Learning from bad peers? Influences of peer deviant behaviour on adolescent academic performance

ABSTRACT

In addition to family and school factors, adolescent academic performance can also be influenced by the surrounding peer groups. Based on the data from China Education Panel Studies (CEPS) between 2013 and 2014, this paper examined the association between peer deviant behaviour and adolescent academic performance. It is found that peer deviant behaviour negatively predicted adolescent academic performance, and the negative association between peer deviant behaviour and academic performance in migrant and school-boarding adolescents was obviously weaker than that in native and home-resident adolescents. This negative association was slightly reduced but still significant after controlling for potential selection bias. More peer deviant behaviours reduced adolescent academic performance by increasing their own deviant behaviours and reducing their own educational expectation. Therefore, it is necessary to guide peer behaviours and interactions and regulate adolescent deviant behaviours from a global perspective to avoid negative peer effects.

KEYWORDS:

• Peer deviant behaviour
• academic performance
• peer effects
• Chinese adolescents

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Statement regarding informed consent

The CEPS data are publicly available, the survey was approved, and informed consents were obtained from both adolescents and their parents.

Notes

1. $Cohen{\hspace{0.17em}}_{\hspace{0.17em}}^{\prime }sd=\left(x_1-x_2\right)/s$, Cohen (1988) recommended effect size benchmarks of small, medium, and large for effect size of d = 0.3, d = 0.5, and d = 0.8, respectively. In this study, $x_1$ meant the average of adolescent academic performance in those without peer deviant behaviour, $x_2$ meant the average of adolescent academic performance in those with peer deviant behaviour, and $s$ meant the combined standard deviation of the above two groups.

2. $AdjustedCohen{\hspace{0.17em}}_{\hspace{0.17em}}^{\prime }sd=2r/\sqrt{1-r^2}$. For this adjusted d, Cohen (1988) recommended effect size benchmarks of small, medium, and large for effect size of d = 0.1, d = 0.3, and d = 0.5, respectively. In this study, r meant the Pearson’s correlation coefficient between adolescent academic performance and peer deviant behaviour.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Junfeng Jiang

Junfeng Jiang is an associate research fellow at School of Sociology at Central China Normal University. His research interests include medical sociology and educational sociology.