青少年日常生活选择的社会来源:年龄和决策域的变化。

IF 3.2 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL
Scarlett K Slagter, Anna C K van Duijvenvoorde, Wouter van den Bos
{"title":"青少年日常生活选择的社会来源:年龄和决策域的变化。","authors":"Scarlett K Slagter, Anna C K van Duijvenvoorde, Wouter van den Bos","doi":"10.1002/jad.70063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Previous research has investigated the impact of peers on adolescents' decision-making across various domains. However, adolescents are not just passive receivers of information; they actively seek advice from peers. Yet, there is limited understanding of whom adolescents turn to within their peer networks to guide their decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study explored adolescents' preferences for seeking advice within their peer network when making decisions across different decision domains: risky, prosocial, and academic. Dutch youth (N = 748, ages 11-19) were presented with hypothetical scenarios and asked which classmates they preferred to consult. Peer nominations were used to examine the characteristics of consulted peers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primarily, adolescents seek information from their (best) friends-accounting for 70%-85% of cases-and peers they like and trust, with friends serving as the most important source of guidance across all domains. We also found that consulted peers were more likely to be perceived as cool, admirable, smart, influential, or as leaders, rather than lacking these characteristics. With increasing age, adolescents demonstrated an increased reliance on friends for prosocial and risky decisions and a greater bias for smart peers when making academic decisions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study emphasises adolescents' active role in seeking advice from peers to inform their decisions related to risky-, prosocial-, and academic behaviour. Across all domains, adolescents prioritise guidance from (close) friends and peers they trust. Characteristics related to the social status of a peer, and perceived intelligence, also contribute to someone being consulted for advice. The type of peers adolescents prefer to consult appears to be more consistent across domains than highly domain-specific. However, the increased bias for friends with age was absent for academic choices. Future studies should aim to better understand adolescents' motives for consulting certain peers and should investigate the extent to which a peer's knowledge and skills play a role. These insights are essential for evaluating the suitability of peers as information sources across various decision domains.</p>","PeriodicalId":48397,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Adolescence","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Social Sources Adolescents Consult for Daily Life Choices: Variations in Age and Decision Domains.\",\"authors\":\"Scarlett K Slagter, Anna C K van Duijvenvoorde, Wouter van den Bos\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jad.70063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Previous research has investigated the impact of peers on adolescents' decision-making across various domains. However, adolescents are not just passive receivers of information; they actively seek advice from peers. Yet, there is limited understanding of whom adolescents turn to within their peer networks to guide their decisions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study explored adolescents' preferences for seeking advice within their peer network when making decisions across different decision domains: risky, prosocial, and academic. Dutch youth (N = 748, ages 11-19) were presented with hypothetical scenarios and asked which classmates they preferred to consult. Peer nominations were used to examine the characteristics of consulted peers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Primarily, adolescents seek information from their (best) friends-accounting for 70%-85% of cases-and peers they like and trust, with friends serving as the most important source of guidance across all domains. We also found that consulted peers were more likely to be perceived as cool, admirable, smart, influential, or as leaders, rather than lacking these characteristics. With increasing age, adolescents demonstrated an increased reliance on friends for prosocial and risky decisions and a greater bias for smart peers when making academic decisions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study emphasises adolescents' active role in seeking advice from peers to inform their decisions related to risky-, prosocial-, and academic behaviour. Across all domains, adolescents prioritise guidance from (close) friends and peers they trust. Characteristics related to the social status of a peer, and perceived intelligence, also contribute to someone being consulted for advice. The type of peers adolescents prefer to consult appears to be more consistent across domains than highly domain-specific. However, the increased bias for friends with age was absent for academic choices. Future studies should aim to better understand adolescents' motives for consulting certain peers and should investigate the extent to which a peer's knowledge and skills play a role. These insights are essential for evaluating the suitability of peers as information sources across various decision domains.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48397,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Adolescence\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Adolescence\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.70063\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Adolescence","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jad.70063","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:以往的研究已经从多个领域调查了同伴对青少年决策的影响。然而,青少年不仅仅是被动的信息接受者;他们积极寻求同伴的建议。然而,对于青少年在他们的同伴网络中向谁求助以指导他们的决定,人们的了解是有限的。方法:本研究探讨了青少年在不同决策领域(风险决策、亲社会决策和学术决策)中寻求同伴网络建议的偏好。荷兰青年(N = 748,年龄在11-19岁)被提出假设的场景,并询问他们更愿意咨询哪些同学。同行提名被用来检查被咨询的同行的特征。结果:首先,青少年从他们的(最好的)朋友(占70%-85%的案例)和他们喜欢和信任的同伴那里寻求信息,朋友是所有领域中最重要的指导来源。我们还发现,接受咨询的同事更有可能被认为是冷静、令人钦佩、聪明、有影响力或领导者,而不是缺乏这些特征。随着年龄的增长,青少年在做亲社会和冒险的决定时越来越依赖朋友,在做学术决定时更倾向于聪明的同龄人。结论:本研究强调了青少年在寻求同伴建议方面的积极作用,以告知他们与风险行为、亲社会行为和学业行为有关的决定。在所有领域,青少年优先考虑来自他们信任的(亲密)朋友和同伴的指导。与同伴的社会地位和感知智力相关的特征也有助于向某人咨询建议。青少年更愿意咨询的同伴类型似乎在不同领域比高度特定领域更一致。然而,在学术选择上,对年龄较大的朋友的偏见却没有增加。未来的研究应旨在更好地了解青少年咨询某些同伴的动机,并应调查同伴的知识和技能在多大程度上起作用。这些见解对于评估同级作为跨各种决策领域的信息源的适用性是必不可少的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Social Sources Adolescents Consult for Daily Life Choices: Variations in Age and Decision Domains.

Introduction: Previous research has investigated the impact of peers on adolescents' decision-making across various domains. However, adolescents are not just passive receivers of information; they actively seek advice from peers. Yet, there is limited understanding of whom adolescents turn to within their peer networks to guide their decisions.

Methods: This study explored adolescents' preferences for seeking advice within their peer network when making decisions across different decision domains: risky, prosocial, and academic. Dutch youth (N = 748, ages 11-19) were presented with hypothetical scenarios and asked which classmates they preferred to consult. Peer nominations were used to examine the characteristics of consulted peers.

Results: Primarily, adolescents seek information from their (best) friends-accounting for 70%-85% of cases-and peers they like and trust, with friends serving as the most important source of guidance across all domains. We also found that consulted peers were more likely to be perceived as cool, admirable, smart, influential, or as leaders, rather than lacking these characteristics. With increasing age, adolescents demonstrated an increased reliance on friends for prosocial and risky decisions and a greater bias for smart peers when making academic decisions.

Conclusion: This study emphasises adolescents' active role in seeking advice from peers to inform their decisions related to risky-, prosocial-, and academic behaviour. Across all domains, adolescents prioritise guidance from (close) friends and peers they trust. Characteristics related to the social status of a peer, and perceived intelligence, also contribute to someone being consulted for advice. The type of peers adolescents prefer to consult appears to be more consistent across domains than highly domain-specific. However, the increased bias for friends with age was absent for academic choices. Future studies should aim to better understand adolescents' motives for consulting certain peers and should investigate the extent to which a peer's knowledge and skills play a role. These insights are essential for evaluating the suitability of peers as information sources across various decision domains.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Adolescence
Journal of Adolescence PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
2.60%
发文量
123
期刊介绍: The Journal of Adolescence is an international, broad based, cross-disciplinary journal that addresses issues of professional and academic importance concerning development between puberty and the attainment of adult status within society. It provides a forum for all who are concerned with the nature of adolescence, whether involved in teaching, research, guidance, counseling, treatment, or other services. The aim of the journal is to encourage research and foster good practice through publishing both empirical and clinical studies as well as integrative reviews and theoretical advances.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信