Cited by 103Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAction Observation and SynchronizationChild and Animal Learning Development

Neural mechanisms of resistance to peer influence in early adolescence

Open access
Grosbras, Marie-Helène, Jansen, Marije, Leonard, Gabriel, McIntosh, Anthony, Osswald, Katja, Poulsen, Catherine, Steinberg, Laurence, Toro, Roberto +1 more·2007·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

During the shift from a parent-dependent child to a fully autonomous adult, peers take on a significant role in shaping the adolescent's behavior. Peer-derived influences are not always positive, however. Here, we explore neural correlates of interindividual differences in the probability of resisting peer influence in early adolescence. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we found striking differences between 10-year-old children with high and low resistance to peer influence in their brain activity during observation of angry hand movements and angry facial expressions: compared with subjects with low resistance to peer influence, individuals with high resistance showed a highly coordinated brain activity in neural systems underlying perception of action and decision making. These findings suggest that the probability of resisting peer influence depends on neural interactions during observation of emotion-laden actions.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.1360-07.2007

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • Individual differences in susceptibility to peer pressure correlate with structural and functional connectivity differences, linking the development of resistance to peer influence with improved coordination of emotion and cognition.

    “individual differences in individuals' vulnerability to peer pressure are correlated with differences in structural and functional connectivity in ways that link the development of resistance to peer influence to improvements in the coordination of emotion and cognition.”

    From A behavioral scientist looks at the science of adolescent brain development (2010) · cites this paper as Grosbras et al., 2007

  • In Golarai et al. (2007), there was an age-related increase in the spatial extent of face-selective suprathreshold activation within right fusiform cortex (FFA): FFA was significantly larger in adult than child groups, and the adolescent group showed an intermediate pattern.

    “Results showed an age-related increase in the spatial extent of face-selective suprathreshold activation within right fusiform cortex (the ‘fusiform face area’; FFA): FFA was significantly larger in adult than child groups, and the adolescent group showed an intermediate pattern.”
  • The expansion of FFA into surrounding cortex was correlated with a behavioural improvement in recognition memory for facial identity.

    “The expansion of FFA into surrounding cortex was correlated with a behavioural improvement in recognition memory for facial identity.”
  • In Grosbras et al. (2007), the group who scored high on the resistance to peer influence measure showed stronger functional connectivity between brain regions underlying action perception (e.g. STS) and decision making (e.g. lateral PFC, premotor cortex) than did the group who scored low on the measure.

    “The group who scored high on the resistance to peer influence measure showed stronger functional connectivity between brain regions underlying action perception (e.g. STS) and decision making (e.g. lateral PFC, premotor cortex) than did the group who scored low on the measure.”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grosbras, M.-H., Jansen, M., Leonard, G., McIntosh, A., Osswald, K., Poulsen, C., Steinberg, L., Toro, R., & Paus, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
  • Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Temple University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2007-07-25
Volume
27
Issue
30
Pages
8040-8045
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2010311715
Cited by
103
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
3.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Santa Fe Institute
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
peer influence, resistance to peer influence, early adolescence, individual differences, neural correlates, angry facial expressions, action observation, decision-making, social cognition
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Child, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Nerve Net, Peer Group, Prefrontal Cortex

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