Abstract
In this paper, we examine the importance of two different peer effects as determinants in the adolescent’s decision whether or not to smoke. One is measured at the class level and the other reflects the smoking behaviour of the adolescent’s best friends. A nationally representative wave of Spanish data, collected in different state and private centres of secondary education and vocational training (14–18 years), and several linear probability models are used to estimate the role of peer effects. We find that a 10 % increase in the proportion of classmates is associated with a 3.6 points increment in the probability of smoking. Similarly, if the smoker’s friends go from “only some” to “the majority”, the probability of smoking increases by 39 points. Although both peer effects are significant if introduced separately, the class peer variable is not significant once the closer peer effect is introduced. Our work provides evidence to support the hypothesis that peer effects are important determinants of smoking among adolescents. This has implications for policy-makers, since the existence of peer effects would amplify the effects of interventions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander C, Piazza M, Mekos D, Valente T (2001) Peers, schools, and adolescent cigarette smoking. J Adolesc Health 29:22–30
Ali MM, Dwyer DS (2009) Estimating peer effects in adolescent smoking behavior: a longitudinal analysis. J Adolesc Health 45:402–408
Ali MM, Dwyer DS (2011) Estimating peer effects in sexual behavior among adolescents. J Adolesc 34:183–190
Arcidiacono P, Nicholson S (2005) Peer effects in medical school. J Public Econ 89:327–350
Chen C, Greenberger E, Farruggia S, Bush K, Dong Q (2003) Beyond parents and peers: the role of important non-parental adults (VIPs) in adolescent development in China and the United States. Psychol Sch 40:35–50
Clark AE, Lohéac Y (2007) “It wasn’t me, it was them!” Social influence in risky behavior by adolescents. J Health Econ 26:763–784
De Vries H, Candel M, Engels R, Mercken L (2006) Challenges to the peer influence paradigm: results for 12–13 year olds from six European countries from the European Smoking Prevention Framework Approach study. Tob Control 15:83–89
Duarte R, Escario J, Molina J (2006) The psychosocial behaviour of young Spanish smokers. J Cons Policy 29:176–189
Duarte R, Escario J, Molina J (2013) Are estimated peer effects on smoking robust? Evidence from adolescent students in Spain. Emp Econ 1–13. doi:10.1007/s00181-013-0704-7
Galbo J, Demetrulias D (1996) Recollections of nonparental significant adults during childhood and adolescence. Youth Soc 27:403–420
Gaviria A, Raphael S (2001) School-based peer effects and juvenile behavior. Rev Econ Stat 83:257–268
Holliday JC, Rothwell HA, Moore LAR (2010) The relative importance of different measures of peer smoking on adolescent smoking behavior: cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses of a large British cohort. J Adolesc Health 47:58–66
Hoxby C (2000) Peer effects in the classroom: learning from gender and race variation. NBER working paper 7867
Krauth BV (2007) Peer and selection effects on youth smoking in California. J Bus Econ Stat 25:288–298
Lundborg P (2006) Having the wrong friends? Peer effects in adolescent substance use. J Health Econ 25:214–233
Manski C (1993) Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Rev Econ Stud 60:531–542
Manski CF (2000) Economic analysis of social interactions. J Econ Perspect 14:115–136
McVicar D (2011) Estimates of peer effects in adolescent smoking across twenty six European countries. Soc Sci Med 73:1186–1193
Scheinkman JA (2008) Social interactions (theory). In: Durlauf S, Blume L (eds) New Palgrave dictionary of economics, 2nd edn. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
Soetevent AR, Kooreman P (2007) A discrete-choice model with social interactions: with an application to high school teen behavior. J Appl Econ 22:599–624
Terza JV, Basu A, Rathouz PJ (2008) Two-stage residual inclusion estimation: addressing endogeneity in health econometric modeling. J Health Econ 27:531–543
WHO (2011) Report on the global tobacco epidemic: warning about the dangers of tobacco
Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Acknowledgments
This work was partially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (Project ECO2008-01297). The usual disclaimers apply.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Duarte, R., Escario, JJ. & Molina, JA. Broader versus closer social interactions in smoking. Mind Soc 13, 183–194 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-013-0135-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-013-0135-3