcin et al., 2001; Buckley, Chapman, & Sheehan, 2010; Hennessy et al., 2012; Karimy, Niknami, Hidarnia, & Hajizadeh, 2012). However, relatively few studies have prospectively evaluated how parenting and peers are related to adolescent development of attitudes and intentions and engagement in risky behaviors over time (Gutman, Eccles, Peck, & Malanchuk, 2011; Halgunseth et al., 2013; Trucco et al., 2011). The present study addressed this gap by evaluating how harsh parenting and association with deviant peers relates to adolescent engagement in later risky behaviors, as mediated through adolescent intentions and attitudes regarding such behaviors.

The Present Investigation

The present investigation evaluated how observed harsh parenting and involvement with deviant peers was associated with adolescent tobacco use, alcohol use, and risky sexual behaviors. We used data from a two-decade longitudinal study of a cohort of rural adolescents and their families followed from early to late adolescence. We measured observed harsh parenting and association with deviant peers when adolescents were 13 years old, and tobacco use, alcohol use, and risky sexual behaviors when these same adolescents were 18 years old. Attitudes and intentions about engagement in risky behaviors were assessed when youth were 15 years old. In addition, adolescent early involvement in sexual behavior and use of tobacco and alcohol, as well as substance use by their parents were assessed when the adolescent was 13 years old (see Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Conceptual Model

Following from our review of the literature, we expected that both observed harsh parenting and adolescent involvement with deviant peers would be associated with later adolescent risky behavior. It was also expected that attitudes and intentions about risky behavior during middle adolescence would mediate this relationship, even after taking into account parental behavior and youth engagement in risky behaviors during early adolescence. It is important to control for parental substance use and early adolescent risky behavior as research suggests that parent use is related to adolescent use (Redonnet, Chollet, Fombonne, Bowes, & Melchior, 2012), and early onset of risky behaviors (Connolly & McIsaac, 2011; Ellickson, Tucker, & Klein, 2003; Gruber, DiClemente, Anderson, & Lodico, 1996; Gutman et al., 2011) leads to greater dependency into adulthood.

Finally, to ascertain whether adolescent gender or parent education played a role in any of the pathways within the model, these constructs were also included as covariates in the analyses. Past evidence suggests that adolescent boys are more involved in tobacco use, alcohol use and risky sexual behaviors than adolescent girls (Melby, Conger, Conger, & Lorenz, 1993). However, Simons-Morton, Haynie, Crump, Eitel, and Saylor, (2001) found that girls may be more susceptible to peer pressure which may lead to more alcohol use than boys. In addition, a study conducted by White, Pandina, and Chen (2002) showed that parent educational attainment had a negative relationship with adolescent involvement in risky behaviors such as tobacco use.

Method

Participants

Data come from the Iowa Youth and Families Project (IYFP) which were collected annually from 1989 through 1994 (n = 451). Participants included the target adolescent (52% female), his/her parents, and a sibling within four years of age of the target adolescent. When interviewed for the first time in 1989, the target adolescent was in seventh grade (M age = 13.2 years; 236 girls, 215 boys). Participants were recruited from both public and private schools in eight rural Iowa counties. Due to the rural nature of the sample, there were few minority families (approximately 1%); therefore, all of the participants were Caucasian. Seventy-eight percent of the eligible families agreed to participate. The families were primarily lower middle- or middle-class. In 1989, parents averaged 13 years of schooling and had a median family income of $33,700. Families ranged in size from four to 13 members, with an average size of 4.94 members. Fathers’ average age was 40 years, while mothers’ average age was 38. In 1994, the families from the IYFP continued in another project, the Family Transitions Project (FTP). The same target adolescents participated in the FTP in order to follow their transition into early adulthood. The FTP has followed the target youth from as early as 1989 through 2010 (M target age = 35 years), with a 90% retention rate.

The present study includes targets who participated from early through late adolescence. The data were analyzed at the three developmental time points. The first was when the target adolescent was 13 years old (1989). The second period was during middle adolescence when the target was 15 years old (1991). Finally, the last time point occurred when the target was in late adolescence at age 18 years (1994).

Procedure

Throughout the target's adolescence, families were visited in their homes twice each year by a trained interviewer. Each visit lasted approximately two hours, with the second visit occurring within two weeks of the first visit. Incentives were provided for participation. During the first visit, each family member completed a set of questionnaires pertaining to subjects such as individual characteristics and peer relationships. During the second visit, family members participated in structured interaction tasks that were videotaped. In the present analyses, observer ratings from the parent-adolescent discussion task were used. This task involved parents and their adolescent discussing general questions about family life such as household chores and family rules which lasted 25 minutes. Trained observers coded the quality of these interactions using the Iowa Interaction Rating Scales (Melby & Conger, 2001) which have been shown to demonstrate adequate variability and reliability (Melby & Conger, 2001). The means and standard deviations for all study constructs are provided in Table 1.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics for Study Variables (N =451)

Variables M SD Min Max
Early Adolescence, Age 13
Harsh parenting 1.90 0.56 1 4
Adolescent association with deviant peers 0.32 0.55 0 4
Middle Adolescence, Age 15
Adolescent attitudes and intentions 2.25 1.12 1 7
Late Adolescence, Age 18
Adolescent tobacco use 1.02 1.78 0 5
Adolescent alcohol use 0.51 0.65 0 3
Adolescent sexual behavior 0.78 0.93 0 4
Covariates, Age 13
Parent education 13.38 1.62 8.50 19
Parent tobacco use 0.30 0.36 0 1
Parent alcohol use 0.36 0.31 0 1
Adolescent tobacco use 0.15 0.3 0 1
Adolescent alcohol use 0.19 0.28 0 1
Adolescent sexual behavior 0.01 0.09 0 1
Open in a new tab

Measures

Early Adolescence, Age 13

Harsh parenting

Observer ratings were used to assess parents’ hostility, antisocial behavior, and angry coerciveness toward the adolescent during the discussion task. Data on the discussion task was collected in 1989 when the adolescent was 13 years old. Each rating was scored on a 9–point scale, ranging from low (no evidence of the behavior) to high (the behavior is highly characteristic of the parent). Hostility was defined as hostile, annoyed, critical, and disapproving behavior toward the adolescent. Angry coercion involves an attempt to control or change the other person's behavior in a hostile manner. Antisocial behavior was characterized by egotistic, immature, rebellious, and indifferent behavior towards the adolescent.

During the discussion task, mothers and fathers, along with their adolescent discussed questions from a series of cards labeled specifically for either the parent or the teenager. Parents and youth took turns reading questions related to subjects such as school activities, family rules, and parental discipline. The person reading the card was instructed to read each question out loud and give his or her answers first. The rest of the family members were instructed to give their individual answers next and then everyone discussed together about the answers that were given. They were to go on to the next card once they felt they had said everything they wanted to about each question. Scores were averaged across each parent to create a manifest variable and were internally consistent (α = .86) and demonstrated acceptable inter-rater reliability (.94).

Adolescent association with deviant peers

Adolescent association with deviant peers was assessed through self–report in 1989 when the adolescent was 13 years old. Adolescents were asked whether or not they had a friend who engaged in tobacco use, alcohol use, and sexual behavior in the past year. This construct consisted of 3 items with responses ranging from 0 = none of them to 4 = all of them (Simons, Johnsons, Conger, & Elder, 1998). Item responses were averaged to create a manifest indicator in the model (α = .71).

Middle Adolescence, Age 15

Adolescent attitudes and intentions

Adolescent attitudes and intentions were assessed through self-report in 1991 when the adolescent was 15 years old. Adolescents reported on three questions related to engagement in future risky behavior which included, “Do you think that you will smoke cigarettes or use tobacco in the future, what is the likelihood that you will drink alcohol in the next year, and do you think that you will have sexual intercourse in the next year.” The responses were on a seven point scale, ranging from “I definitely will not” to “I definitely will.” Adolescents were also asked to report on how dangerous to their health smoking cigarettes or using tobacco is and how dangerous drinking is. Responses ranged from 1 = extremely dangerous to 7 = not at all dangerous. Finally, adolescents were asked to compare themselves to others in terms of the likelihood that they would have a tobacco related illness at some time in the future, as well as the likelihood that they would have a drinking problem at some point in the future (1 = much less likely than others to 7 = much more likely than others). All items were averaged together and were internally consistent (α = .82).

Late Adolescence, Age 18

Adolescent tobacco use

Adolescent tobacco use was assessed through self-report in 1994 when the adolescent was 18 years old. Adolescents reported on their frequency of tobacco use either by chewing or smoking in the past month (Maxwell, 2002). Responses ranged from 0 = never to 5 = every day.

Adolescent alcohol use

Adolescent alcohol use was assessed through self-report in 1994 when the adolescent was 18 years old. Adolescents reported on their frequency of drinking alcohol (beer, wine, hard liquor), having 3 or 4 drinks in a row, and having 5 or more drinks in a row in the past month. Responses ranged from 0 = never to 5 = every day. Scores were averaged together to create a manifest indicator in the model (α = .92; Conger et al., 1994).

Adolescent risky sexual behavior

Adolescent sexual behavior was assessed through self-report in 1994 when the adolescent was 18 years old. Adolescents were asked if they have had sexual intercourse within past 12 months. If they answered “yes” then they were asked questions regarding the frequency of condom use (1 = always used to 5 = never used) and number of sexual partners (1 = involved with 1 partner, 2 = 2 partners, 3 = 3 partners, 4 = 4 or more partners). The scores above were averaged together to create a manifest variable (Beadnell et. al., 2005).

Covariates, Age 13

The covariates were assessed in 1989 when the adolescent was 13 years old and included adolescent gender (0 = male; 1 = female), and parent's highest grade of education completed which ranged from 8.50 = beyond eighth grade to 19 = master's degree. Parents also reported on their own tobacco and alcohol use (0=have not used this substance, 1= used this substance). All parent scores were averaged together to create manifest variables. Finally, adolescents reported if they had ever used tobacco and alcohol (0= have not used this substance, 1= used this substance) and ever engaged in sexual behavior (0=have not had sexual intercourse, 1= have had sexual intercourse) during early adolescence.

Results

We used IBM SPSS AMOS 21 (Arbuckle, 2005) to estimate each model using full information maximum likelihood estimation (Allison, 2003). This is a powerful estimation of parameters and a widely accepted procedure in longitudinal research, rather than deleting cases with missing data (Duncan, Duncan, & Strycker, 2013). Attrition analyses were conducted to examine if adolescents assessed in the present analysis varied in tobacco use, alcohol use, and risky sexual behavior compared to those adolescents who were not retained in the study. Overall, adolescent behaviors did not statistically vary on any of the key outcomes (p > .05). Descriptive statistics are reported in Table 1. Next, correlations were calculated (see Table 2) and as expected, observed harsh parenting during early adolescence was statistically and significantly related to late adolescent tobacco use (r = .17, p < .01), alcohol use (r = .18, p < .01), and risky sexual behavior (r = .14, p < .01). Early adolescent association with deviant peers was also significantly related to tobacco use (r = .23, p < .01) alcohol use (r = .19, p < .01) and risky sexual behavior (r = .12, p < .05) during late adolescence. Adolescent attitudes and intentions about risky behavior during middle adolescence was statistically and significantly related to late adolescent tobacco use (r = .48, p < .01), alcohol use (r = .46, p < .01), and risky sexual behavior (r = .41, p <.01). As expected, harsh parenting (r = .19, p < .01) and involvement with deviant peers (r = .37, p < .01) was also significantly related to adolescent attitudes and intentions regarding risky behaviors.

Table 2.

Correlations Between the Variables Used in Analyses

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Early Adolescence, Age 13
1. Harsh parenting 1.00
2. Association with deviant peers 0.09 1.00
Middle Adolescence, Age 15
3. Adolescent attitudes & intentions 0.19** 0.37** 1.00
Late Adolescence, Age 18
4. Adolescent tobacco use 0.17** 0.23** 0.48** 1.00
5. Adolescent alcohol use 0.18** 0.19** 0.46** 0.44** 1.00
6. Adolescent sexual behavior 0.14** 0.12* 0.41** 0.18** 0.36** 1.00
Covariates, Age 13
7. Parent education −0.18** −0.01 −0.20** −0.12* −0.11** −0.17** 1.00
8. Parent tobacco use 0.18** 0.16** 0.26** 0.23** 0.08 0.15** −0.24** 1.00
9. Parent alcohol use 0.12* 0.04 0.07 −0.02 0.15** 0.13* 0.03 0.11* 1.00
10. Adolescent tobacco use 0.09 0.40** 0.40** 0.24** 0.23** 0.13** −0.04 0.13** 0.02 1.00
11. Adolescent alcohol use 0.10* 0.40** 0.29** 0.14** 0.22** 0.13* −0.03 0.03 0.05 0.45** 1.00
12. Adolescent sexual behavior −0.01 0.17** 0.19** 0.16** 0.01 −0.01 −0.07 0.12* −0.03 0.11* 0.10* 1.00
Open in a new tab

Note.

*

p < .05

**

p < .01

Testing the Direct & Mediational Pathways

Structural equation modeling was used to test our conceptual model (see Figure 1). For model fit we used standard chi square index of statistical fit, the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA; Browne & Cudeck, 1993) and the Confirmatory Fit Index (CFI; Kenny, 2011). Chi–square fit index is generally significant when the sample size is equal to 400 or above (Kenny, 2011). RMSEA is considered best fit when below .05 and reasonable fit when between .05 and .08 (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Finally, when CFI is equal to or above .90 then the model is said to have excellent fit (Kenny, 2011).

Direct effects

We first assessed the direct effect of observed harsh parenting and adolescent association with deviant peers during early adolescence on late adolescent tobacco use, alcohol use, and engagement in risky sexual behaviors (see Figure 2). Model results, while small in magnitude, indicated that observed harsh parenting at age 13 was associated with higher levels of adolescent tobacco use (β = .11*, t = 2.92), alcohol use (β = .13**, t = 2.75), and risky sexual behavior (β = .11*, t = 2.12) at age 18 years. Similarly, association with deviant peers at age 13 was associated with increased adolescent tobacco use (β = .14**, t = 2.79), alcohol use (β = .12**, t = 2.28), and risky sexual behavior (β = .13**, t = 2.60) at age 18 years. The model's CFI was .97 and RMSEA was .06. The Chi square was significant X2 (10, N = 451) = 26.98; p = .03. Together this represents an adequate fit of the data. For parsimony, covariates were analyzed in the reported model, but only shown for the mediational model below, as results were similar with and without the covariates in the model.

Figure 2. Direct Effects.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Direct paths include standardized β values & (t values); X2 = (10, N = 451) = 26.98, p = .03; CFI = .97; RMSEA = .06; *p < .05; **p < .01. The statistically non-significant pathways were not included in the figure.

Mediational effects

Next the mediational model was tested which included adolescent attitudes and intentions during middle adolescence, as well as the covariates assessed during early adolescence. As shown in Figure 3, adolescent attitudes and intentions about risky behaviors mediated the relationship between observed harsh parenting and association with deviant peers on later adolescent tobacco use, alcohol use, and risky sexual behavior even after controlling for parent tobacco use, alcohol use, and early adolescent engagement in risky behaviors. That is, harsh parenting (β = .10*, t = 2.37) and association with deviant peers (β =.19***, t = 3.90) significantly predicted adolescent attitudes and intentions about risky behaviors. Also, adolescent attitudes and intentions about risky behaviors was significantly related to tobacco use (β = .41***, t = 8.00), alcohol use (β = .42***, t = 8.27) and risky sexual behavior (β = .41***, t = 7.87) in late adolescence, with moderate effect sizes. Once adolescent attitudes and intentions was added to the model, all of the initial direct paths were no longer significant. Only statistically significant pathways were included in the figures and covariate table (see Table 3). The comparative fit index was .99. The RMSEA value was .04. The value of chi square value was X2 (10, N= 451) = 18.52, p = .05, representing a good fit of the data.

Figure 3. Mediational Effects.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Mediation paths include standardized β values & (t values); X2 = (10, N = 451) = 18.52, p = .05 CFI = .99; RMSEA = .04; *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. The statistically non-significant pathways were not included in the figure.

Table 3.

Standardized Coefficients of Covariates in the Mediation Path Model

β t-ratio
Early Adolescence, age 13
Adolescent tobacco use
Adolescent attitudes & intentions about risky behaviors 0.26*** 5.18
Adolescent involvement with deviant peers 0.23*** 4.97
Adolescent alcohol use
Adolescent alcohol use (age 18) 0.10* 2.22
Adolescent involvement with deviant peers 0.28*** 6.14
Adolescent sexual behavior
Adolescent involvement with deviant peers 0.10* 2.45
Adolescent attitudes & intentions about risky behaviors 0.10* 2.18
Adolescent gender
Adolescent tobacco use (age 18) –0.15*** –3.46
Parent education
Harsh parenting –0.15** –3.18
Adolescent attitudes & intentions about risky behaviors –0.10* –2.52
Parent tobacco use
Harsh parenting 0.13** 2.66
Adolescent involvement with deviant peers 0.12** 2.77
Adolescent attitudes & intentions about risky behaviors 0.14** 3.22
Adolescent tobacco use (age 18) 0.13** 3.00
Parent alcohol use
Harsh parenting 0.10* 2.16
Open in a new tab

Note. All insignificant values are omitted from the table.

*

p < .05

**

p < .01

***

p < .001

Discussion

This investigation evaluated the association between observed harsh parenting and adolescent involvement with deviant peers when youth were in early adolescence and youth engagement of alcohol use, tobacco use, and risky sexual behavior during late adolescence. In addition, adolescent attitudes and intentions regarding involvement in these behaviors were examined as a mediating mechanism during middle adolescence. This study adds to the sparse literature that has examined the roles of parenting and peers within the context of adolescent attitudes and intentions about later involvement in risky behaviors (Halgunseth et al., 2013; Trucco, et al., 2011). To be sure these significant associations were not due to parental use of substances or early adolescent engagement in risky behaviors, these earlier behaviors were considered as well. As hypothesized, both observed harsh parenting and association with deviant peers in early adolescence was significantly associated with adolescent engagement in risky behaviors five years later. However, this direct relationship was no longer significant after including adolescent attitudes and intentions regarding these risky behaviors during middle adolescence in the model. This suggests that attitudes and intentions fully explained the association between parenting and association with deviant peers on later risky behaviors. That is, harsh parenting and association with deviant peers was no longer related directly to adolescent engagement in risky behaviors once attitudes and intentions about such behaviors were added in the model. This was true even after parental substance use and early adolescent involvement in risky behaviors were taken into account. These results are consistent with Ajzen's (2005) idea that intentions and attitudes develop from an adolescent's surrounding environment. Thus, it appears that parents and peers play a significant role in the development of adolescent attitudes and intentions about risky behaviors, which in turn, affect their engagement in risky behaviors in the late adolescent years.

Also important, the current study employs a research design that overcomes some of the methodological limitations found in many earlier studies of parenting, peers, and risky youth outcomes. First, it uses a prospective, longitudinal research design, thus eliminating retrospective biases inherent in measures based on recall of early adolescent experiences. The current investigation also used multiple informants, including ratings of parenting behavior by trained observers. This approach reduces method variance biases produced by reliance on a single informant. It is particularly noteworthy that the magnitude of the association between observed harsh parenting and adolescent risky behaviors was similar to that of adolescent self-report of deviant peers and later risky behavior. This is remarkable given that one set of associations is based on the same reporter and the other on two different reporters.

Altogether, the results replicate and extend previous studies examining the effects of parents and peers on youth risk outcomes. For example, Halgunseth et al. (2013) found a mediating influence of delinquent-oriented attitudes on the relation between parental inconsistent discipline and adolescent delinquency. Trucco et al. (2011) found that perceived peer attitudes mediated the association between peer delinquency and alcohol use. The current study helps to expand these studies by considering parents, peers, and adolescent views about substance use and risky sexual behaviors on later engagement in such behavior. Once we take into account an adolescent's intention to engage in future risky behaviors or their belief of how dangerous risky behaviors can be, the impact that parents and peers play in such future engagement is lessened. This attests to the importance of examining adolescent goals and values about their own behavior. While the current results showed that both harsh parenting and association with deviant peers was significantly related to adolescent intentions and attitudes, future research should continue to investigate the mechanisms that help to shape such attitudes and intentions about risky behavior throughout the adolescent years. In addition, we examined the influence of parenting and peers separately within the model, but future studies should examine the cumulative effect of parenting and peers on adolescent involvement in risky behaviors.

It should be acknowledged that there are alternative explanations for some of the findings. For example, it could be that genetic factors help to explain some of the observed associations. For example, genetic influences such as pubertal development, testosterone levels, and dopaminergic systems may help account for individual differences in behavior (Harden, 2014). Indeed, it was found that adolescents who experienced poor family functioning, as well as off-time pubertal timing demonstrated increased risk of substance use (Hummel, Shelton, Heron, Moore, & van den Bree, 2013). Thus, future research should explore not only the importance of parenting and peer contexts, but how genetics influence adolescent risky outcomes.

There are also limitations of this study worthy of comment. The sample was limited in terms of ethnic and racial diversity, as well as geographic location. In addition, all adolescents in these analyses lived with their biological parents. Future research using more diverse samples is needed. Another limitation is that the data were collected some years ago and the prevalence of adolescent risky behavior may be different from current trends. Although there has been a downward trend in adolescent alcohol use in Iowa since the 1990s, the overall number of youth who use alcohol is still concerning. For example, results from the Iowa Youth Survey (IYS) indicate that youth in Iowa report current and binge drinking rates higher than national averages (Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation, 2013). Indeed, a substantial majority of the rural youth in the current study experienced a high prevalence of substance use disorders (Rueter, et al., 2007). Specifically, many first experienced alcohol use disorders as adolescents with a substantial proportion continuing into adulthood. These rates of alcohol use were more prevalent than those from other samples in urban areas, indicating that rural young adults may be at an even higher risk for substance use problems (Rueter, et al., 2007).

In closing, the current results suggest that adolescent attitudes and intentions surrounding risky behavior may help to explain the association between harsh parenting and involvement with deviant peers on an adolescent's future engagement of risky behaviors. This is an important finding with potential applied implications. For example, this finding can motivate clinicians and policy makers to use and develop effective educational and preventive interventions designed to promote healthy attitudes surrounding substance use and sexual behavior. A systemic approach to prevention and intervention of risky behaviors should be taken which includes not only the adolescent but their parents and peers as well. Prevention programs should not only address the prevalence and predictors of risky behaviors but more importantly, as this study implies, programs should address individual attitudes and intentions about these risky behaviors. That is, programs could evaluate an adolescent's positive and negative evaluations about risky behaviors. This could be done by asking youth if they think they will smoke cigarettes or use tobacco in the future, drink alcohol, or have sexual intercourse in the next year. For adolescents who indicate an intention to smoke, drink, or engage in sexual behaviors, additional programming could be provided beyond basic education in the risks of these behaviors.

In addition, family-based programs that focus on decreasing harsh parenting, as well as increasing positive attitudes and intentions toward risky behaviors may be effective in reducing engagement in these behaviors (Halgunseth et al., 2013). Likewise, efforts toward promoting positive attitudes towards risky behaviors may diminish the impact that deviant peer affiliations have on such behaviors. In short, educators must speak frankly to young adolescents, their parents, and their peers about intentions to engage in future risky behaviors or their belief of how dangerous risky behaviors can be as this is a powerful predictor of subsequent risky behavior in late adolescence.

Acknowledgements

This research is currently supported by a grant from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD064687). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies. Support for earlier years of the study also came from multiple sources, including the National Institute of Mental Health (MH00567, MH19734, MH43270, MH59355, MH62989, MH48165, MH051361), the National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA05347), the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD027724, HD051746, HD047573), the Bureau of Maternal and Child Health (MCJ-109572), and the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Successful Adolescent Development Among Youth in High-Risk Settings.

Contributor Information

Tricia K. Neppl, Dept. of Human Development and Family Studies, Iowa State University, 4389 Palmer Suite 2356, Ames, IA 50011; tneppl@iastate.edu; phone: 515-294-8502.

Jui Dhalewadikar, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Iowa State University; juid2425@iastate.edu.

Brenda J. Lohman, Dept. of Human Development and Family Studies, Iowa State University, 4389 Palmer Suite 2356, Ames, IA 50011; blohman@iastate.edu; phone: 515–294–6230.

References

  1. Adalbjarnardottir S, Hafsteinsson LG. Adolescents’ perceived parenting styles and their substance use: Concurrent and longitudinal analyses. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2001;11(4):401–423. doi:10.1111/1532-7795.00018. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ajzen I. Attitudes, personality, and behavior. McGraw–Hill International; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  3. Akers AY, Gold MA, Bost JE, Adimora AA, Orr DP, Fortenberry JD. Variation in sexual behaviors in a cohort of adolescent females: The role of personal, perceived peer, and perceived family attitudes. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2011;48:87–93. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.05.004. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.05.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Alati R, Baker P, Betts KS, Connor JP, Little K, Sanson A, Olsson CA. The role of parental alcohol use, parental discipline and antisocial behaviour on adolescent drinking trajectories. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2014;134:178–184. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.09.030. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2013.09.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Albarracin D, Johnson BT, Fishbein M, Muellerleile PA. Theories of reasoned action and planned behavior as models of condom use: a meta–analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 2001;127(1):142–161. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.142. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ali MM, Dwyer DS. Estimating peer effects in sexual behavior among adolescents. Journal of Adolescence. 2011;34:183–190. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.008. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2009.12.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Allison PD. Missing data techniques for structural equation modeling. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. 2003;112:545–557. doi: 10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.545. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.112.4.545. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Arbuckle J. Amos 6.0 user's guide. Marketing Department, SPSS Incorporated; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  9. Baker JG, Rosenthal SL, Leonhardt D, Kollar LM, Succop PA, Burklow KA, Biro FM. Relationship between perceived parental monitoring and young adolescent girls' sexual and substance use behaviors. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. 1999;12(1):17–22. doi: 10.1016/S1083-3188(00)86615-2. doi:10.1016/S1083-3188(00)86615-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Beadnell B, Morrison DM, Wilsdon A, Wells EA, Murowchick E, Hoppe M, Gilmore MR, Nahom D. Condom use, frequency of sex, and number of partners: Multidimensional characterization of adolescent sexual risk–taking. Journal of Sex Research. 2005;42(3):192–202. doi: 10.1080/00224490509552274. doi:10.1080/00224490509552274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Browne MW, Cudeck R, Bollen KA, Long JS. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage Focus Editions. 1993;154:136–162. [Google Scholar]
  12. Buckley L, Chapman R, Sheehan M. Protective behaviour in adolescent friendships: The influence of attitudes towards the consequences, friendship norms and perceived control. Journal of Youth Studies. 2010;13(6):661–679. doi:10.1080/13676261003801762. [Google Scholar]
  13. Chaplin TM, Sinha R, Simmons JA, Healy SM, Mayes LC, Hommer RE, Crowley MJ. Parent-adolescent conflict interactions and adolescent alcohol use. Addictive Behaviors. 2012;37:605–612. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.01.004. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.01.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Chapman EN, Werner-Wilson RJ. Does positive youth development predict adolescent attitudes about sexuality? Adolescence. 2008;43(171):505–523. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Chassin L, Presson CC, Montello D, Sherman SJ, McGrew J. Changes in peer and parent influence during adolescence: Longitudinal versus cross–sectional perspectives on smoking initiation. Developmental Psychology. 1986;22(3):327–334. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.22.3.327. [Google Scholar]
  16. Cohen DA, Richardson J, LaBree L. Parenting behaviors and the onset of smoking and alcohol use: A longitudinal study. Pediatrics. 1994;94(3):368–375. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Conger RD, Conger KJ. Resilience in Midwestern families: Selected findings from the first decade of a prospective, longitudinal study. Journal of Marriage and Family. 2002;64(2):361–373. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00361.x. [Google Scholar]
  18. Conger RD, Rueter MA, Conger KJ. The family context of adolescent vulnerability and resilience to alcohol use and abuse. Sociological Studies of Children. 1994;6:55–86. [Google Scholar]
  19. Connolly J, McIsaac C. Romantic relationships in adolescence. Social Development: Relationships in Infancy, Childhood, and Adolescence. 2011:180–206. [Google Scholar]
  20. Cooke R, Sniehotta F, Schuz B. Predicting binge–drinking behaviour using an extended TPB: Examining the impact of anticipated regret and descriptive norms. Alcohol and Alcoholism. 2007;42(2):84–91. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agl115. doi:10.1093/alcalc/agl115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Crosnoe R, Johnson MK. Research on adolescence in the twenty–first century. Annual Review of Sociology. 2011;37:439–460. doi: 10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150008. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Cruz JE, Emery RE, Turkheimer E. Peer network drinking predicts increased alcohol use from adolescence to early adulthood after controlling for genetic and shared environmental selection. Developmental Psychology. 2012;48(5):1390–1402. doi: 10.1037/a0027515. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027515. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Duncan TE, Duncan SC, Strycker LA. An introduction to latent variable growth curve modeling: Concepts, issues, and application. Routledge Academic; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  24. Eisenberg N, Zhou Q, Spinrad TL, Valiente C, Fabes RA, Liew J. Relations among positive parenting, children's effortful control, and externalizing problems: A three–wave longitudinal study. Child Development. 2005;76(5):1055–1071. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00897.x. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00897.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Ellickson PL, Tucker JS, Klein DJ. Ten–year prospective study of public health problems associated with early drinking. Pediatrics. 2003;111(5):949–955. doi: 10.1542/peds.111.5.949. doi:10.1542/peds.111.5.949. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Ennett ST, Faris R, Hipp J, Foshee VA, Bauman KE, Hussong A, Cai L. Peer smoking, other peer attributes, and adolescent cigarette smoking: A social network analysis. Prevention Science. 2008;9(2):88–98. doi: 10.1007/s11121-008-0087-8. doi:10.1007/s11121-008-0087-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Englund MM, Egeland B, Oliva EM, Collins WA. Childhood and adolescent predictors of heavy drinking and alcohol use disorders in early adulthood: A longitudinal developmental analysis. Addiction. 2008;103:23–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02174.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02174.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Grazioli VS, Dillworth T, Witkiewitz K, Andersson C, Kilmer JR, Pace T, Fossos-Wong N, Carroll H, Berglund M, Daeppen J-B, Larimer ME. Protective Behavioral Strategies and Future Drinking Behaviors: Effect of Drinking Intentions. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. 2015 Feb 2; doi: 10.1037/adb0000041. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/adb0000041. [DOI] [PubMed]
  29. Gruber E, DiClemente RJ, Anderson MM, Lodico M. Early drinking onset and its association with alcohol use and problem behavior in late adolescence. Preventive Medicine. 1996;25(3):293–300. doi: 10.1006/pmed.1996.0059. doi:10.1006/pmed.1996.0059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Guilamo-Ramos V, Bouris A, Lee J, McCarthy K, Michael SL, Pitt-Barnes S, Dittus P. Paternal influences on adolescent sexual risk behaviors: A structured literature review. Pediatrics. 2012;130(5):e1313–e1325. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-2066. doi: 10.1542/peds.2011-2066. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Gutman LM, Eccles JS, Peck S, Malanchuk O. The influence of family relations on trajectories of cigarette and alcohol use from early to late adolescence. Journal of Adolescence. 2011;34(1):119–128. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.01.005. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.01.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Halgunseth LC, Perkins DF, Lippold MA, Nix RL. Delinquent-oriented attitudes mediate the relation between parental inconsistent discipline and early adolescent behavior. Journal of Family Psychology. 2013;27(2):293–302. doi: 10.1037/a0031962. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0031962. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Harden KP. Genetic influences on adolescent sexual behavior: Why genes matter for environmentally oriented researchers. Psychological Bulletin. 2014;140(2):434–465. doi: 10.1037/a0033564. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0033564. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Hennessy M, Bleakley A, Fishbein M. Measurement models for reasoned action theory. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2012;640:42–57. doi: 10.1177/0002716211424709. doi:10.1177/0002716211424709. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Hu L.-t., Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999;6(1):1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118. [Google Scholar]
  36. Hummel A, Shelton KH, Heron J, Moore L, van den Bree MBM. A systematic review of the relationships between family functioning, pubertal timing and adolescent substance use. Addiction. 2013;108(3):487–496. doi: 10.1111/add.12055. doi: 10.1111/add.12055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Irwin CE, Igra V, Eyre S, Millstein S. Risk–taking behavior in adolescents: The Paradigm. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1997;817:1–35. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1997.tb48193.x. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1997.tb48193.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Iowa Consortium for Substance Abuse Research and Evaluation . Iowa youth survey trend report. The University of Iowa; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  39. Jacobson KC, Crockett LJ. Parental monitoring and adolescent adjustment: An ecological perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2000;10(1):65–97. doi:10.1207/SJRA1001_4. [Google Scholar]
  40. Jessor R. New perspectives on adolescent risk behavior. Cambridge University Press; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  41. Kaplow JB, Curran PJ, Dodge KA. Child, parent, and peer predictors of early– onset substance use: A multisite longitudinal study. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 2002;30(3):199–216. doi: 10.1023/a:1015183927979. doi:10.1023/A:1015183927979. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Karimy M, Niknami S, Hidarnia AR, Hajizadeh I. Intention to start cigarette smoking among Iranian male adolescents: usefulness of an extended version of the theory of planned behaviour. Heart Asia. 2012;4:120–124. doi: 10.1136/heartasia-2012-010140. doi:10.1136/heartasia-2012-010140. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Kenny DA. Measuring model fit. Retrieved November. 2011;29:2011. [Google Scholar]
  44. Kim-Spoon J, Farley JP, Holmes CJ, Longo GS. Does adolescents' religiousness moderate links between harsh parenting and adolescent substance use? Journal of Family Psychology. 2014;28(6):739–748. doi: 10.1037/a0037178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037178. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Kincaid C, Jones DJ, Sterrett E, McKee L. A review of parenting and adolescent sexual behavior: The moderating role of gender. Clinical Psychology Review. 2012;32(3):177–188. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2012.01.002. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2012.01.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Kiuru N, Burk WJ, Laursen B, Salmela-Aro K, Nurmi J-E. Pressure to drink but not to smoke: Disentangling selection and socialization in adolescent peer networks and peer groups. Journal of Adolescence. 2010;33(6):801–812. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.07.006. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.07.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Kotchick BA, Shaffer A, Miller KS, Forehand R. Adolescent sexual risk behavior: A multi–system perspective. Clinical Psychology Review. 2001;21(4):493–519. doi: 10.1016/s0272-7358(99)00070-7. doi:10.1016/S0272-7358(99)00070-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Lamis DA, Malone PS, Lansford JE, Lochman JE. Maternal depressive symptoms as a predictor of alcohol use onset and heavy episodic drinking in youths. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2012;80(5):887–896. doi: 10.1037/a0028959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0028959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Light JM, Greenan CC, Rusby JC, Nies KM, Snijders TAB. Onset to first alcohol use in early adolescence: A network diffusion model. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2013;23(3):487–499. doi: 10.1111/jora.12064. doi: 10.1111/jora.12064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Longmore MA, Manning WD, Giordano PC. Preadolescent parenting strategies and teens' dating and sexual initiation: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family. 2001;63(2):322–335. doi:10.111/j.1741-3737.2001.00322.x. [Google Scholar]
  51. Mak KK, Ho SY, Day JR. Smoking of parents and best friend-Independent and combined effects on adolescent smoking and intention to initiate and quit smoking. Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 2012;14(9):1057–1064. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nts008. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nts008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Mares SHW, Lichtwarck-Aschoff A, Engels RCME. Alcohol-specific parenting, adolescent alcohol use and the mediating effect of adolescent alcohol-related cognitions. Psychology & Health. 2013;28(7):833–848. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2012.762453. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2012.762453. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Maxwell KA. Friends: The role of peer influence across adolescent risk behaviors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2002;31(4):267–277. doi:10.1023/A:1015493316865. [Google Scholar]
  54. McLoyd VC, Kaplan R, Purtell KM, Bagley E, Hardaway CR, Smalls C. Poverty and socioeconomic disadvantage in adolescence. Handbook of Adolescent Psychology. 2009 doi:10.1002/9780470479193.adlpsy002014. [Google Scholar]
  55. Melby JN, Conger RD. The Iowa family interaction rating scales: Instrument summary. In: Kerig P, Lindahl K, editors. Family observational coding systems: Resources for systematic research. Erlbaum; Mahwah, NJ: 2001. [Google Scholar]
  56. Melby JN, Conger RD, Conger KJ, Lorenz FO. Effects of parental behavior on tobacco use by young male adolescents. Journal of Marriage and the Family. 1993;55(2):439–454. doi:10.2307/352814. [Google Scholar]
  57. Mercken L, Sleddens EFC, de Vries H, Steglich CEG. Choosing adolescent smokers as friends: The role of parenting and parental smoking. Journal of Adolescence. 2013;36:383–392. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.12.004. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.12.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Meschke LL, Bartholomae S, Zentall SR. Adolescent sexuality and parent– adolescent processes: Promoting healthy teen choices. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2002;31(6):264–279. doi: 10.1016/s1054-139x(02)00499-8. doi:10.1016/S1054-139X(02)00499-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Musher-Eizenman DR, Holub SC, Arnett M. Attitude and peer influences on adolescent substance use: The moderating effect of age, sex, and substance. Journal of Drug Education. 2003;33(1):1–23. doi: 10.2190/YED0-BQA8-5RVX-95JB. doi:10.2190/YED0-BQA8-5RVX-95JB. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Muuss RE, Porton HD. Increasing risk behavior among adolescents. In: Muuss RE, Porton HD, editors. Adolescent Behavior and Society. McGraw Hill; New York: 1998. pp. 422–431. [Google Scholar]
  61. Osgood DW, Ragan DT, Wallace L, Gest SD, Feinberg ME, Moody J. Peers and the Emergence of Alcohol Use: Influence and Selection Processes in Adolescent Friendship Networks. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2013;23:500–512. doi: 10.1111/jora.12059. doi: 10.1111/jora.12059. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Potard C, Courtois R, Rusch E. The influence of peers on risky sexual behaviour during adolescence. European Journal of Contraception and Reproductive Healthcare. 2008;13(3):264–270. doi: 10.1080/13625180802273530. doi:10.1080/13625180802273530. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Redonnet B, Chollet A, Fombonne E, Bowes L, Melchior M. Tobacco, alcohol, cannabis and other illegal drug use among young adults: The socioeconomic context. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2012;121(3):231–239. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.09.002. doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.09.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Rubin KH, Bukowski WM, Parker JG. Peer interactions, relationships, and groups. Handbook of child psychology. 1998 doi:10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0310. [Google Scholar]
  65. Rueter MA, Holm KE, Burzette R, Kim KJ, Conger RD. Mental health of rural young adults: Prevalence of psychiatric disorders, comorbidity, and service utilization. Community Mental Health Journal. 2007;43(3):229–249. doi: 10.1007/s10597-007-9082-y. doi: 10.1007/s10597-007-9082-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  66. Shelton KH, Harold GT, Fowler TA, Rice FJ, Neale MC, Thapar A, van den Bree MB. Parent-child relations, conduct problems and cigarette use in adolescence: Examining the role of genetic and environmental factors on patterns of behavior. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2008;37(10):1216–1228. doi:10.1007/s10964-007-9254-7. [Google Scholar]
  67. Simons RL, Johnson C, Conger RD, Elder G. A test of latent trait versus lifecourse perspectives on the stability of adolescent antisocial behavior. Criminology. 1998;36:217–244. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9125.1998.tb01247.x. [Google Scholar]
  68. Simons-Morton B, Haynie DL, Crump AD, Eitel P, Saylor KE. Peer and parent influences on smoking and drinking among early adolescents. Health Education & Behavior. 2001;28(1):95–107. doi: 10.1177/109019810102800109. doi:10.1177/109019810102800109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Stanton B, Li X, Pack R, Cottrell L, Harris C, Burns JM. Longitudinal influence of perceptions of peer and parental factors on African American adolescent risk involvement. Journal of Urban Health. 2002;79(4):536–548. doi: 10.1093/jurban/79.4.536. doi:10.1093/jurban/79.4.536. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  70. Steinberg L. A dual systems model of adolescent risk–taking. Developmental Psychobiology. 2010;52(3):216–224. doi: 10.1002/dev.20445. doi:10.1002/dev.20445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  71. Trucco EM, Colder CR, Wieczorek WF. Vulnerability to peer influence: A moderated mediation study of early adolescent alcohol use initiation. Addictive Behaviors. 2011;36:729–736. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.02.008. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.02.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  72. Urberg KA, Degirmencioglu SM, Pilgrim C. Close friend and group influence on adolescent cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Developmental Psychology. 1997;33(5):834–844. doi: 10.1037//0012-1649.33.5.834. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.5.834. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  73. Van De Ven MO, Engels RC, Otten R, Van Den Eijnden RJ. A longitudinal test of the theory of planned behavior predicting smoking onset among asthmatic and non–asthmatic adolescents. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 2007;30(5):435–445. doi: 10.1007/s10865-007-9119-2. doi:10.1007/s10865-007-9119-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  74. Vitoria PD, Salgueiro MF, Silva SA, de Vries H. Social influence, intention to smoke, and adolescent smoking behaviour longitudinal relations. British Journal of Health Psychology. 2011;16:779–798. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8287.2010.02014.x. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8287.2010.02014.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  75. Whitaker DJ, Miller KS. Parent–adolescent discussions about sex and condoms impact on peer influences of sexual risk behavior. Journal of Adolescent Research. 2000;15(2):251–273. doi:10.1177/0743558400152007. [Google Scholar]
  76. White HR, Pandina RJ, Chen P-H. Developmental trajectories of cigarette use from early adolescence into young adulthood. Drug and Alcohol Dependence. 2002;65(2):167–178. doi: 10.1016/s0376-8716(01)00159-4. doi:10.1016/S0376-8716(01)00159-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  77. Zucker RA, Donovan JE, Masten AS, Mattson ME, Moss HB. Early developmental processes and the continuity of risk for underage drinking and problem drinking. Pediatrics. 2008;121:S252–S272. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-2243B. doi:10.1542/peds.2007-2243B. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES