The Effect of Peer Behaviour and Influences on Negative Behaviour of Individuals 

The relationship between the behaviour and influences of peers and the behaviour of individuals has been explored in a variety of ways. There are number of factors that have been found to influence the effect of peer behaviour on individual behaviour. These factors include age, culture, financial effects, whether the interaction is virtual or in-person, and group size. These all fall under the concept of social learning theory. For the purposes of this literature review, social learning theory relates to individuals learning from one another by way of the actions and attitudes they observe others portraying. This literature review relates to social learning theory in that the negative behaviour of the individuals is a result of observation the negative behaviour and influences of their peers.

This finding that peer behaviour and influence is more significant than other factors is not exclusive to the aforementioned study. In their article comparing deviance in Japanese and American college students, Kobayashi & Farrington (2019) concluded that the difference was almost exclusively due to peer behaviour. Japanese students were found to engage less in deviant behaviour than their American counterparts because they engaged less with peers who do, and cultural differences had very little impact on the likelihood of the students to commit deviant behaviour. Similarly, in their article on deviant cyber-sexual activities, Klein & Cooper (2019) found peer associations and reinforcements have the strongest influence. Though gender, self-esteem, sexual orientation, race, and religion were all found to be important, the willingness to engage in deviant cyber-sexual behaviour was most effected by the peers of the young adults. Even the willingness of the individual to engage in equivalent activities in-person was found to have less of an impact than peer influence. In contrast to this, Fox (2017) believe that it is a combination of social learning theory, and biology and genetics which effect behaviour. Rather than attributing behaviours to either nature or nurture, an integrated approach was taken considering the social learning perspective, including peer association, and a biological perspective, and how they work together to influence negative behaviour. Fox (2017) concluded that incorporating these into a single theory gave a more accurate model of impacts on criminal behaviour than using either on their own. Therefore, Kobayashi & Farrington (2019) and Klein & Cooper (2019) found it is common for peer behaviour and influences to be found to be more significant than all other factor when influencing the behaviour of an individual. However, this was contradicted by Fox (2017) who concluded that peer factors should be used in conjunction with others to create a more substantial influence. Ultimately, these studies all concluded that social learning theory, and more specifically peer factors, are important in influencing negative behaviours, but there is contention as to how influential it can be and if it should be combined with other approaches.

As shown above, it is widely accepted that peer influences and peer behaviour are very influential on the negative behaviour of an individual, whether or not they are used in conjunction with other factors. The reasons for why peer factors are so important are plentiful. In their study on American business students, O’Fallon & Butterfield (2012) identified a range of reasons as to why peer behaviour is so influential to the willingness of an individual to cheat. These were found using a series of questionnaires answered by the students. The reasons identified as most influential were vicarious learning, fitting in with group identity, perceived relative deprivation and negative emotions. Where perceived relative deprivation is considering themselves to be at a loss, compared to their peers, because their peers have engaged in cheating behaviour and they have not. This perceived relative deprivation then leads to negative emotions. Moreover, Ali (2012) found that influences from peers and family members had a very significant effect. Compared to the financial detriment of cigarette taxes, the willingness of an individual to engage in smoking was much more affected by peer and family influence.

It has been well established through multiple sources that peer behaviour and influences have a significant impact on negative behaviour, in that by peers engaging in such behaviours, an individual is more likely to engage in the behaviour as well. However, this relationship can also work to the opposite effect, in that peer behaviour can be used to reduce the willingness of an individual to engage in negative behaviour. In the article by O’Fallon & Butterfield (2012) referenced above, they assess that social learning theory, social identity theory and social comparison theory can be used to reduce unethical behaviour. If peers are observed to be acting ethically, an individual is more likely to act ethically in response. This is supported by Arain, Sheikh, Hameed, & Asadullah. (2017) in their article on business students reflecting the ethical behaviour exhibited by their university teachers. They found that the moral identities of students were strongly affected by the ethical leadership of their teachers. Students with teachers who displayed more ethical behaviour were more likely to engage in positive behaviour. These show that negative behaviour can not only be increased, but also reduced by utilising positive peer behaviour and influences. Moreover, behaviour of an individual is influenced not only by their peers, but by their role models, in this case teachers, as well.

In all the cases so far, peer factors have been considered in an in-person capacity. However, with the prevalence of technology driven communication, online peer behaviour and influences should also be considered for a more accurate model of impact on the behaviour of an individual. In their article considering the differences in influence between digital and traditional, or face-to-face, interactions, Miller & Morris (2016) found that social learning theory may have an equally important effect between virtual peers, as compared to traditional peers. It was concluded that particular kinds of deviant behaviour were just as influenced by digital peer associations as by face-to-face interactions. Similarly, Nodeland & Morris (2018) also completed a study on the effects of social learning theory, more specifically peer interactions, between virtual and traditional peers. The aim was to find the effect of self-control theory on cyber offending, however they found self-control to be less influential than cyber peers being negative influence and engaging in deviant behaviour. These studies show that social learning theory is relevant over the internet as compared to in-person. Despite not having any physical interaction and not observing behaviour in person, individuals were still able to learn behaviour. Nodeland & Morris (2018) suggest that this is because deviant behaviours are observable online and therefore can be replicated in accordance with social learning theory, though is also possible that it is due to social pressures that are present both online and in person.

When it comes to effects on negative behaviour of an individual, often the behaviour and influences of only a few peers are considered, not the influence of a large group. In their study on homophobic aggression among adolescents, Prati (2012) found that the attitude of a class level as a whole mediated the relationship between the number of actions individuals observed and the number of actions they admitted to partaking in. That is, the more homophobic the attitude of the class was, the more observations of peers being aggressive towards students perceived as gay, and the higher the number of self-reported aggressive incidents towards students perceived as gay. It was concluded that the reason for this was that the students felt that their homophobic actions were legitimised by the feelings of the class. This shows that the influence of a large group of peers can be similarly impactful on individuals compared to the observed behaviour of a few peers at a time. If this were taken into account in the study by O’Fallon & Butterfield (2012), it could be found that individuals were affected not only by observing unethical peer behaviour, but by the attitude of the undergraduate business cohort as a whole. This could also apply to other cases and will be further considered in the discussion on future direction.

Kobayashi & Farrington (2019), Klein & Cooper (2019), and Ali (2012) discovered that peer factors were more influential than other factors, including race, age and financial loss, on the unethical behaviour of an individual. O’Fallon & Butterfield (2012) suggested several possible social and cognitive causes for this. However, the idea that peer factors alone are the most influential was contested by Fox (2017) who concluded that an integrated approach combining peer influence with a biological perspective of social learning theory made for a more accurate model of behavioural impact. O’Fallon & Butterfield (2012) and Arain at al. (2017) predicted and found that peer behaviour and influences could also be used to reduce unethical behaviour in individuals. Going beyond the traditional face-to-face influences of small groups of peers, Miller & Morris (2016) and Nodeland & Morris (2018) found that virtual peers could have just as much of an effect on individuals. Similarly, Prati (2012) found that the attitude of a large group of peers was also very influential to individuals and their behaviour. Combining these ideas and findings shows that social learning theory is very adaptable and not specific to a given case but able to be altered and applied to all situations. In relation to peer behaviour and influence, it was found that virtual peers and peer group size do not lessen the impact of peer influence and peer factors are the most significant when compared to others, though combining them with a biological perspective could give a more accurate model.

The effects of peer behaviour and influences on an individual have been studied extensively from a range of different perspectives. It has been studied to find reasons for why the impact is so significant and the effects of different factors on the relationship. In this literature review, all the articles examined focused on students and young adults. Therefore, this would not give an accurate model of impact for people outside of that limited age group and should be expanded on to include those people. In addition, there was very little cross-culture study referenced. Though the cross-culture study included discovered that the effect of culture was not significant compared to the observed behaviour of peers, that was only for the specific case and it should be studied further to find if, under other circumstances, it could be more important. It was briefly discussed previously that the effect of peer behaviour on individuals has mainly been considered as the effect of observing or being influenced by small groups at a time and that this relationship can be impacted by the attitude of a group. This area is limited to one study on students at a school. Though it may be possible to generalise this to other schools, the effect of this relationship on a wider scale could be useful. For example, the attitude of a local community on deviant behaviour such as graffiti and petty theft could give very valuable insight and potentially lead to ways to reduce such behaviour. Ultimately, though this literature review considered important factors related to the effects of peer behaviour and influences on an individual, there are directions which were not covered to their fullest extent and could be further examined to give additional insight. 

References

1. Ali, M. M. (2012). Social learning theory, cigarette taxes and adolescent smoking behaviour. Jahrbucher Fur Nationalokonomie Und Statistik, 232(6), 633-651.
2. Arain, G., Sheikh, A., Hameed, I., & Asadullah, M. (2017). Do as I Do: The Effect of Teachers’ Ethical Leadership on Business Students’ Academic Citizenship Behaviors. Ethics & Behavior, 27(8), 665-680.
3. Fox, B. (2017). It's nature and nurture: Integrating biology and genetics into the social learning theory of criminal behavior. Journal of Criminal Justice, 49, 22-31.
4. Klein, J., & Cooper, D. (2019). Deviant Cyber-Sexual Activities in Young Adults: Exploring Prevalence and Predictions Using In-Person Sexual Activities and Social Learning Theory. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48(2), 619-630.
5. Kobayashi, E., & Farrington, D. (2019). Differences in levels of deviance between Japanese and American students: The influence of peer deviance. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 1-16.
6. Miller, B., & Morris, R. (2016). Virtual Peer Effects in Social Learning Theory. Crime & Delinquency, 62(12), 1543-1569.
7. Nodeland, B., & Morris, R. (2018). A Test of Social Learning Theory and Self-Control on Cyber Offending. Deviant Behavior, 1-16.
8. O’Fallon, M., & Butterfield, J. (2012). The Influence of Unethical Peer Behavior on Observers’ Unethical Behavior: A Social Cognitive Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(2), 117-131.
9. Prati, Gabriele. (2012). A Social Cognitive Learning Theory of Homophobic Aggression among Adolescents. School Psychology Review, 41(4), 413-428.