Lizzie Spavins Dmp Thesis

Academic Achievement

Running Head: ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

Friendship Quality and Peer Attachment as Predictors of Adolescents' Subsequent Academic

Achievement

Elizabeth A. Spavins

Distinguished Majors Thesis

University of Virginia

May, 2007

Advisor: Joseph P. AllenSecond Reader: Nicholas D. Reppucci

1


Abstract

This study investigated the hypothesis that peer influences in adolescence, specifically

friendship quality and peer attachment, predict improved academic achievement over time.

Participants included a diverse sample of 145 adolescents (M age = 13.3 years). In support of the

hypothesis, participants who reported greater levels of peer attachment at age 13 displayed

improved academic achievement at age 17, controlling for academic achievement at age 13.

Greater levels of certain aspects of friendship quality, such as validation and caring, as reported

by participants at age 13, also predicted greater academic achievement for participants at age 17.

2


Friendship Quality and Peer Attachment as Predictors of Adolescents' Subsequent Academic

Achievement

School and “school-related activities” occupy more than one-third of the “typical”

American student’s day (Larson & Verna, 1999, as cited in Steinberg, 2005, p. 200). Beyond a

commitment of time, school success is pivotal to outcomes later in life. Academic achievement

predicts decreased juvenile delinquency (Chavez, Oetting, & Swaim, 1994), while educational

attainment is correlated with increased future income (Murphy & Welch, 1995) and decreased

substance use (Swaim, Beauvais, Chavez, Oetting, 1997). Thus, it is important to investigate

what factors contribute to and detract from academic success for adolescents.

Peer influences and interactions are likely candidates for factors that are important in

adolescents’ academic achievement. Previous research has found evidence for the importance of

peer relations in a variety of areas of adolescent functioning. Allen, Porter, McFarland, Marsh,

and McElhaney (2005) report that adolescents who were well-liked by many peers displayed

higher levels of ego development and secure attachment, as well as better interactions with their

mothers and best friends (p. 747). Popularity was also linked to “minor levels of…delinquency”

(p. 747) but less hostile behavior toward peers (Allen et al., 2005, p.757). Furthermore,

adolescents’ susceptibility to peer pressure from their close friends predicted future responses to

negative peer pressure, decreases in popularity, and increased depressive symptoms. Susceptible

teens also rated themselves as less competent in their close friendships (Allen, Porter, &

McFarland, 2006). Peer pressure susceptibility was also cross-sectionally correlated with deviant

behavior and substance use, especially if a close friend had experimented (Allen et al., 2006).

According to Santor, Messervey, and Kusumakar (2000), peer pressure and peer conformity are

better than popularity for predicting antisocial behavior such as substance abuse, delinquency,

3


and worse school achievement. Berndt (1979) finds that peer conformity increases from third

grade until the ninth grade, at which point it begins to decline.

To be influenced by one’s peers does not uniformly predict negative outcomes, however.

Research has shown that the tendency to seek advice from peers over parents had no long-term

consequences for early adolescents (Fuligni, Eccles, Barber, & Clements, 2001). In addition,

attachment style influences the link between friendship and negative outcomes. Non-dismissing

attachment style has been found to moderate the link between general friendship quality and a

teen’s delinquency (McElhaney, Immele, Smith, & Allen, 2006). It has also been demonstrated

that adolescents’ friends’ behaviors have positive correlates. Prinstein, Boergers, and Spirito

(2001) report that teens were less likely to demonstrate antisocial behaviors, specifically violence

and substance use, when they had high proportions of friends who demonstrated prosocial

behavior. Thus, depending on the adolescent, the characteristics of the relationship, and the

extremeness of the susceptibility, teens may be differentially affected by their peers.

Due to the numerous findings of consequences of peer relationships, the characteristics of

adolescent friendships have been studied from various angles. Variability in friendship and group

status is normal (p. 1343), and friendships become more stable with age (Cairns, Leung,

Buchanan, & Cairns, 1995). The finding of friendship variability implicates that at earlier ages,

adolescents may have multiple salient friendships. As a result, studying friendships in general in

addition to studying one specific friendship may reveal more information about peer influences.

For both specific friendships and friends in general, further research needs to be done to

determine whether these early friendships, although shifting, have long-lasting impacts. Such

research would complement existing research on adolescent friendships, which does not examine

the effects of friendship over significant spans of time.

4


Dishion found that one-on-one friendships between antisocial adolescent boys were

characterized by low quality and satisfaction and the presence of coercive behavior. These

findings did not suggest that such friendships were characterized by a lack of positive behavior

(Dishion, Andrews, & Crosby, 1995). It is plausible that the presence of these negative

friendship factors has a negative impact on overall adolescent functioning. Further research is

needed to examine the link between friendship qualities and areas of functioning that may suffer

as a result of antisocial behavior, such as academic functioning. Previous research has found

homophily, the inclination to associate with similar people, characterizes adolescent

relationships, specifically in elements of antisocial behavior such as delinquency (Chavez et al.,

1994) and drug use (Kandel, 1978). Homophily in adolescent friendships may apply to other

domains of behavior as well, such as academic success. Academic achievement is a likely

candidate for similarity to one’s friends given that most adolescents attend school with their

peers.

Beyond their relationships with these others areas of adolescent functioning, peer

influences have been shown to predict academic functioning in adolescence. One avenue in

which research in the field of peer relations and academic achievement has been conducted has

been the effect of peer orientation on academic achievement. Evidence shows that peer

orientation may have an effect on academic achievement at the farthest end of the spectrum.

Extreme orientation toward peers, involving willingness to ignore parents’ rules, schoolwork,

and one’s own skills for the sake of popularity, has been linked to greater problem behavior in

seventh, tenth, and twelfth grade and lower academic achievement in seventh and tenth grade

(Fuligni et al., 2001). The same study found evidence of homophily in antisocial behavior, in that

the proportion of an adolescent’s friends who drank alcohol, used drugs, and skipped class was a

5


strong predictor of problem behavior and weaker predictor of academic achievement. However,

the proportion of a teen’s friends with academic orientation was not predictive on its own of

academic achievement (Fuligni et al.). This could be evidence for a lack of peer influence on

academic achievement, or for a need to investigate other aspects of friendships beyond similarity

in academic success. Fuligni et al.’s research primarily focused on the effect of negative aspects

of an early adolescent’s friendships on academic achievement. Friendships in adolescence are

not only characterized by negative aspects, however. Further research is needed on the positive

aspects of friendship and their effects on academic achievement.

The relationship between group norms and academic success has also been investigated.

Chen, Chang, and He (2003) examined the association between peer factors and academic

achievement of Chinese children. Peer groups of Chinese children are known to be homogenous

with respect to academic achievement, thus the goal of the investigation was to determine the

role of these group-wide characteristics, if any, in the academic and social success of individuals

within the group. The results showed that teens’ academic achievement was positively associated

with popularity, measured by sociometric nominations. Group norms for academics played the

role of mediator between social success and academic achievement (Chen et al., p.722). Wentzel

and Caldwell (1997) also found that group membership was a predictor of grades over time in a

sample of early adolescents. These results are encouraging because they provide evidence of peer

influence bolstering positive teen outcomes, namely school success. These results do not go so

far as to determine the mechanism by which group norms incite this effect.

The influence of peer relations on academic achievement appears equally strong across

both genders. Chen et al. (2003) found no gender effects on the relationship between academic

achievement and social functioning. Similarly, Fuligni et al. (2001) found no gender variation in

6


the long-term effects of extreme peer orientation. Peer influences on academic achievement thus

may not differ significantly by gender.

Chen et al. (2003) found that academic achievement-oriented groups were more socially

adaptive, meaning prosocial behavior was encouraged along with academic performance in these

groups. The opposite was true in groups that were lower in academic achievement. In these

groups, negative behavior and low achievement were endorsed (Chen et al., p. 722). This link

between prosocial behavior, academic achievement, and peer success has been examined further.

Wentzel (1991) found that for early adolescents, socially responsible behavior predicted both

academic achievement and social abilities. In a later study, Wentzel and Caldwell (1997) found

that those aspects of friendships that were related to academic achievement were connected by

the common basis of prosocial behavior. These findings point to one specific antecedent of

academic and peer success.

Research concerning the impact of peer orientation and group norms on adolescents is

one lens with which to examine peer relationships. From a different angle, previous research has

investigated the impact of peer rejection on academic achievement. Research shows that peer

rejection at all points of time (both recent and in the past) has negative effects on school

attendance, as well as externalizing and internalizing behavior problems (DeRosier, Kupersmidt,

& Patterson, 1994). This finding supports the idea that one’s peers are salient in academic

success because they are ever-present during instructional and testing time. Peer rejection could

cause a fear of participating in class or general dread of school, both of which would impede

academic success. Further, peer rejection need not be recent to be harmful (DeRosier et al.).

Complementing these findings that peer influence can have negative academic effects, the

7


current research aims to uncover the relationship between positive peer effects and academic

success.

Interestingly, adolescents neglected by their peers have a different outcome than

adolescents rejected by their peers. Wentzel and Asher (1995) find that socially neglected early

adolescents may fare better than average in terms of academic achievement. This finding

highlights the importance of further breaking down the elements of adolescent friendships to

determine which are salient to academic success. If peer rejection can prevent a student from

wanting to go to school, and peer neglect does not cause academic failure, then it should be

investigated whether positive peer relationships can compel students toward academic

achievement.

Previous research has uncovered a variety of connections between peer factors and

academic achievement. The current research investigates several other peer factors hypothesized

to impact academic success. Previous research has maintained a broad focus by focusing on

general friendship status and peer acceptance levels. The current research examines individual

teen’s reports of attachment to friends and qualities of close friendship dyads. Assessing

adolescents’ views of their friendships is important because these views target more closely what

is perceived by the adolescent as the quality of their friendships overall. Previous research has

demonstrated the importance of friendship groups in antisocial behavior conformity (Berndt,

1979) and cigarette use (Urberg, Degirmencioglu, & Pilgrim, 1997). This research will

investigate the role of several qualities of friendships in general on academic achievement.

Close friendships may matter even more than friendships in general when predicting

adolescent academic achievement. Adolescents have different relationships and interactions with

their closest friends than with their group of friends in general. Thus, factors in the closest

8


friendship may be more salient to adolescent functioning overall, or may impact the adolescent

in different ways than friends in general. The differential influence of the closest friend versus

the friendship group is supported in the literature. Urberg et al. (1997) found closest friends

influence adolescents in different ways than teens’ friendship groups in terms of cigarette

smoking and alcohol use. Urberg et al. also posited that academic achievement is a more

“sensitive” respondent to friendships than substance use. Based on these findings and logic, it is

important to investigate the possibly differential effects of the friendship group and closest peer

on academic achievement.

Evidence in these closest friendships of prosocial behavior characteristics linking

individuals to positive academic achievement would also support and extend previous research

of Wentzel and Caldwell (1997). Beyond the hypothesis of prosocial behavior linking peer

success with academic success, the examination of close friendships may elucidate more factors

that bring about academic success. One’s close friendships may be more important than overall

peer status in academic functioning, and may link academic achievement to peer success in

different ways than general popularity does. It is important to investigate both types of

friendships so that these effects are not inappropriately lumped together and can be most clearly

understood.

The current research seeks to answer several questions regarding peer effects and

academic achievement. One aim of this study is to assess peer influences on adolescent academic

achievement during more of this critical developmental period. Although early adolescence is an

important time period for examining peer effects, it is not sufficient. The current research

assesses participants’ academic achievement over the course of five years, because it is also

important to examine impact over time. Little research has been conducted to determine whether

9


specific peer factors in early adolescence affect academic outcomes beyond two years. If a causal

relationship is to be inferred, results beyond a short length of time must be found. Without such

evidence, it is difficult to determine whether the effect of friendships on academic achievement

is a temporary phenomenon that only holds in early adolescence or a more persistent

relationship. Longitudinal evidence of the effects of early friendship elements on later academic

achievement would strongly support the overall argument that peer factors are important for

academic success.

Other studies measured peer acceptance using sociometric nominations to assess

objective peer acceptance. However, many aspects of friendship quality are personal and thus

perhaps better measured subjectively. The use of teens’ self-report of friendship quality is thus

an important departure from the previous literature. The current research seeks to determine what

self-report friendship qualities are those elements of adolescent friendship that determine

academic success.

Based on these previous findings, teens with better friendships are expected to have better

academic outcomes over time. First, it is expected that higher levels of peer attachment will

predict higher levels of academic achievement over time. Second, it is expected that higher levels

of friendship quality with the close friend will also predict higher levels of academic

achievement over time. These specific links have not been previously assessed, and are

important to consider if the complex relationship between peer influence and academic

achievement is to be understood. In conducting this research, interactions between gender and

peer effects on academic success will also be investigated. It is hypothesized that there will be no

effects of gender on the relationship between peer factors and academic achievement.

10


Method

Participants

Participants in this study were part of a larger longitudinal investigation of adolescent

development in familial and peer contexts. Participants included 145 seventh, eighth, and ninth

graders who had baseline data available for academic achievement at age 13 (M age = 13.3, SD =

0.62). The sample was racially and socioeconomically diverse. Of the participants included, 88

identified themselves as Caucasian (61%), 41 as African American (29%), and sixteen as being

from other ethnic groups (10%). Adolescents’ parents reported a median family income in the

$40,000 – $59,999 range.

Participants nominated their closest same-gender friend to be included in the study each

year. Close friends were defined as, “people you know well, spend time with and who you talk to

about things that happen in your life.” In all cases, adolescents were able to name at least one

close friend using these criteria. Participants completed measures about their relationship with

this close friend. The mean age of close friends was 13.4 years (SD = 0.85). Of the close peers

who reported gender, 69 were male (48%) and 74 were female (52%). The self-identified racial

background of the close friends was 63% Caucasian (89 participants), 29% African-American

(41 participants), and 8% from other ethnic groups (12 participants). Close friends reported that

they had known the adolescents for an average of 4.1 years (SD = 2.93) at age 13.

Formal attrition analyses revealed differences between adolescents who did versus did

not have data for academic achievement at age 17. Adolescents who did have academic

achievement data at age 17 differed from those who did not have these data in age, family

income, level of academic achievement at age 13, and minority status. Participants who did not

have academic achievement data at age 17 were older, had lower median family incomes, lower

11


levels of academic achievement at age 13, and were more likely to be minorities than participants

who did have these data at age 17. Adolescents who did versus did not have academic

achievement data at age 17 did not differ in gender.

Adolescents were recruited from the seventh and eighth grades at a public middle school

drawing from both suburban and urban neighborhoods in the Southeastern United States. One

cohort of eighth graders was included, and two different cohorts of seventh graders were

included in successive years. The school was part of a system in which students had been

together as an intact group since fifth grade. Students were recruited through an initial mailing to

all parents of students in the school along with follow-up contact efforts at school lunches.

Adolescents who indicated they were interested in the study were contacted by telephone. Of all

students eligible for participation, 63% agreed to participate either as target participants or as

peers providing collateral information. Adolescents provided informed assent and their parents

provided informed consent before each interview session. Interviews took place in private offices

within a university academic building.

Procedure

Study participants were assured that all information would be kept confidential and that

their parents would not be informed of their answers. Data were protected by a confidentiality

certificate issued by the United States Department of Health and Human Services, which

protected information from subpoena by federal, state, and local courts. Transportation and child

care were provided if necessary.

Measures

Peer Attachment (Age 13). The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment (IPPA;

Armsden & Greenberg, 1987) was used to measure adolescents’ perceptions of their friendships

12


at age 13. Participants rated 25 items relating to the level of trust, communication, and alienation

with their friends on a 5-point Likert scale. Sample items included: “My friend accepts me as I

am” (trust); “My friend helps me talk about difficulties” (communication); and “My friend

understands me” (alienation). The responses were summed (reversing the alienation items) to

create the adolescent’s total attachment to friends score. Cronbach’s alphas measuring internal

consistency for the three subscales were .91, .88, and .86, respectively, and .92 for the composite,

or total attachment, score. This questionnaire has been shown to have good test-retest reliability

and has been related to other measures of family environment and teenagers’ psychological

functioning (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987).

Friendship Quality (Age 13). The Friendship Quality Questionnaire (FQQ; Parker &

Asher, 1993) was used to measure adolescents’ perceptions of the quality of their friendship with

their closest friend at age 13. Participants rated 40 items measuring six different domains of their

relationship with their closest friend on a 5-point Likert scale. The validation and caring

subscale, hereafter referred to as validation, measured caring qualities of a friendship, and had 10

items. The conflict resolution subscale measured aspects of the friendship related to solving

problems, and had 3 items. The conflict and betrayal subscale measured how much disagreement

took place in the friendship, and had 7 items. The help and guidance subscale assessed how

much the dyad helped one another, and had 9 items. The companionship and recreation subscale

assessed the activities the friends did together, and had 5 items. The intimate exchange subscale

measured disclosure between the participant and close peer, and had 6 items. Sample items from

each domain included: “We make each other feel important and special” (validation); “We talk

about how to get over being mad at each other” (conflict resolution); “We fight a lot” (conflict

and betrayal); “We help each other with school work a lot” (help and guidance); “We go to each

13


others’ houses” (companionship and recreation); and “We tell each other private things”

(intimate exchange). Cronbach’s alphas measuring internal consistency for the six subscales

were .90, .73, .84, 0.90, 0.75, and 0.86, respectively.

Academic Achievement (Ages 13 through 17). An annual, weighted grade point average

(GPA) was used to measure participants’ academic achievement. This average was calculated at

each grade level using scholastic records from the participants’ high schools. The initial rating

scale was zero to four points per class, with a grade of A worth four points, a B worth three

points, a C worth two points, a D worth one point, and an F worth zero points. Adjustments were

made in the calculations depending on course level. Advanced or honors courses were worth one

extra point; applied or special courses were worth half a point less; failed courses were factored

in as worth zero points. Grades were also adjusted so the number of credits awarded by the

school for each course was taken into consideration. Thus, one semester-long course was worth

half as much as one full-year course. All classes taken, electives and core subjects such as

English, math, and social studies, were included in the GPA calculation.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Means and standard deviations for all demographic factors and variables examined in this

study are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Initial analyses examined the role of gender and family

income on the primary measures. Family income had a slight correlation with primary measures

in the study in several instances. As a result, family income was entered into analyses whenever

it was significantly related to any other variable in the analysis. Because adolescent-peer

groupings were automatically segregated by gender (participants could only bring in same-

gender friends), gender was entered routinely as a covariate in all analyses. Possible moderating

14


effects of all of these demographic factors on each of the relationships described in the primary

analyses below were also examined. No such moderating effects were found beyond what would

be expected by chance.

Table 1

Demographic Variables for Target Teenagers and Peers

Teenagers Peers

Age (in years) Mean SD

13.319

.62

13.413

0.85

Gender Male Female

70 (48.3%)

75 (51.7%)

69 (48.3%)

74 (51.8%)

Race/Ethnicity Caucasian African American Other

88 (60.7%)

41 (28.3%)

16 (11.0%)

89 (62.7%)

41 (28.9%) 12 (8.4%)

15


Table 2 Means and Standard Deviations of Primary Measures

M SD

IPPA

Trust 43.19 6.23

Communication 31.44 5.78

Alienation 13.66 4.22

Total Attachment 103.0 13.63

FQQ

Conflict & Betrayal -25.17 3.74

Validation & Caring 40.50 6.69

Help & Guidance 32.51 7.08

Conflict Resolution 11.4 2.76

Intimate Exchange 18.27 4.88

Companionship & Recreation 19.93 3.93


GPA age 13 3.00 0.72

GPA age 14 2.86 0.92

GPA age 15 2.66 1.16

GPA age 16 2.97 1.10

GPA age 17 3.13 1.09

16


Correlational Analyses

For descriptive purposes, Tables 3, 4, and 5 present simple correlations among all

primary constructs. These analyses indicate numerous simple correlations between elements of

adolescents’ friendships and academic achievement, which are explored further in the next

section. These analyses also indicate that the elements of adolescents’ friendships being

considered are moderately highly correlated, and thus provide measures of different aspects of

the same broad construct of friendship quality.

Table 3

Perception of Attachment to Peers as Measured by the Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment

Correlated with Scholastic Achievement

Peer

Attachment

GPA

Age 13

GPA

Age 14

GPA

Age 15

GPA

Age 16

GPA

Age 15

Trust 0.30*** 0.35*** 0.29*** 0.35*** 0.54***

Communication 0.27** 0.28*** 0.26** 0.34*** 0.51***

Alienation -0.20* -0.18* -0.15+ -0.10 -0.20+

Total

Attachment 0.32*** 0.34*** 0.29*** 0.33*** 0.52***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

Note: N’s vary by year, for age 13: 145; age 14: 140; age 15: 131; age 16: 117; age 17: 90.

17


Table 4

Friendship Quality as Measured by the Friendship Quality Questionnaire Correlated with

Scholastic Achievement

Friendship

Quality

GPA

Age 13

GPA

Age 14

GPA

Age 15

GPA

Age 16

GPA

Age 17

Companionship

and Recreation 0.20* 0.18* 0.30*** 0.29** 0.32**

Conflict

Resolution 0.11 0.17* 0.17* 0.19* 0.30**

Help and

Guidance 0.22** 0.19* 0.20* 0.25** 0.38***

Intimate

Exchange 0.27*** 0.20* 0.26** 0.32*** 0.39***

Conflict and

Betrayal -0.28*** -0.31*** -0.27** -0.25** -0.37***

Validation 0.25** 0.35*** 0.35*** 0.36*** 0.50***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

Note: N’s vary by year, for age 13: 145; age 14: 140; age 15: 131; age 16: 117; age 17: 90.

18


Table 5

Univariate Correlations Among Predictors

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Trust 0.79*** -0.47*** 0.94*** 0.36*** 0.41*** 0.53*** 0.49*** 0.51*** 0.63***

2. Communication – -0.30*** 0.88*** 0.45*** 0.48*** 0.64*** 0.67*** 0.46*** 0.66***

3. Alienation – -0.65*** -0.19* -0.18* -0.23** -0.19* 0.35*** -0.31***

4. Total

Attachment

– 0.41*** 0.45*** 0.58*** 0.57*** 0.54*** 0.66***

5. Companionship – 0.44*** 0.67*** 0.63*** 0.19* 0.56***

6. Conflict

Resolution

– 0.62*** 0.44*** 0.38*** 0.66***

7. Help and

Guidance

– 0.69*** 0.35*** 0.74***

8. Intimate

Exchange

– 0.30*** 0.63***

9. Conflict and

Betrayal

– 0.52***

10. Validation and

Caring

–

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

N = 145

19


Primary analyses

Hypothesis 1: Higher levels of peer attachment will be linked to higher levels of academic

achievement over time.

Analyses first examined the relation of peer attachment to adolescents’ academic

achievement. To address this hypothesis, a series of hierarchical linear regression analyses were

performed. In each analysis, one subscale of peer attachment was regressed onto academic

achievement, after first accounting for the effects of adolescent gender, family income level, and

academic achievement at age 13. Academic achievement at age 13 was highly correlated with

academic achievement at age 17. In order to calculate relative change over time of participants’

academic achievement, a baseline measure of academic success was needed. Given the high

correlation between academic achievement at ages 13 and 17, age 13 achievement was used as

this baseline measure to gauge change in academic achievement over time.

Table 6 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from trust of

friends at age 13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of trust were associated with

higher levels of academic achievement, even after covarying initial levels of achievement. Trust

of friends in general was positively related to academic achievement five years later.

Table 7 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from

communication with friends at age 13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of

communication were associated with higher levels of academic achievement, even after

covarying initial levels of achievement. Communication with friends in general was positively

related to academic achievement five years later.

20


Table 6

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Trust of Friends at Age 13

β entry β final Δ R2 Total R2

Step 1. Income .57*** .19*

Gender .13 .08

Statistics from step .33*** .33***

Step 2. GPA at age 13 .63*** .57*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Trust of friends at age 13 .18* .18* .02* .64***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

N=89

Table 7

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Communication with Friends at Age 13


Step 1. Income .57*** .20*

Gender .13 .05


Step 2. GPA at age 13 .63*** .57*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Communication with friends at age 13 .18* .18* .02* .64***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

N=89

21


Table 8 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from alienation

from friends at age 13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of alienation were

associated with lower levels of academic achievement, even after covarying initial levels of

achievement. Alienation from friends in general was negatively related to academic achievement

five years later.

Table 8

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Alienation from Friends at Age 13


Step 1. Income .57*** .21**

Gender .13 .10 Statistics from step .33*** .33***

Step 2. GPA at age 13 .63*** .63*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Alienation from friends at age 13 -.12+ -.12+ .01+ .63***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10. N=89

Table 9 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from total

attachment to friends at age 13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of total

attachment were associated with higher levels of academic achievement, even after covarying

initial levels of achievement. Total attachment to friends in general was positively related to

academic achievement five years later.

22


Table 9

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Total Attachment to Friends at Age 13


Step 1. Income .57*** .18*

Gender .13 .06


Step 2. GPA at age 13 .63*** .57*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Total Attachment to friends at age 13 .20* .20* .02* .64***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10. N=89

Hypothesis 2: Higher levels of friendship quality with the close peer will be linked to higher

levels of academic achievement over time.

Next, analyses examined the relation of friendship quality to level of academic

achievement. As with the previous hypothesis, a series of hierarchical linear regression analyses

were performed. Each subscale of the friendship quality assessment was regressed onto academic

achievement, after accounting for the effects of adolescent gender, family income level, and

academic achievement at age 13.

Table 10 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from help and

guidance with the close peer at age 13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of help

and guidance were associated with higher levels of academic achievement, even after covarying

initial levels of achievement. Help and guidance with the close friend was positively related to

academic achievement five years later.

23


Table 10

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Help and Guidance with Close Peer at Age 13


Step 1. Income .57*** .19*

Gender .13 .06


Step 2. GPA at age 13 .63*** .61*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Help and Guidance with close peer at

age 13 .16* .16* .02* .64***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

N=89

Table 11 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from validation

with the close peer at age 13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of validation were

associated with higher levels of academic achievement, even after covarying initial levels of

achievement. Validation with the close friend was positively related to academic achievement

five years later.

Table 12 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from conflict

and betrayal with the close peer at age 13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of

conflict and betrayal were associated with lower levels of academic achievement, even after

covarying initial levels of achievement. Conflict and betrayal with the close friend was

negatively related to academic achievement five years later.

24


Table 11

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Validation with Close Peer at age 13


Step 1. Income .56*** .16

Gender .13 .06


Step 2. GPA at age 13 .63*** .59*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Validation with close peer at age 13 .22** .22** .03** .65***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

N=88

Table 12

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Conflict and Betrayal with Close Peer at age 13


Step 1. Income .57*** .23**

Gender .13 .10


Step 2. GPA at age 13 .63*** .59*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Conflict and Betrayal with close peer

at age 13 -.14* -.14* .01* .63***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

N=89

25


Lower levels of conflict resolution within the friendship with the close peer were

predictive of improved academic achievement at age 17 when controlling for gender and family

income. However, the relationship was no longer significant when controlling for academic

achievement at age 13. Conflict resolution with the close friend was negatively related to

academic achievement five years later, but not when baseline academic achievement was

controlled for.

Higher levels of intimate exchange within the friendship with the close peer were

predictive of improved academic achievement at age 17 when controlling for gender and family

income. However, the relationship was no longer significant when controlling for academic

achievement at age 13. Intimate exchange with the close friend was positively related to

academic achievement five years later, but not when baseline academic achievement was

controlled for.

Higher levels of companionship and recreation within the friendship with the close peer

were predictive of improved academic achievement at age 17 when controlling for gender and

family income. However, the relationship was no longer significant when controlling for

academic achievement at age 13. Companionship and recreation with the close friend was

positively related to academic achievement five years later, but not when baseline academic

achievement was controlled for.

Hypothesis 3: Conjoint prediction of academic achievement at age 17 from friendship quality

and peer attachment predictors at age 13.

Table 13 presents the results predicting academic achievement at age 17 from total

attachment to peers at age 13 and all six measures of friendship quality with the close peer at age

13. Main effects findings indicate that higher levels of validation were associated with higher

26


levels of academic achievement, even after covarying initial levels of achievement and all

friendship factors. Validation with the close friend was positively related to academic

achievement five years later.

Table 13

Regressions Predicting GPA at Age 17 from Friendship Factors at Age 13


Step 1. Income .57*** .14

Gender .12 .09


Step 2. GPA at age 13 .64*** .62*** .29*** .62***

Step 3. Total Attachment to friends .19* .04

Validation with close peer .19* .28*

Companionship with close peer -.06 .01

Conflict Resolution with close peer -.06 -.09

Help and Guidance with close peer .08 .09

Intimate Exchange with close peer -.15 -.16

Conflict and Betrayal with close peer -.02 -.02

Statistics from step .06+ .68***

Note: ***p≤.001, **p≤.01, *p≤.05, +p≤.10.

N=86

27


Discussion

This study found that adolescent friendship factors were predictive of relative changes in

adolescents’ levels of academic achievement over time. Attachment to peers in general was

predictive of adolescents’ academic achievement. In addition, aspects of friendship quality with

adolescents’ close friends were predictive of relative changes in levels of academic achievement

over time. These findings indicate that adolescent friendships may be an important factor in

understanding factors that contribute to academic achievement.

One potential explanation of the association between friendship factors and academic

achievement over time is that better friendships improve grades by making school more

enjoyable and worthwhile. This finding is complementary to research showing that peer rejection

has been related to decreased school attendance (DeRosier et al., 1994). Friendship factors could

improve school performance in a number of ways. One possibility is that the presence of positive

friendships could enhance the overall atmosphere of school and thus encourage more school

involvement and higher levels of academic achievement.

In addition, specific aspects of friendships may act individually to improve school

performance. Adolescents who experience higher levels of validation with their friends could

receive more positive feedback from friends for class participation and school success, and thus

have greater academic achievement. Friendships which allow for communication and provide

help and guidance may support teens in their efforts to excel at homework and class-work.

Higher levels of trust in friendships could lead students to want to come to school more, and be

less afraid to participate in class. Lower levels of conflict and alienation would serve as less of a

distraction from academics than friendships with higher levels of conflict (Wentzel & Caldwell,

1997).

28


The results of this study also suggest that certain aspects of friendships may be less

related to academics and school, and thus are less strongly related to academic achievement.

Intimate exchange with friends is a quality of friendship more likely to manifest itself outside of

a school setting, and intimate exchange was not strongly related to academic achievement when

accounting for baseline academic achievement. The content of what private information friends

share with one another may also largely not be related to academics. Conflict resolution is

another friendship factor less strongly related to academic achievement. One possible

explanation for the lack of predictive value of conflict resolution is that it is likely to be practiced

outside of school and focused on non-academic issues. Another explanation is that, within the

close friendship, conflict resolution abilities may be less important for academic achievement

than whether there is a large amount of conflict in the friendship overall. If friendships are

comprised of higher levels of conflict, this could be sufficiently distracting from an adolescent’s

academic demands that levels of conflict resolution would not become a protective factor. At the

same time, conflict resolution may not be a salient aspect of friendships if those friendships are

characterized by lower levels of conflict.

Companionship and recreation are two other aspects of friendship which are not as

strongly related to academic achievement. One possible explanation for the lack of predictive

value of companionship and recreation is that higher levels of companionship and recreation in

friendship serve as a distraction from academics (Wentzel & Caldwell, 1997). Another possible

explanation for the lack of predictive value of companionship and recreation is that the positive

aspects of a friendship are not equally salient. Merely spending time together with friends was

not related to higher levels of school performance, while other factors, such as validation, were

strongly correlated with academic achievement. This could be because a higher level of

29


companionship within a friendship does not reflect any component of the friendship specifically

related to support or encouragement. This link may be critical in the association between

friendship and academic achievement.

Another possible explanation for the link between significant elements of adolescent

friendships and academic achievement is prosocial behavior. Wentzel and Caldwell (1997) have

found support for this relationship between teens’ own tendencies to behave in prosocial ways

and their social and academic abilities in a sample of early adolescents. Higher levels of

validation, help, guidance, trust, and communication, as well as lower levels of conflict, betrayal,

and alienation are all friendship factors that were predictive of subsequent academic achievement

in the current research, and could all be described as prosocial behaviors. One interpretation of

this link is that the specifically prosocial elements of a friendship are the most significant in

promoting academic achievement. Another possible explanation is that adolescents with

prosocial abilities bring these skills to their friendships, and that these friendships improve the

school environment and bolster school success. It is also possible that adolescents belong to peer

groups that encourage both academic achievement and prosocial behavior as acceptable norms,

similar to the findings of Chen et al. (2003).

Intimate exchange, conflict resolution, companionship, and recreation were friendship

factors not significantly correlated with academic achievement. One possible explanation is that

these friendship qualities are less related to an important element of prosocial behavior, such as

interpersonal support, than validation, help, guidance, conflict, betrayal, trust, communication,

and alienation, which were significantly correlated with academic achievement. It may be that an

element of prosocial behavior such as interpersonal support is responsible for the relationship

between friendship qualities and academic achievement, and therefore friendship qualities that

30


do not involve interpersonal support would not be as strongly correlated with academic

achievement. It is also possible that intimate exchange, conflict resolution, companionship, and

recreation were modestly related to academic achievement, but the relationship was not detected

in this sample due to power limitations.

An alternative explanation is that two groups exist in the sample. One group is comprised

of adolescents with consistently high levels of social and academic skills who thus display higher

levels of friendship quality, peer attachment, and academic achievement. The other is a group of

teens with persistently low levels of friendship quality and academic achievement. The existence

of these two groups would create the relationship revealed in the current research between

friendship factors and academic achievement. It is possible that friendship quality and peer

attachment correlate with academic achievement in this way. Future research should examine

this possibility. The results of this study predicted relative change in academic achievement over

time, accounting for baseline levels of academic achievement. This makes it less likely that the

current findings are simply a reflection of the presence of two distinct groups of adolescents with

stable academic and social capabilities over time.

A further possibility, however, is that some external factor at age 13, for example, family

conflict or parental divorce, both affected adolescent peer relationships and increased the

likelihood of relative decreases in academic performance over time. Only experimental research

would be able to completely rule out such alternative explanations. Future research examining

these alternative factors directly would be useful in addressing this possibility.

Multiple interpretations exist for the manner in which friendship factors and peer

attachment relate to academic achievement. Each interpretation suggests that the overall quality

of early friendships is significant for adolescent functioning. Thus, despite research showing that

31


friendships are fluid in early adolescence (DeRosier et al., 1994), early adolescence is potentially

an important developmental period in which to study long-term peer effects. Future research

could investigate at what point in early adolescence friendship factors matter most for concurrent

and future outcomes such as academic success, externalizing behaviors, and substance use.

This study also supports the many findings demonstrating the importance of peer factors

in adolescent development (Allen et al., 2005; Santor et al., 2000; Urberg et al., 1997). The

current research may also be evidence of positive peer influences in adolescence. Positive peer

effects on academic achievement are important for school and parent-understanding of

adolescent development. The many facets of peer relations in adolescence are critical in school

programs ranging from ability-tracking to behavioral interventions. Future research could

investigate what specific areas of peer interaction are best used in effective interventions

(Wentzel & Caldwell, 1997). Additionally, future research could look into what friendship

qualities are most instrumental in affecting academic achievement and by what mechanisms such

qualities operate.

The results of this study are important because they reveal a relationship between

friendship factors and an influential marker in adolescents’ lives, academic achievement. The

results also point to the fact that there exists a multitude of additional school outcome variables

that are of importance and interest. Future research should investigate the relationship between

friendship quality and school motivation, self-efficacy toward school, and pursuit of higher

education to capture fully the effects of peers on academic life.

The current research possessed several limitations which are important in understanding

these results. First, moderately high correlations exist between predictor variables. This indicates

that the predictor variables may not measure distinct aspects of friendship quality and peer

32


attachment. As a result, it may only be possible to interpret the results of this study as relating

academic achievement to friendship quality and peer attachment in general, not to any specific

component of friendship.

In addition, when all of the predictor variables are accounted for together, the only

measure still significant is validation. Due to the high correlations between the variables, it is not

surprising that they would largely overlap when accounted for together. It follows that these

results are not able to discern which elements of friendships are more important than others. The

possible exception is validation within the close friendship, which alone remained significant in

the model. It is possible that validation is the most salient friendship factor that is associated with

academic achievement. Future research could pursue this question by using friendship factors

less highly correlated with one another to predict academic achievement. An additional option

for future research could be to use information about friendship quality and peer attachment from

multiple reporters, such as an adolescent’s closest friends and classmates. Such investigations

might reveal more about which peer factors are most important for school success.

A second limitation of this study was the decrease in number of participants over time.

Participants dropping out of high school may account for some of this decrease. This limits the

generalizability of the current findings because participants are not likely to drop out of high

school at random. Those students with the lowest levels of academic achievement are more

likely to drop out. These students thus cannot be included in the sample because no outcome

variable data is available for them. The current pool of participants is not entirely representative

of an adolescent population, because those students with the lowest levels of academic

achievement have been excluded. In addition, due to difficulty obtaining academic achievement

information from participants who matriculated out of the target high school via transfer to a new

33


school, detention at a juvenile correction facility, or other situations, the sample size decreased

following collection of data at age thirteen. Future research should focus on participant follow-up

so that as much academic achievement data can be obtained as possible. Obtaining more detailed

records from all institutions of learning is also important for future research so that grades from

different schools’ records can be appropriately interpreted.

A third limitation is that, although these data provide longitudinal evidence of a

relationship between adolescent friendship factors and academic achievement, they cannot

provide evidence of a causal relationship. It is possible that peer attachment and friendship

quality in early adolescence cause improved academic achievement in later adolescence. These

results may also indicate that peer attachment and friendship quality are correlated with

academic achievement, but higher levels of both are caused by a third factor such as an

adolescent’s prosocial ability. Further research should seek to uncover the mechanism of the

relationship and its ramifications for adolescent academic achievement.

The study of factors that correlate with and could impact adolescent academic

achievement is a valuable pursuit. Academic achievement is an influential societal signal, and

becomes especially important in late adolescence, when the transition to higher education

traditionally takes place. The current findings show that friendship quality and peer attachment in

early adolescence are predictive of relative changes in levels of academic achievement over time.

Beyond family income and previous levels of academic achievement, friendship factors add

another piece of information to what is currently understood about predicting academic

achievement in late adolescence. This finding is significant in drawing up a complete picture of

an important aspect of adolescent development. Understanding what social and psychological

34


influences are most salient to improving academic achievement is significant for students,

parents, educators, and the economy as a whole.

35


References

Allen, J. P., Porter, M. R., & McFarland, F. C. (2006). Leaders and followers in adolescent close

friendships: Susceptibility to peer influence as a predictor of risky behavior, friendship

instability, and depression. Development and Psychopathology, 18, 155-172.

Allen, J. P., Porter, M. R., McFarland, F. C., Marsh, P., & McElhaney, K. B. (2005). The two

faces of adolescents’ success with peers: Adolescent popularity, social adaptation, and

deviant behavior. Child Development, 76(3), 747-760.

Armsden, G. C. & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment:

Individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence.

Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427-454.

Berndt, T. J. (1979). Developmental changes in conformity to peers and parents. Developmental

Psychology, 15(6), 608-616.

Cairns, R. B., Leung, M., Buchanan, L., & Cairns, B. D. (1995). Friendships and social networks

in childhood and adolescence: Fluidity, reliability, and interrelations. Child Development,

66(5), 1330-1345.

Chavez, E. L., Oetting, E. R., & Swaim, R. C. (1994). Dropout and delinquency: Mexican-

American and Caucasian non-Hispanic youth. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,

23(1), 47-55.

Chen, X., Chang, L., & He, Y. (2003). The peer group as a context: Mediating and moderating

effects on relations between academic achievement and social functioning in Chinese

children. Child Development, 74, 710-727.

36


DeRosier, M. E., Kupersmidt, J. B., & Patterson, C.J. (1994). Children’s academic and

behavioral adjustment as a function of the chronicity and proximity of peer rejection.

Child Development. 65, 1799-1813.

Dishion, T. J., Andrews, D. W., & Crosby, L. (1995). Antisocial boys and their friends in early

adolescence: Relationship characteristics, quality, and interactional process. Child

Development, 66(1), 139-151.

Fuligni, A. J., Eccles, J. S., Barber, B. L., & Clements, P. (2001). Early Adolescent Peer

Orientation and Adjustment During High School. Developmental Psychology, 37(1), 28-

36.

Kandel, D. (1978). Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent friendships. The

American Journal of Sociology, 84, 427-436.

Larson, R., & Verma, S. (1999). How children and adolescents spend time across the world:

Work, play, and developmental opportunities. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 701 -736.

McElhaney, K. B., Immele, A., Smith, F. D., & Allen, J. P. (2006). Attachment organization as a

moderator of the link between friendship quality and adolescent delinquency. Attachment

and Human Development, 8(1), 33 – 46.

Murphy, K. M., & Welch, F. (1992). Wages of college graduates. In W. E. Becker & D. R.

Lewis (Eds.), The economics of American higher education (pp. 121-140). Norwell,

Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Parker, J. G. & Asher, S. R. (1993). Friendship and friendship quality in middle childhood: Links

with peer group acceptance and feelings of loneliness and dissatisfaction. Developmental

Psychology, 29, 4, 611-621.

37


Prinstein, M. J., Boergers, J., & Spirito, A. (2001). Adolescents’ and their friends’ health-risk

behavior: Factors that alter or add to peer influence. Journal of Pediatric Psychology,

26(5), 287-298.

Santor, D. A., Messervey, D., & Kusumakar, V. (2000). Measuring peer pressure, popularity,

and conformity in adolescent boys and girls: Predicting school performance, sexual

attitudes, and substances abuse. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29(2), 163-182.

Steinberg, L. (2005). Adolescence. Boston: McGraw Hill.

Swaim, R. C., Beauvais, E., Chavez, E. L., & Oetting, E. R. (1997). The effect of school

dropout rates on estimates of adolescent substance use among three racial/ethnic groups.

American Journal of Public Health, 87, 51-55.

Urberg, K.A., Degirmencioglu, S.M., & Pilgrim, C. (1997). Close friend and group influence on

adolescent cigarette smoking and alcohol use. Developmental Psychology, 33(5), 834-

844.

Wentzel, K. R. (1991). Relations between social competence and academic achievement in early

adolescence. Child Development, 62(5), 1066-1078.

Wentzel, K. R., and Asher, S. R. (1995). The academic lives of neglected, rejected, popular, and

controversial children. Child Development, 66(3), 754-763.

Wentzel, K. R., & Caldwell, K. (1997). Friendships, peer acceptance, and group membership:

Relations to academic achievement in middle school. Child Development, 68(6), 1198-

1209.

38

Documents

Lizzie Spavins Dmp Thesis