China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Domain VI: Professional Growth and Responsibility
Published in Nicole M. Augustine, Prevention Specialist Exam Study Guide, 2023
Let us think about the types of questions you might ask from each domain:Community: What is the neighborhood like? What are some of the most influential and effective community organizations in your area? Are they doing any work to reduce risk factors or create protective factors for youth and families living there?Family: How does parenting style affect children's outcomes? What level of parental engagement is needed to improve long-term outcomes? Are there viable, accessible parenting supports already present in the community?School: How do school policies and practices affect students’ outcomes? How can we help to make schools more supportive for all students, including those who are at a higher risk of dropping out or being expelled?Individual/Peer: What is going on in a person's social environment that might put them at increased risk for developing certain problem behaviors? How do we improve resistance skills and boost confidence when we encounter negative peer pressure?
Clinician engagement
Published in Paul Bowie, Carl de Wet, Aneez Esmail, Philip Cachia, Safety and Improvement in Primary Care: The Essential Guide, 2020
There is good evidence from social science that people’s behaviour is strongly influenced by the actions of those who are like them.12 Dawson et al.13 suggest the influence of colleagues is one of ‘multiple cues’ identified by clinicians as significant factors affecting their practice. Peer influence is a powerful yet greatly underused resource in building engagement and spreading behaviour. Positive peer pressure can strongly influence attitudes and behaviours. When peers share a mutual respect, they will listen to, learn from and support one another in ways that can foster engagement, shape opinions and generate energy for change.
Tackling Health Inequalities in Adolescence
Published in James Matheson, John Patterson, Laura Neilson, Tackling Causes and Consequences of Health Inequalities, 2020
Advances in knowledge about brain development have revealed that the brain continues to change during adolescence and young adulthood [1]. The prefrontal cortex, responsible for the development of abstract thinking, the ability to consider alternative views and the consequences of actions, develops up until the age of 25. In contrast, the limbic system, responsible for pleasure-seeking behaviours with immediate reward, peaks at age 16–18. This may go some way to explain adolescent risk-taking behaviours and the impact of peer pressure.
The effect of social phobia and peer pressure on substance use among adolescents
Published in Journal of Substance Use, 2023
Social phobia, also known as social anxiety disorder, is an intense fear of becoming humiliated in social situations and is accompanied by behavioral, somatic, and psychological symptoms causing considerable losses in functionality. Stein’s study (2017) is stated that the incidence of social phobia was 4% according to the World Health Survey (2008)., Adolescents place much importance on what their peers think about them. Each peer group has its own unwritten rules which define how its members interact with each other. Adolescents yearn to belong to a peer group which would accept them for who they are and help them make friends and develop collaboration and leadership skills, which are some of the developmental tasks of adolescence. Peer pressure can be defined as “any attempt by one or more peers to compel an individual to follow in the decisions or behaviours favoured by the pressuring individual or group.” Peer pressure may sometimes lead adolescents to harmful behavior (Esen, 2002; Ngee Sim & Fen, 2003), such as substance use (Studer et al., 2016).
Using Social Learning Theories to Better Understand the Variation of the Moral Acceptability of Performance Enhancement Drug Use
Published in AJOB Neuroscience, 2020
An important finding is that CE was considered more morally acceptable with an increased usage among peers. This represents a partial replication of prior research (e.g., Sattler, Forlini, et al. 2013). Dinh et al. mainly interpreted this effect as peer pressure. From social learning theories, we know that others’ engagement in a behavior can also lead to imitation and reinforcement of this behavior (Akers and Sellers 2013; Cialdini, Kallgren, and Reno 1991; Deutsch and Gerard 1955; Sutherland 1947). Their engagement can serve as a signal for the public acceptance of said behavior and thereby be a normative influence. The actions of others provide information about the cost-benefit ratio of the respective behavior and thus serves as an informational influence. In the case of CE this information could be, for example, whether the positive effects of the drug may exceed the negative effects (such as short- and long-term health consequences). It can be assumed that the worse the cost-benefit ratio of CE-drugs is, the lower the moral acceptability. But surely peer engagement in CE-drug use—as an instrumental behavior to outperform others—can also evoke social comparisons and the fear of falling behind. Thus, peer pressure can result. Whether peer pressure leads to a greater acceptance of the behavior that causes this pressure is debatable (the opposite could be assumed as well). Other explanations, such as informational and normative, should have received more attention when interpreting the positive relationship between higher peer engagement and higher moral acceptability.
Using Connected Technologies in a Continuous Quality Improvement Approach in after-school Settings: The PAX Good Behavior Game
Published in Journal of Technology in Human Services, 2019
Yasemin Cava-Tadik, Emilie Phillips Smith, Dian Yu, Megan Leathers, Jaelyn R. Farris
One example of an evidence-based practice tested in after-school is the Good Behavior Game, a universal prevention program designed 40 years ago to increase academic performance and to decrease disruptive behaviors for elementary school-aged children (Barrish, Saunders, & Wolf, 1969; Kellam et al., 2008; Smith et al., 2017; Weis, Osborne, & Dean, 2015). Paxis Institute has developed a prepackaged, manualized, commercialized version called PAX Good Behavior Game (PAX GBG, “pax” means peace in Latin). Referred to as a “behavioral vaccine” (Embry, 2002, 2004), PAX GBG is a peer-assisted intervention (Kohler & Strain, 1990) that relies on interdependent group contingencies to improve children’s behavior and self-regulation (Maggin, Johnson, Chafouleas, Ruberto, & Berggren, 2012; Wright & McCurdy, 2012). The strategy is based on social learning theory (Bandura, 1977), in which desirable behaviors are reinforced, encouraged, and maintained by modeling appropriate behaviors, and by providing contingent group activity rewards for self-regulation and peer group coregulation. Moreover, in addition to adults providing appropriate structure and support, “positive peer pressure” or “peer coregulation” also plays a key role (Embry, 2002) because the children can encourage their teammates to engage in prosocial behaviors that benefit both themselves and the group.