Effects of peer influences 1

Running head: EFFECTS OF PEER INFLUENCES ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE:

Effects of Peer Influences on Academic Performance: A Literature Review

Philip A. Reich

Candidate for the degree of Master of Education in Educational Psychology

Wayne State University

College of Education

Theoretical and Behavioral Foundations Division

ED 7999 – Dr. Cheryl Somers

December 10, 2012

 Effects of peer influences 2

Abstract

Research has shown that peer relationships play an important role in human

development. The process of socialization extends beyond early familial relationships

and is rooted in a child’s early academic experience. Early school experiences provide

the construct for future behavior in both academic and social settings.

The bonds of friendship develop within a child’s academic peer group and evolve

into a dynamic and multi-level construct; each having a different effect on decision-

making and overall behavior; often forming the basis of future behavior.

Maturation occurs as an evolutionary process through chronological stages as

influences shift from parents to peers and students struggle for peer acceptance. The

degree to which peer-influences affect motivation, decision-making, goal setting, and

overall academic performance, is widely debated and subject to mixed results.

Student academic motivation and performance is affected by teacher influence in

context with teacher academic goals, socialization, and help seeking influences.
 Effects of peer influences … 3

Introduction

From birth to death, the evolutionary process of independence progresses

through gradual stages of development. Key to successful independence is predicated

on developing bonds of friendship and influence of peer relationships.

Stages of student development are rife with change in areas of social,

physiological, and cognitive development; and, students are required to make important

decisions relative to their respective academic endeavors, which may, or may not, rate

the same level of importance as their perceived social status.

For decades, educators, and social scientists, have studied the role of peer-

influences and friendship bonds on student motivation relative to academic performance

in an attempt to garner a clear understanding of the dynamics of those relationships.

Classroom teachers, at the forefront of the education process, are faced daily with the

challenges of student motivation.

The importance of studies of the roles of peer influences, bonds of friendship,

and motivation, lie in our increasing opportunity to expand our knowledge-base to better

understand, predict, and reinforce positive future outcomes in student academic

motivation and achievement.

The question remains: To what degree do friendships and peer groups influence

student motivation, decision-making, goal setting, and overall academic performance?

 Effects of peer influences … 4

The following is a literature review offering a discussion of the role of peer

influences, friendship bonds, motivation, and goal setting, relative to academic

performance.

Friendships, Peer Groups, and Motivation

Researcher Thomas Berndt described four-types of support that the bonds of

friendship provide: (1) informational; (2) instrumental; (3) companionship; (4) esteem

(Berndt; 2004.) Each of these support-types reinforce a sense of interdependence

among group members while simultaneously reinforcing an increase in autonomy.

In defining the bonds of friendship, as described by Berndt (2004), researcher

Kathryn R. Wetzel (2004) stated: Informational support refers to guidance and advice in

personal problems with parents, romantic relationships, teachers or other friends.

Instrumental support refers to help on any type of task, such as homework or chores.

Companionship support refers to reliance on friends to do things with, such as someone

to eat lunch with or go to a dance or sporting event. Esteem support refers to the

encouragement friends provide both when life is going well (e.g., congratulating each

other) and when life does not go as one hoped (e.g., consoling in the face of failure).

(Wentzel, 2004).

The important difference between friendship bonds, and peer groups, is the

development of friendship bonds through direct, personal, interactions between

individuals; as opposed to peer groups, which are comprised of individuals’ belonging to

 Effects of peer influences … 5

the same societal group. Examples of peer groups might include: members of the law

enforcement community; employees working for the same company; or, students

attending the same school.

One dynamic unique to the bond of friendships is the direct influence of friends

relative to decision-making and overall behavior. Through direct interaction, friends

often share similar likes/dislikes, as well as personal information, thoughts, and feelings.

The effect of peer influences are less personal than friendships, but may be exerted

directly; such as a student ridiculed by other members of the group; or, indirectly; such

as a student that conforms to a certain clothing fashion to emulate the style of his/her

peers.

Unlike the potential for the indirect, non-interpersonal, interactions of peer-

relationships, friendships are personal, multi-faceted, and capable operating at multi-

levels. According to Brown (2004), and Rubin et al. (2006): The adolescent peer

environment is a multilevel, multifaceted environment that includes three main types of

peer interactions: dyads (individual relationships), cliques (small groups of peers who

regularly interact with each other), and crowds (adolescents who share the same

reputation, but who may not necessarily interact with each other) (Brown, 2004; Rubin,

et al., 2006). Student decisions and behaviors are predicated on these complex

relationships between friends.

 Effects of peer influences … 6

The age-old adage, “Birds of a feather, flock together”, however lacking in

scientific basis, may describe an oddly accurate illustration of the bonds of friendship

and its origins. The peer emulation theory, as proposed by Berndt (1999), and Berndt &

Keefe (1996) purports that: Individuals may act comparably to their friends because

friends adopt and reproduce each other’s beliefs (Berndt, 1999; Berndt & Keefe, 1996).

This phenomenon can be observed in any school setting throughout the United States,

whereas students tend to align themselves with others that share their same values and

belief-system. According to H.C. Kelman (1961): Relative to the basis of the peer

emulation theory; individuals internalize and replicate others’ actions and attitudes

through the processes of; compliance; identification; and, internalization; whereas,

individuals acquire another’s behavior for the purpose of gaining favor with that person

(compliance); adopt the observable behaviors of another for the purpose of relationship

satisfaction (identification); and/or, adopting a system of self-beliefs in a specific domain

with that of another (internalization) (Kelman, 1961).

The Berndt, Laychak, Park Study

Researchers T. Berndt, A. Laychak, and K. Park (1990) designed an experiment

for the purpose of studying the effects of peer influences in academic motivation among

adolescent friends. According to Berndt, et al. (1990): Most prior studies were lacking in

direct assessment of peer influences. The Berndt, et al., (1990) study involved direct

assessment by means of coding observational responses and quantifying the results.

 Effects of peer influences … 7

For the experiment, Berndt, et al. (1990) proposed two independent hypotheses,

to wit: (1) discussions of dilemmas between friends lead to an increase in the similarity

of friends’ decisions; and, (2) discussions between friends would lead to shifts toward

more extreme decisions (Berndt, et al., 1990).

The experiment involved the pairing of adolescent close friends, based on

research findings that close friends share greater mutual influences than peers (Cohen,

1983). Eighth-graders from two Midwest junior high schools, located in the same rural

district, participated in the study. A total of 118 students; 74 females, and 44 males;

were studied, and 90% of the total number of participating students were white.

For the process of selecting student pairs at the same grade-level, students were

asked to list the names of same-sex friends, beginning with their best-friend, in order of

closeness. In selecting each student pair, researchers narrowed-down each student’s

list to the top five names. For purposes of quantifying data, a numeric scale was

utilized, whereas students were asked to rate each name on their list, to wit: from don’t

like (1) to like very much, as much as a best-friend (5) (Berndt, et al., 1990). Student

pairs were selected from those students who listed each other in the top five as a 4, or a

5, in closeness on a numeric scale of 1 to 10.

In the overall experimental design, subjects of the study were randomly

assigned to one of two conditions: (1) the experimental condition; or, (2) the control

condition. In the experimental condition, the paired friends discussed ‘dilemmas’ that

required them to decide between two actions reflecting different levels of achievement
 Effects of peer influences … 8

motivation relative to academic involvement. The responses of the student pair in the

experimental group were compared for similarity. In the control condition, the paired

friends discussed topics unrelated to school. The student pairs in the control group were

also compared for similarity in their decisions.

Prior to the discussion stage of the experiment, each pair of friends were

administered a pretest consisting of six (6) written scenarios, each scenario containing a

dilemma, and each scenario offered the student a choice between a high level of

achievement motivation, and a low level of achievement motivation. The scenarios

described a condition in which the students were offered choices between attending an

after-school social event; or, studying for an upcoming exam, working on a school

project for extra credit, or dropping a school-related sport for the purpose of studying to

improve grades. Student responses were submitted individually, as each of the paired

students were not given the opportunity to view or discuss each other’s responses.

According to Berndt, et al. (1990): In each dilemma, they decided between one

action that reflected a high level of achievement motivation and another action that

reflected a low level of achievement motivation. Choice of high-motivation alternatives

showed that students valued their education and gave high priority to school-related

tasks. Choice of low-motivation alternatives showed that students had little interest in

doing well in school and did not enjoy challenges if they meant additional work (Berndt,

et al., 1990).
 Effects of peer influences … 9

The results of the Berndt, et al. (1990) experiment supported the first hypothesis

inasmuch as after discussions (between friends), student decisions increase in

similarity. Inversely, the results of the experiment did not support the second

hypothesis that discussions between friends would lead to shifts toward more extreme

decisions.

Assuming that the results of the Berndt, et al. (1990) study accurately depicts

what it purports to measure, the study is one of many that lend important contributions

in furthering an understanding of the role of student decision-making relative to the

bonds of friendship and the reciprocal effect of those influences.

Lacking in the Berndt, et al. (1990) study, however, are the controls of the

independent variable in measuring the accuracy and candidness of student responses

relative to the implementation of student decisions that lead to an increase in academic

behavior performance. In other words; of the students who reported a decision of

higher-level motivation in congruence with their friend(s), how many of those students

implemented those higher-levels of behavior in actuality? As a student, to merely report

a higher-level behavioral choice as a participant in a controlled experiment is starkly

different than implementing the higher-level behavior in practice. One recommendation

to advance the Berndt, et al. (1990) study one-step further: In comparing the grade-

point averages of the student respondents against their reported responses relative to

their decisions, the resulting data would allow researchers a more comprehensive and

accurate view of the results of the overall study.

 Effects of peer influences … 10

Peer Influences, Modeling, and Academic Performance

Peer pressure can be either positive or negative and is based on the individual’s

intrinsic desire to belong, or to ‘fit in’. Children develop the desire to be liked early-on in

childhood; and, through personal interactions (most often in the school setting), cull their

playmates according to individual perception of desirability and need, a term referred to

as “homophily.” Homophily is a form of modeling; a term coined by sociologists in the

1950’s, and defined as, “love of the same” (New York Times, December 10, 2006). In

peer relationships, homophily is a result of individuals that associate and bond with one

another based on similar likes, dislikes, and other dynamic social attributes.

Studies have shown that modeling plays an important role in the shaping of

behavior, and occurs within peer groups. This especially applies to academic

performance among adolescents. Observing a friend's commitment to schoolwork, or

voicing a belief about the meaning of school, could introduce an individual to new

behaviors and viewpoints. Bandura (1986) stated: Depending on the consequences,

observation of a model can strengthen or weaken the likelihood that the observer will

engage in such behavior or adopt such beliefs in the future (Bandura, 1986). Social

cognitive theory proposes that students acquire information about friends’ academic and

social behaviors through vicarious experiences and direct instruction (Bandura, 1986).
 Effects of peer influences … 11

In support of modeling as an influence in shaping behavior, Ryan (2000) reported

that researchers Shunk and Zimmerman (1996) provided evidence that self-efficacy

beliefs are influenced by peer models. Ryan (2000) further described the findings of

Shunk, et al. (1996) to wit: Children who experienced difficulties with mathematics were

exposed to a mastery or coping model who was working on mathematics problems.

Peer mastery models solved math problems correctly and verbalized statements

reflecting high self-efficacy and low task difficulty. Peer coping models initially

demonstrated difficulty with the problems and verbalized negative statements, but

ultimately verbalized high-efficacy statements and solved the problems. For children

who experienced problems in math, coping models enhanced self-efficacy (Shunk,

Hanson, & Cox, 1987). Their own self-efficacy was bolstered – perhaps thinking, “If that

student can have trouble and then succeed then even if I have trouble I can succeed”

(Ryan, 2000).

Effects on academic performance can be the result of positive or negative peer

pressure, either through friends, or as peer group influences. According to M. H. Jones,

et al., (2012): It should be noted that there is often not a direct relationship from friends’

behaviors to a student’s academic performance. Rather, friends affect one’s self-

beliefs, which may then alter academic behaviors (Jones, Audley-Piotrowski, Kiefer,

2012). An illustration of this point might involve interactions between students in social

or romantic activities, and devoid of mutual discussions involving academic

performance.
 Effects of peer influences … 12

On behalf of the Heritage Foundation, a study conducted by researcher K. A.

Johnson (2000) proposes: Negative peer pressure is a factor in lower test scores about

as much as being a(n) Hispanic or black minority group member -- and more than living

in a low income family.

Researchers analyzed responses to background questions asked students taking

the 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) reading test, and

correlated them with test scores.

 Among fourth graders, almost 36 percent of African-Americans and 29 percent of

Hispanics say their "friends make fun of people who try to do well in school,"

compared to just over 17 percent of whites.

 Among eighth graders the numbers are more even, but still high; almost 30

percent of Hispanics and 23 percent of blacks and of whites agree with the above

statement.

The effect of peer pressure was calculated independent from other factors which affect

a child's academic achievement -- race, income, gender and parents' education:

 For instance, compared to a fourth grade white girl from a non-poor family, being

an African-American was associated with an 8.6 percent lower test score, and

being a Hispanic was associated with an 8.2 percent lower score.

 Negative peer pressure was associated with an 8.5 percent lower test score.
 Effects of peer influences … 13

 Being from a low-income family was associated with a test score drop of 6.1

percent (Johnson, 2000.)

Studies have supported the use of coping models as a means to improve academic

skills and instill a higher level of student self-efficacy. Unlike models that employ the

use of mastery techniques that involve specific, flawless, practice; coping model

strategies expose students to the pitfalls, as well as the benefits, of practice, for the

purpose of overcoming fears and anxieties that stifle learning. Children who observed

coping models (single or multiple) judged themselves similar in competence to the

models; children who observed mastery-models judged themselves less competent

than the models (Schunk and Hanson, 1989). Coping models illustrate how determined

effort and positive self-thoughts can overcome difficulties. Peer influences also play an

important role in helping students to achieve academically. Models of the same sex and

age as children and whom children view as similar in competence might not only teach

children skills but also promote their self-efficacy for acquiring those skills (Schunk and

Hanson, 1985). Observing peers acquiring skills can instill the belief in children that

they are capable of learning, which enhances task motivation and skill development

(Schunk, 1985).

Help-seeking and Academic Achievement

Students often look to peers for social and emotional support. As students

graduate from elementary to middle school, changes in venue (a new school), peers,

and teachers, may create anxieties detrimental to the learning process. Coupled with
 Effects of peer influences … 14

developmental changes, adolescents often rely on friendships and peers to cope with

day-to-day challenges, both during and after school. Relative to students’ moving from

elementary level to middle-school, researcher Eccles (2004) reports: Such a move has

been shown to be associated with declines in academic engagement and achievement.

One such strategy used among peers is ‘help seeking’. Researchers Ryan and

Shim (2012) stated: “In … documenting the importance of peers to achievement, we

hypothesize that changes in help-seeking behaviors with peers will predict changes in

achievement.” An important aspect of Ryan and Shim’s (2012) research lies in the

basic tenets of scientific research, to wit: to understand conditions and to predict

outcomes.

Two such classifications of help-seeking are: (1) adaptive help; and (2) expedient

help. Adaptive help enhances learning, and is based on a method of probing the

student’s existing knowledge rather than providing the answer without explanation. An

example of adaptive help is the ‘Socratic Method’; whereas, a question is followed by a

response that poses another question. This method of teaching reinforces learning, as

it is designed to train the student to think critically and independently. Expedient help is

of no benefit to the inquiring student, inasmuch as the answer is ‘expediently’ provided

by the helping student; or, the helping student may perform the task (for the inquiring

student) in an effort to expedite the process. Expedient help is counter-productive to

learning, and lacks the use of critical thinking processes necessary for learning.
 Effects of peer influences … 15

Declines in academic achievement among adolescents have been documented,

and linked to an increase in expedient help seeking, as students move from elementary

to middle school. Juvonen, et al. (2004) stated: The idea that some peer interactions

around academics may be maladaptive for learning is especially relevant during early

adolescence, a stage characterized by declines in motivation, engagement, and

achievement (Juvonen, Kaganoff, Augustine, & Constant, 2004). Thus, early

adolescence and the transition to middle school may be a stage when both peer culture

and alienation contribute to peer interactions that undermine learning and achievement

(Ryan and Shim, 2012).

The role of the teacher during adolescents’ earlier stages of academic

development is critical to student success. Equally important are the students’

perceptions of the teacher. Although teachers vary in teaching-styles, the end-goal lies

in the teacher’s ability to foster intrinsic motivation, thus leading the student toward

autonomous learning strategies.

Academic programs throughout the United States are similar in structure,

whereas elementary school students maintain the same teacher throughout most of the

day. Beginning in middle school, students move from classroom to classroom and

experience several different teachers on a daily basis. The diversity of the middle

school curriculum lends to diversity in teachers, teacher expectations, and teaching-

styles.
 Effects of peer influences … 16

Teachers vary in the academic goals they emphasize to students, and this has

implications for how students think about themselves, their work, and their peers (Ames,

1992; Meece, Anderman, & Anderman, 2006). According to Ryan and Shim (2012):

Through the types of tasks they assign, how they encourage students to do their work,

and how they recognize and evaluate students, teachers may communicate different

ideas about the purpose of schoolwork and what constitutes success in their classroom.

When teachers emphasize mastery goals, they communicate to students that

understanding, improvement, and the intrinsic value of learning are the primary reasons

for involvement in schoolwork. Central to a mastery goal is a focus on effort as integral

to achievement. When teachers emphasize performance goals, they communicate to

students that demonstrating ability relative to others is of primary importance in the

classroom (Ryan and Shim, 2012).

The importance of research in help seeking among peers is the allowance for an

increased understanding of adolescent cognitive processes relative to decision-making,

motivation, and academic performance, in conjunction with peer/friend influences. A

comprehensive understanding of help-seeking behavior can be utilized to develop

teaching methods designed minimize or negate the effects of expedient help strategies,

and reinforce effective learning strategies.

Peer Groups, Friendships, and Motivation

Among the goals of education is the molding of students into well-rounded, clear-

thinking, rational, and productive members of society. An educator’s greatest challenge

 Effects of peer influences … 17

is student motivation. Peer groups and friends have been shown to influence

motivation. Researcher A.M. Ryan (2000) observed that: Peer groups were influential

regarding changes in students’ intrinsic value for school (i.e., liking and enjoying) as well

as achievement (i.e., report card grades). The peer group was not, however, influential

regarding changes in students’ utility value for school (i.e., importance and usefulness).

It was found that associating with friends who have a positive affect toward school

enhanced students’ own satisfaction with school, whereas associating with friends who

have a negative affect toward school decreased it (Ryan, 2000).

Studies involving reciprocating influences between friends have suggested that

discussions between friends lead to an increase in the similarity of their decisions on

motivation-related dilemmas (Berndt, et. al., 1990). Further research by D. B. Kandel

(1978) suggested that: School-related attitudes of friends became more similar over

time if their friendships remained stable. Kandel (1978) further suggests that:

adolescents that were best friends throughout the school year had more similar

educational aspirations at the end of the year than at the beginning (Kandle, 1978).

Researcher A. M. Ryan (2000) posed an important question relative to past and

present research outcomes, to wit: Do peer groups influence the development of

motivation, engagement, and achievement, and what is the nature of this influence?

In examining Ryan’s (2000) question, the concept of student motivation must be

defined. Motivation is a cognitive process actuated either intrinsically, or through

extrinsic stimuli. In other words, a student’s unilateral decision to do (or not do) his/her
 Effects of peer influences … 18

schoolwork may be an intrinsic, self-motivated behavior (e.g., doing the work just for the

sake or pleasure of doing it; or, the self-satisfaction of obtaining a good grade); or, a

behavior based on extrinsic motivation (e.g., negative or positive: peer/friend influences;

parental influences; teacher influences).

Motivation as a concept cannot be accurately quantified, thus posing difficulties

for cogent research. Ryan (2000) states: Although we know little about how the peer

group serves as a context for the socialization of engagement and achievement, we

know even less regarding motivation (Ryan, 2000). Engagement, however, can be

measured and refers to observed behaviors. An example of engagement as an

observed behavior would be; a student’s academic output, such as homework, extra-

credit work, time spent on school-related projects; all of which can be quantified. Ryan

(2000) stated: the distinction between motivation and engagement is between student

cognition underlying involvement in schoolwork (i.e., beliefs) and actual involvement in

schoolwork (i.e., behavior) (Ryan, 2000).

Ryan (2000) further stated that: defined as such, most studies of peer influence

have not examined peer groups. Research has examined peer influence in the context

of best friend pairs (e.g., Kandel, 1978) or crowds of adolescents (e.g., Brown, Clasen,

& Eicher, 1986) (Ryan, 2000).

Ryan’s (2000) point is valid, inasmuch as in our discussion of the Berndt, et al.

(1990) study was limited to decisions (academic and non-academic) of students

 Effects of peer influences … 19

categorized as ‘best friends’ (relationships on a highly personal level), unlike peer

groups, which may (or may not) involve student associations on a personal level.

Socialization, Goal-setting, Motivation, and Academic Performance

Studies suggest that student motivation toward higher levels of academic

performance may be a result of achievement goals in accordance with the student’s

personal belief in his/her ability to accomplish a target goal. Wentzel and Wigfield

(1998) define children’s ‘ability beliefs’ as: Evaluations of their competence in different

areas. Bandura (1986) proposed that individuals’ efficacy expectations, or their beliefs

that they can accomplish a given task or activity, are the major determinant of activity

choice, willingness to expend effort, and persistence (Bandura, 1986).

A student’s unilateral decision to engage in an activity (e.g., schoolwork; sports;

volunteering) that satisfies a specific goal is known as; subjective task value. Eccles et

al., (1983), defined different components of subjective task values as: interest value,

attainment value, and utility value (Eccles et al. 1983; Wigfield, 1994; Wigfield and

Eccles, 1992). Interest value refers to the degree of satisfaction that the student has for

a particular goal-oriented activity. An example would be that of a student’s decision to

try-out for the girls’ varsity basketball team based on her desire to play the game. A

student’s interest value is a form of intrinsic motivation due to the arbitrariness of the

decision. In other words, in our example, our student’s decision to try-out for the team is

unilateral, and not based on friendship affiliations or peer pressure. Attainment value

relates to the degree of importance that the student places on the value of the chosen
 Effects of peer influences … 20

activity or behavior. An example of an attainment value would be that of the student in

our example earning her spot on the girls’ varsity basketball team and believing that her

abilities could significantly contribute to the team’s success in winning a championship.

Utility value refers to the utility, or usefulness (in actuality, or perceived), that a goal-

based activity provides. An example of utility value would be that of our basketball

team-member playing to the best of her ability with the goal of earning a scholarship for

college.

According to Wentzel and Wigfield, (1998): Researchers have defined different

broad goal orientations toward achievement, with two orientations receiving the most

research attention (e.g. Ames, 1992; Dweck and Leggett, 1988; Nicholls, 1979b;

Nicholls, Cheung, Lauer, and Pataschnick, 1989). The first broad goal orientation;

learning goals (or, task mastery goals), are goals that are set for the purpose of

mastering a specific task or activity. Wentzel and Wigfield (1998) report that: Mastery

goals relate to the use of deeper processing strategies (elaboration) and meta-cognitive,

self-regulatory strategies, such as planning, comprehension monitoring, and so on

(Pintrich and Degroot, 1990). An example of a learning, or mastery, goal would be a

student struggling in math that spends his/her after-school time with a math tutor for the

purpose of skill-strengthening with the goal of earning a higher grade. The second goal

orientation, according to Wentzel and Wigfield (1998), is based on the student’s ego

(also known as ‘performance’ goals) whereas the student’s motivation to engage in an

activity is for the purpose of ‘topping’ all others. An example of a performance goal

would be a taller, heavier, student joining the school wrestling team knowing that he has
 Effects of peer influences … 21

greater chances of winning over his opponents due to his stature. In general,

performance goal strategies are adopted by students who are cognizant of their abilities

to outperform other students rather than to enhance their own abilities in other areas

(e.g., improving skills in a variety of academic subjects).

For the purpose of this discussion, one might pose the question, “How are the

constructs of student goals relative to peer influences?” The answer may lie in the

process of socialization.

Whether students choose to aspire to higher levels of academic performance,

or not; the process of socialization cannot be avoided. Interactions between students

and teachers form patterns of behavior and friendship bonds begin to develop within the

peer group. Wentzel and Wigfield (1998) describe these interactions as social-

motivational processes, to wit: Goals to achieve social relationship outcomes have been

related to social-behavioral effectiveness, orientations toward others, and peer

acceptance. Goals to behave in socially appropriate ways have been related positively

to social acceptance by classmates and teachers as well as to displays of socially

appropriate behavior (Wentzel and Wigfield, 1998). Wentzel and Wigfield (1998) further

postulate: Attributional styles and control beliefs have been related to a range of social

outcomes, including aggression, peer rejection, and help giving. Beliefs about social

competence and efficacy also have been related to a range of social outcomes,

including helping control of aggression, peer acceptance, and social assertiveness

(Wentzel and Wigfield, 1998).

 Effects of peer influences … 22

The constructs of student motivation, academic performance, and peer/friendship

influences, are rooted in the socialization process and not strictly within the confines of

peer relationships alone. Interactions between students, teachers, school counselors,

and parents, are catalyst in the creation of parameters for student behavior, decision-

making, achievement motivation, and goal setting.

According to Wentzel and Wigfield (1998): Interpersonal relationships also

represent contexts that can lead to engagement with, or alienation from, classroom

activities (Juvonen and Wentzel, 1996). Students who pursue social goals that promote

group cohesion and positive interpersonal interactions (such as to be prosocial and

responsible), will most likely be those students who also feel as if they are an integral

part of the social group (Wentzel and Wigfield, 1998).

Summary

The impact of peer pressure, both negative and positive, has a lasting effect; not

only throughout students’ school experience, but for a lifetime. Students engaged in

help-seeking strategies run the risk of academic difficulty if not properly applied, and

teachers who employ performance task goal methods create (in students) near-indelible

behavior strategies that could have a negative impact for future decision-making and

coping skills.

The most effective teachers and peer role models (e.g., friends) are actively

involved in identifying problems in peer group pressure, motivation, and goal setting

strategies and effectively utilize available resources toward minimizing negative effects.
 Effects of peer influences … 23

It is these teachers and role models that guide students toward positive goal-setting

strategies, increasing positive outcomes for future success. Teachers, parents, peers,

and students that utilize mastery goals as learning strategies enjoy higher academic

performance levels and self-efficacy.

Research designs are limited to the subjective nature of the data gleaned due to

the nature of the data. In other words; despite strict control designs of the independent

variable, researchers are limited to subject responses, which may, or may not, be

candid or accurate (e.g., student respondents may be reporting what they think

researchers want to hear), and are limited in opportunities for direct observation. These

limitations, however, should not deter researchers from continuing studies, nor should

the existing body of research be ignored.

The importance of research (in this venue) lies in understanding cognitive

processes as the basis for behavior. Despite extensive research to date, the dynamics

of student learning, motivation, decision-making, and overall performance, require a

continued pursuit of studies, to adapt to the ever-changing constructs of social behavior.

 Effects of peer influences … 24

References

Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal

of Educational Psychology, Vol. 84; pp. 261-271.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive

theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ; Prentice Hall

Berndt, T.J. (1999). Friends’ influence on students’ adjustment to school.

Educational Psychologist, Vol. 34, pp. 15-28.

Berndt, T.J. (2004). Children’s friendships: Shifts over a half century in

perspectives on their development and their effects. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, Vol. 50,
No. 3, (July, 2004) pp. 206-223.

Berndt, T.J., & Keefe, K. (1996). Friends’ influence on school adjustment: A

motivational analysis. In Juvonen & K.R. Wentzel (Eds.) Social motivation:
Understanding childrens’ school adjustment (pp. 248-278). New York, NY. Cambridge
University Press.

Berndt, T.J., Laychak, A.E., Park, K. (1990). Friends’ influence on adolescents’

academic achievement motivation: An experimental study. Journal of Educational
Psychology, Vol. 82, No. 4, 664-670.
 Effects of peer influences … 25

Brown, B. (2004). Adolescent relationships with their peers. In R.M. Lerner and L.
Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of Adolescent Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Brown, B.B., Clasen, D.R., & Eicher, S.A. (1986). Perceptions of peer pressure,
peer conformity dispositions, and self-reported behavior among adolescents.
Developmental Psychology, Vol. 22, pp. 521-530.

Cohen, J. (1983). Commentary: The relationship between friendship selection

and peer influence. In J.L. Epstein & N. Karweit (Eds.), Friends in School (pp. 163-
174). New York: Academic Press.

Dweck, C.S., and Leggett, E.L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation

and personality. Psychol. Rev. 95: 256-273.

Eccles, J.S., (2004). Schools, academic motivation, and stage-environment fit. In

R.M. Lerner & L. Steinberg (Eds.), Handbook of adolescent psychology. (2 nd ed., pp.
125-153). New York, NY. Wiley.

Eccles, J.S., Adler, T.F., Futterman, R., Goff, S.B., Kaczala, C.M., Meece, J., and
Midgley, C. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In Spence, T.T. (ed.)
Achievement and achievement motives. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
 Effects of peer influences … 26

Hallinan, M. T. (1983). "Commentary: New Directions for Research on Peer

Influence." In Friends in School: Patterns of Selection and Influence in Secondary
Schools, ed. J. L. Epstein and N. Karweit. New York: Academic Press.

Ide, J.K., Parkerson, J., Haertel, G.D., Walberg, H.J. (1981). Peer group
influence on educational outcomes: A quantitative synthesis. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 1981, Vol. 73, No. 4, 472-484.

Jacobson, L.T. (2010). Academic Performance in Middle School: Friendship

Influences. Proceedings of the 6th Annual GRASP Symposium, Wichita State University;
Faculty: Charles A. Burdsal, 2010.

Johnson, K.A. (2000). The Peer Effect on Academic Achievement Among Public
Elementary Students. CDA Report No. 00-06, May 26, 2000; Heritage Center for Data
Analysis, Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, DC,
20002.

Jones, M.H., Audley-Piotrowski, S.R., Kiefer, S.M. (2012). Relationships Among

Adolescents’ Perceptions of Friends’ Behaviors, Academic Self-Concept, and Math
Performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2012, Vol. 104, No. 1, 19-31.

Juvonen, J., and Wentzel, K.R. (1996). Social motivation: Understanding

children’s school adjustment. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
 Effects of peer influences … 27

Juvonen, J., Le, V.-N., Kaganoff, T., Augustine, C., & Constant, L. (2004). Focus
on the wonder years: Challenges facing the American middle school. Santa Monica,
CA: Rand.

Kandel, D.B. (1978). Homophily, selection, and socialization in friendships.

American Journal of Sociology, 84, 427-436.

Kelman, H.C. (1961). Processes of opinion change. The Public Opinion

Quarterly, 25, 57-78.

Marcus, R.F., Sanders-Reio, J. (2001). The Influence of Attachment on School

Completion. School Psychology Quarterly, 2001, Vol. 16, No. 4, 427-444.

Meece, J.L., Anderman, E.M., & Anderman, L.H. (2006). Classroom goal
structures, student motivation, and academic achievement. Annual Review of
Psychology, 57, pp. 487-503. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070258

Mounts, N.S., Steinberg, L. (1995). An Ecological Analysis of Peer Influence on

Adolescent Grade Point Average and Drug Use. Developmental Psychology, 1995, Vol.
31, No. 6, 915-922.

(New York Times, December 10, 2006;

www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/magazine/10Section2a.t-4.html).
 Effects of peer influences … 28

Nicholls, J.G. (1979). Quality and equality in intellectual development: The role of
motivation in education. Amer. Psychol. Rev., 34: 1071-1084.

Nicholls, J.G., Cheung, P., Lauer, J. and Pataschnick, M. (1989). Individual

differences in academic motivation: Perceived ability, goals, beliefs, and values. Learn.
Indiv. Diff. 1: 63-84.

Pintrich, P.R., and DeGroot, E. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning

components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology,
Vol. 82; pp. 33-40.

Prinstein, M.J., Dodge, K.A. (2008). Understanding Peer Influence in Children

and Adolescents. The Guilford Press, (New York, NY), 255-pages. (ISBN 978-1-59385-
397-6).

Rubin, K.H., Bukowski, W., Parker, J.G. (2006). Peer Interactions, Relationships,
and Groups. W. Damon & R. Lerner (Series Eds.) & N. Eisenberg (Volume Ed.),
Handbook of Child Psychology, 6th edition: Vol. 3, Social, emotional, and personality
development, (pp. 571-645), New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Ryan, A.M. (2000). Peer Groups as a Context for the Socialization of

Adolescents’ Motivation, Engagement, and Achievement in School. Educational
Psychologist, 2000, 35(2), 101-111.
 Effects of peer influences … 29

Ryan, A.M., Shim, S.S., (2012). Changes in Help Seeking From Peers During
Early Adolescence: Associations With Changes in Achievement and Perceptions of
Teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2012, Vol. 104, No. 4, 1122-1134.

Shunk, D.H., Hanson, A.R. (1989). Influence of Peer-Model Attributes on

Children’s Beliefs and Learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1989, Vol. 81, No.
3, 431-434.

Shunk, D.H., Hanson, A.R. (1985). Peer Models: Influence on Children’s Self-
Efficacy and Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1985, Vol. 77, No. 3,
313-322.

Schunk, D.H., Hanson, A.R., & Cox, P.D. (1987). Peer-model attributes and
children’s achievement behaviors. Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 79, pp. 54-
61.

Shunk, D.H., & Zimmerman, B.J. (1996). Modeling and self-efficacy influences on
children’s development and self-regulation. In J. Juvonen & K. Wentzel (Eds.), Social
motivation: Understanding children’s school adjustment (pp.154-180). Cambridge
University Press.

Steinberg, L., Monahan, K.C. (2007). Age Differences in Resistance to Peer

Influence. Developmental Psychology, 2007, Vol. 43, No. 6, 1531-1543.
 Effects of peer influences … 30

Wentzel, K. R., Barry, C., & Caldwell, K. (2004). Friendships in Middle School:
Influences on motivation and school adjustment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96,
195–203.

Wentzel, K.R., and Wigfield, A. (1998). Academic and social motivational

influences on students’ academic performance. Educational Psychology Review, Vol.
10, No. 2, pp. 155-175.

Wigfield, A., (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A

developmental perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 6: 49-78.

Wigfield, A., and Eccles, J.S., (1992). The development of achievement task
vales: A theoretical analysis. Dev. Rev.,12, pp: 265-310.