[MUSIC] Hi. We've been talking about how popularity plays a role in health risk behavior. And what we just learned was that it wasn't likability, but it was the type of popularity that we think of as being high status and dominant that might be most closely associated with health risk behaviors. The thing that's really interesting about this is that it's those really high status kids that end up being very influential within their environment. So the fact that they're the ones at most risk for health risk behaviors has major implications for all the less popular kids in school. Because they are the ones that are setting the norm that everyone else is going to follow. What we know now is that one of the reasons why is because we tend to engage in behaviors that match what we think other people do. Especially if there's someone that's engaged in a behavior and we really like that person or we really want to be like them. Then we're very inclined to emulate those behaviors. This is why there is celebrity endorsers for so many products in marketing. Because the idea is that if we identify with that celebrity, or if there is someone that's very high status that we think, I'd like the be more like them and they engage in a behavior, or buy a product, or have a belief, then we're very likely to follow. Here's the problem, though. When it comes to adolescence, and when it come to health risk behaviors, adolescents are trying to do what they think those really popular kids in their school are doing. But there's really good evidence to suggest that what they think the popular kids are doing is wrong. They're totally overestimating how much it is that popular kids really engage in health risk behavior. And that's what we're about to talk about. We did a study where we were specifically looking at that, trying to understand how much kids might overestimate their peers engagement in health risk behaviors. So in a paper that was authored, first authored by Sarah Helms, we looked at different crowds that you usually see in a lot of high schools, particularly here in America. And really interestingly, this is a way of understanding popularity that matches the way that kids talk about popularity. So, of course, adolescents in high school don't talk about social preference or social reputation, but they do, especially in America, talk about peer crowds. The groups of kids that are athletically oriented, they're referred to as the Jocks. The groups of kids that are really high status, like the mean girls, they're the Populars or the Preps. Or in that movie the Plastics, the group of kids that are really academically oriented, like the Nerds or the Geeks or the Brains, and the ones that engage in deviant behavior, the Burnouts. This doesn't happen as often in other cultures, and it might be because in many other cultures, we see that high schools are tracked. So by the time the kids get to secondary education, they've all ready placed into university oriented schools versus more trade schools, or non-university tracts. And, because there's more homogeneity in terms of academic achievement, these very disparate groups, based on their interests and habits, are less salient. We do see this though very much in America and it's depicted in our movies which then, people see in other countries as well. So no matter where you live, you probably know what I'm talking about with these peer crowds. Really interestingly, these peer crowds have been around for decades and decades. They might have different names but back in the 50's, all the way to today, there has been some form of Jocks, and Populars, and Nerds, and Burnouts, as well as some other groups as well. Well what we did, is we asked kids to tell us, using a pier nomination assessment, who are the kids in your school who are the most quintessential, stereotypical Jocks, of all the Jocks, and who are the most quintessential Populars, same for the Brains and the Burnouts? And this was very easy to do among adolescents, because these were the words that they use, and this is the way that they think about it. And they love talking about all these crowds, so we got all that information. And then we ask them all to fill out a measure to tell us about the health risk behaviors they engaged in, all kinds of health risk behaviors. I'll talk about just a few. Now what we were able to do with this information is we were able to look at how much do people who are not a part of the Jocks, think that the Jocks engage in a health risk behavior? For instance, let's say, how many partners do they have, that they engage in sexual intercourse with? Now, because this was Non-Jocks, or lets say Non-Populars, perceiving what it is that the Populars did, we refer to that as out-group norms. So what do people outside of the group think is normal, among those, in that group? We were also then able to look at in-group norms. So what did the Populars think, the other Populars did? How often did they engage in a behavior, or how many sexual intercourse partners did they have? And then, because we knew who the real quintessential Populars were, and they had all filled out our measure, we're able to look at how much they self-reported that they had actually engaged in these behaviors. So, how many sexual intercourse partners did they really say that they had? Well, here's what we found. In this graph, what you'll see is we're just looking at the out-group norms. So how much do Non Jocks think that Jocks engage in sexual intercourse? And this is was based on a Likert scale, where 1 indicated 0 partners and so on. Different batches of partners, so for instance, 2 indicated 1 partner, 3 indicated 2 to 3 partners and so on. And what you see here is that Non Jocks think that Jocks are having sexual intercourse with quite a number of partners. Non Populars are thinking that Populars are having sex with quite a number of partners. And that's more so than the number of sexual intercourse partners that people think Burnouts are having. And certainly a lot more than people are thinking that the Nerds are having, the number of partners that the Nerds have. Now what you can see here are the In-Groups. And the In-Groups are, how much do Jocks, how many sexual intercourse partners do Jocks think their fellow Jocks have? How many sexual intercourse partners do Burnouts think their fellow Burnouts have? What you can see here are a couple of things to take note of. First of all, it turns out that the people that are not Jocks and not Populars are overestimating how many sexual intercourse partners Jocks and Populars have. The folks who are Jocks and are Populars say, well everyone thinks we have a lot of sex, but it's actually not with as many partners as everyone thinks. Or at least that's what they perceive. Interestingly also, what you can see is that everyone thought that the Jocks and the Populars had the most partners. But when you look at the in-groups, you're seeing that the Burnouts tend to have not significantly different number of perceived partners as do the Jocks and the Populars. Okay, so again, this is all based on perceptions. What it is that the Non Jocks think Jocks are doing, and what the Jocks think Jocks are doing. What's really interesting is when you look at the actual data. So how many sexual intercourse partners did Jocks really say that they had when we asked the most quintessential, stereotypical Jocks? What we found was that when it comes to the high status crowds, the Jocks and the Populars, people are way overestimating how much they're engaging in health risk behavior. So actually, the Jocks are not having more sexual intercourse partners than the Nerds are. The Populars are having a little more sexual, they have more sexual intercourse partners, but not much more. And it turns out, the Burnouts are the ones that have significantly more sexual intercourse partners than any of the other groups. In fact, people have a pretty good perception of what the Burnouts are doing. This was relatively accurate. But for all other groups, and especially the Jocks and Populars, people think they're engaging in health risk behaviors more than they're reporting they actually are. So we can look at this same pattern of results with a number of other health risk behaviors. Here we’re looking at binge drinking, and what you can see is that people are grossly overestimating how much they think the Jocks and the Populars are engaging in binge drinking. That’s five or more drinks on a single occasion. But they're not overestimating as much, how much the Burnouts are engaging in binge drinking. And in fact, they're a little bit underestimating, but not significantly, how much the Nerds engage in binge drinking. So again, the pattern is that, at least for these behaviors, that people tend to overestimate health risk behaviors, specifically, of the popular high status peers. Here you can see results for cigarette use. Again, you can see that Burnouts are actually engaging in this behavior the most. People do think they're engaging in behavior the most, but they're also substantially overestimating how much the Jocks and the Populars are using cigarettes. When it comes to damaging property, again, you see a similar pattern. People think that the Jocks and Populars are doing this a lot, but they're not. In fact, the Populars are engaged in that behavior even less frequently than are the Nerds. When it comes to studying, just to demonstrate that we can see this affect differently depending on the behavior, it's not the case that people just overestimate whatever the Popular and Jocks do, it's specifically health risk behaviors. When it comes to a behavior we would think that the Nerds do a lot of, people do overestimate how much it is that the Nerds are studying. Here people are saying, based on our Likert scale, that the Nerds must be studying 24 hours a day. But actually, the four black bars here were not statistically significantly different from one another at all. Everyone was engaged in the same amount of studying, people just misperceived how much the Nerds were studying. And similarly, when it comes to the number of friends, people perceived that the Populars and the Jocks had way more friends than the Burnouts or the Nerds. But again, the four black bars here are completely consistent with each other statistically, indicating that across all four groups, folks had the exact same number of friends, statistically speaking. But there were misperceptions. So overall, what this is suggesting is that there seems to be a tendency for people to overestimate how much the high status kids, the popular kids, engage, specifically, in health risk behaviors. And we also found that the extent to which kids think that the Populars and the Jocks are engaging in high levels of health risk behaviors, that predicted increase in their own engagement in substance use over time. So in other words, not only are these perceptions wrong, but they're very powerful in predicting adolescents' own engagement in substance use, really suggesting that one of the reasons, one of the ways in which popularity is effecting health risk behavior is that popular kids engage in this behavior more. And this is the kind of popularity we're talking about, that high reputation or status group. They engage in substance use more and maybe because of that, people start to perceive their engaging in that behavior, but at much, much higher levels than they actually are. And because everyone is trying to emulate those popular kids, those perceptions, those erroneous perceptions of how much the Populars are engaging in substance use, for instance, then makes everyone else engage in substance use at even higher levels. So we can see how that peer influence effect, starts with the Populars, and has an effect on everyone else. And that might be explaining why we're seeing such increasing levels of health risk behavior, over time. Okay. For our next, and our last clip, we're going to talk about some of the ways that childhood popularity is related to long term outcomes much later in adulthood, with a few recent studies that have looked at effects even into the 40s and 50s and beyond to see how popularity is having an impact, not just in adolescence, but for the rest of our lives.
