Loyalty to friends and confiding in adults

1
(No Transcript)
2
Loyalty to friends and
confiding in adults

• Developmental changes during adolescence

Amy Bertelsen and Constance Flanagan The
Pennsylvania State University
3
Popular Press
81 of school shootings between 1974 and 2000
the attacker told someone about his plans
almost always a peer, sibling, or friend
(Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borum, Modzeleski,
2002)
4
Wave 3 Sample
34 respondents did not provide an age.
5
Theoretical Framework
Age
Autonomy / Self-Determination
Perceived Risk of Behavior
Loyalty
Adolescents Willingness to Confide Concerns for
a Friend to an Adult
Enmeshed Friendship
Belief that Confiding in Adults Will Result in
More Trouble
6
Willingness to Confide in Adults(1 Very
Unlikely, 5 Very Likely)
7
(No Transcript)
8
Theoretical Framework
Age
Autonomy / Self-Determination
Perceived Risk of Behavior
Loyalty
Adolescents Willingness to Confide Concerns for
a Friend to an Adult
Enmeshed Friendship
Belief that Confiding in Adults Will Result in
More Trouble
9
Hypothesis One

• There will be an inverse association between
  adolescents age and willingness to confide in
  adults.

10
Adolescents Age

• Correlation confirmed
• negative association
• r -.23, p

Willingness to Confide in Adults
11
Hypothesis Two

• Early adolescents will be more inclined than
  middle and late adolescents to say they would
  talk to an adult if their friend was doing
  something dangerous.

12
Difference between early, middle, and late
adolescents willingness to confide concerns for
a friend to an adult.
Willingness to Confide in Adults could range from
1 (Very Unwilling) to 5 (Very Willing). Means
with different superscripts are significantly
different at the p Dunnetts C post hoc tests.
13
Hypothesis Three

• There will be an association for early
  adolescents between loyal friendships and
  confiding in adults but no such association for
  middle and late adolescents.

14
Loyalty Construct

• Example Items
• My friends can count on me to keep a secret.
• I stick up for my friends when somebody says
  something mean about them.
• Cronbachs Alpha .89

15
Comparison of loyal v. not loyal adolescents
willingness to confide concerns for a friend in
an adult
16
Hypothesis Four

• Regardless of age, an adolescent who is
  enmeshed in and overly reliant on his/her friends
  will be less likely to confide in an adult.

17
Enmeshed Construct

• Example Items
• I would lie to keep my friend out of trouble.
• If a friend tells you a secret, you should never
  tell anyone else, even if it is dangerous.
• Cronbachs Alpha .56

18
Comparison of enmeshed v. not enmeshed
adolescents willingness to confide concerns for
a friend in an adult
19
Hypothesis Five

• Regardless of age, willingness to confide in
  an adult will be negatively correlated with the
  belief that doing so will get the adolescent or
  his/her friend into more trouble.

20
Belief that Confiding Results in More Trouble
Construct

• Example Items
• Drug, Tobacco, Alcohol Vignettes
• - Dont say anything because your friend might
  get in trouble.
• - Dont say anything because you might get in
  trouble.
• If a friend is doing something dangerous, telling
  a parent will only get you or them into more
  trouble.
• Cronbachs Alpha .82

21

• Correlation confirmed
• negative association
• for all three age
• groups
• Early Adolescents
• r -.49, p .000
• Middle Adolescents
• r -.42, p .000
• Late Adolescents
• r -.37, p .000

Belief that Confiding will Result in More Trouble
Willingness to Confide in Adults
22
Summary of Findings
Autonomy / Self-Determination
Age ß -.189
Perceived Risk of Behavior
Loyalty ß .144
(-)
()
Adolescents Willingness to Confide Concerns for
a Friend to an Adult
Enmeshed Friendship ß -.186
(-)
R2 .28
Belief Confiding in Will Result in More Trouble ß
-.335
(-)
23
Implications

• Prepare older adolescents with the skills to
  intervene on their own.
• Loyalty may not manifest in going to adults.
• Enmeshed teens might feel marginalized.
• Create a climate where young people feel they
  wont (and dont) get into trouble for seeking
  the help of an adult.

24
The Social Responsibility and Prevention Project
The Pennsylvania State
University Principal Investigators Constance
Flanagan, Ph.D.
Les Gallay, Ph.D. Website www.pop.psu.edu\soc
resp
25
Future Research

• Additional variables
• Autonomy, Perceived danger of behavior, Belief
  that harm will actually happen, Parent-child
  relationship and communication, social
  responsibility
• Homogeneity of the friendship network
• Loyalty and other forms of intervention

26
Friendship The Anti-Drug?
Lake Video
27
Theoretical Framework
Age
Autonomy / Self-Determination
Perceived Risk of Behavior
Loyalty
Adolescents Willingness to Confide Concerns for
a Friend to an Adult
Enmeshed Friendship
Belief that Confiding in Adults Will Result in
More Trouble
28
Conclusion
Autonomy / Self-Determination
Age Adolescents 11-19 years old r -.23, p
.000
Perceived Risk of Behavior
Loyalty Early Adolescents r .24, p
.000 Middle Adolescents r .16, p .000 Late
Adolescents r .09, p .031
(-)
()
Adolescents Willingness to Confide Concerns for
a Friend to an Adult
Enmeshed Friendship Early Adolescents r -.32,
p .000 Middle Adolescents r -.34, p
.000 Late Adolescents r -.33, p .000
(-)
Belief Confiding in Will Result in More
Trouble Early Adolescents r -.49, p
.000 Middle Adolescents r -.42, p .000 Late
Adolescents r -.37, p .000
(-)
29
(No Transcript)
30
(No Transcript)
31
(No Transcript)
32
(No Transcript)
33
(No Transcript)