Cited by 42Cannabis and Cannabinoid ResearchSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Four Mechanistic Models of Peer Influence on Adolescent Cannabis Use

Open access
Caouette, Justin D., Feldstein Ewing, Sarah W.·2017·Current Addiction Reports

Abstract

Purpose of review Most adolescents begin exploring cannabis in peer contexts, but the neural mechanisms that underlie peer influence on adolescent cannabis use are still unknown. This theoretical overview elucidates the intersecting roles of neural function and peer factors in cannabis use in adolescents. Recent findings Novel paradigms using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in adolescents have identified distinct neural mechanisms of risk decision-making and incentive processing in peer contexts, centered on reward-motivation and affect regulatory neural networks; these findings inform a theoretical model of peer-driven cannabis use decisions in adolescents. Summary We propose four "mechanistic profiles" of social facilitation of cannabis use in adolescents: (1) peer influence as the primary driver of use; (2) cannabis exploration as the primary driver, which may be enhanced in peer contexts; (3) social anxiety; and (4) negative peer experiences. Identification of "neural targets" involved in motivating cannabis use may inform clinicians about which treatment strategies work best in adolescents with cannabis use problems, and via which social and neurocognitive processes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40429-017-0144-0

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Adverse family factors operate by driving the child away from home, disengaging from mainstream goals, and increasing involvement with deviant peers.

    “The mechanisms of effect operate here by driving the child away from home, disengaging from mainstream goals (e.g., academic achievement), and becoming increasingly involved with deviant peers (Caouette and Feldstein Ewing, 2017).”

    From Assessment of culture and environment in the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development Study: Rationale, description of measures, and early data (2018) · cites this paper as Caouette and Feldstein Ewing, 2017

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says adolescents generally spend less time with parents and more time with peers, and “Peer influence and peer affiliation” (page unavailable) links cannabis use with delinquent-peer affiliation. Neither passage says adverse family factors drive children away from home or mainstream goals, or cause their involvement with deviant peers. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Adverse family factors such as family conflict predict earlier and heavier substance use.

    “Conversely, adverse family factors, such as family conflict, operate indirectly, but also predict earlier and heavier substance use.”

    From Assessment of culture and environment in the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development Study: Rationale, description of measures, and early data (2018) · cites this paper as Caouette and Feldstein Ewing, 2017

    The section “Negative experiences with peers” links adverse peer interactions, not family conflict, to greater adolescent cannabis use (page unavailable). Searches for family conflict, adverse family factors, and earlier or heavier use found no passage in our copy establishing the claimed family-factor relationship. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 109 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. [16]Hughes A Lipari RN Williams MR The CBHSQ Report: Marijuana use and perceived risk of harm from marijuana use varies within and across states Rockville, MD Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 2016 27854415
  2. [27]Feldstein Ewing SW Walters S Baer J Group motivational interviewing with adolescents and young adults Gr Motiv Interviewing New York, NY The Guilford Press 2012 387 406
  3. [36]Giedd JN The amazing teen brain Sci Am 2015 312 32 7 26336683
  4. [46]Guyer AE McClure-Tone EB Shiffrin ND Pine DS Nelson EE Probing the neural correlates of anticipated peer evaluation in adolescence Child Dev 2009 80 1000 15 19630890 PMC2791675
  5. [55]Kedzior K Laeber L Cannabis use and disorder: Epidemiology, comorbidity, health consequences, and medico-legal status BMC Psychiatry 2014 14 PMC4032500 24884989
  6. [89]Karoly HC Bryan AD Weiland BJ Mayer A Dodd A Feldstein Ewing SW Does incentive-elicited nucleus accumbens activation differ by substance of abuse? An examination with adolescents Dev Cogn Neurosci 2015 16 5 15 26070843 PMC4657439

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Caouette, J. D., & Feldstein Ewing, S. W.
Affiliations
Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Corresponding author
Caouette, Justin D.
Venue
Current Addiction Reports
Published
2017-05-02
Volume
4
Issue
2
Pages
90-99
ISSN
2196-2952 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2611958162
Cited by
42
References
109
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Addiction Reports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (3R01AA023658-02S1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
peer influence, adolescent cannabis use, risk-based decision making, incentive processing, emotion regulation, social facilitation, social anxiety, treatment goals

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review