The Role of Close Friendship Dynamics in the Development of Adolescent Depression and Substance Use Initiation

While difficulty establishing peer relationships in adolescence is a known risk factor for poor mental health (e.g., Prinstein & Aikins, 2004), much less research has explored the maladaptive patterns of interactions within adolescent friendships that may also contribute to later adjustment difficulties (e.g., Allen et al., 2006).  Moreover, despite the plethora of research on peer influences on adolescents’ behavior (e.g., Santor et al., 2000), we know strikingly little about friendship processes that help to explain why some teens are more susceptible to negative peer influences than others (e.g., Hartup, 2005).  

Data for the present study are drawn from a socio-economically and racially diverse sample of 184 teens and their close friends at three occasions (mean age = 16 at time 1, 17 at time 2, 18 at time 3). At age 16, adolescents discussed a disagreement with their close friend, and discussions were coded for behaviors by the teen and close friend promoting their connectedness (e.g., warmth, listening, and validating) (Allen et al., 1994). Difference scores were computed to represent the degree of imbalance between the target teens’ efforts to maintain connectedness and those of his or her close friend.  At ages 16 and 17, teens and close friends reported whether they had ever used cigarettes.  At age 16 and 18, teens’ depressive symptoms were assessed using the BDI (Beck et al., 1961).

After controlling for gender, household income, and teens’ level of connectedness efforts, imbalance between teens and their friends in connectedness efforts at age 16 predicted changes in depression symptoms from age 16 to 18.  Youth who exhibited more connectedness-promoting behaviors than their friend were more likely to experience an increase in symptoms of depression (B = .24, p < .05). In addition, imbalance significantly moderated the relation between friends’ cigarette use and youths’ own likelihood of trying cigarettes (B = 4.89, p < .05). In other words, teens who “worked harder” to maintain connectedness with a friend who was more distant and less cooperative than them were more likely to develop internalizing symptoms and were more susceptible to negative peer influence by that friend.

Youth who are able to maintain connectedness during a disagreement typically fare better in their peer relationships and overall well-being; yet the present findings reveal how such efforts can be detrimental when unreciprocated.  Thus, while prevention efforts should continue to target the social skills of individual youth, the present findings implicate friendship dynamics as an important additional target for intervention (e.g., teaching youth to choose friends who reciprocate their friendship efforts, or recognize friends who do not).