peer pressure| 有名人の最新ニュースを読者にお届けします。

私たちは、人々が好きな有名人について読んで、それについて気分を良くすることができるスペースを作りたかったのです.私たちは、人々が有名人についてポジティブな方法でゴシップできる場所を作りたかった.
私たちは、何年もの間、日本のエンターテインメント ニュースを生き、呼吸してきた情熱的なエンターテインメント ニュース ジャンキーの小さなチームです。

peer pressure, 2017-03-02, How To Handle Peer Pressure, When people close to your age try to influence you, it’s called peer pressure. A peer can be a friend, classmate, family member or anyone you hang out with. Peers can pressure you to make the same decisions they do. Sometimes peers will pressure you to do something dangerous, foolish, against the law or that you don’t feel ready for, like having sex.

Peer pressure is a normal part of growing up. Everyone feels peer pressure, even adults. It can be hard to know what’s the right decision to make when you feel peer pressure. It’s your life and your choices. Make sure that the decisions you make are based on what you want—not what your peers want.

—

Please like, share and subscribe to AMAZE! Follow us on Snap and Insta for more info about puberty and growing up.

Snap: AmazeOrg
Insta: AmazeOrg

AMAZE

[AMZ-025], AMAZE Org

Eゲイト英和辞典での「peerpressure」の意味

詳細については、次の URL をご覧ください。……

概説[編集]

少数意見（多数決の問題点：少数意見の抑圧）を有する者に対して態度変容を迫る手段にはさまざまな方法がある。彼らに対して物理的に危害を加える旨を通告するような明確な脅迫から、多数意見に逆らうことに恥の意識を持たせる､ネガティブ・キャンペーンを行って少数意見者が一部の変わり者であるとの印象操作をする､「一部の足並みの乱れが全体に迷惑をかける」と主張する、少数意見のデメリットを必要以上に誇張する、同調圧力をかけた集団から社会的排除を行うなどである。
組織社会学者の太田肇は、社会の閉鎖性、同質性、個人の未分化という構造的要因に共同体主義というイデオロギーが加わることで同調圧力がエスカレートすると説明している^[1]。また文筆家の山本七平は「空気」、歴史学者の阿部謹也は「世間」という概念を用いて日本社会の同調圧力に関する考察を行っている^[2][3]。

詳細については、次の URL をご覧ください。……

ピア・プレッシャーとは？

ピア・プレッシャーとは、端的に説明すると、周囲の人々からの様々な圧力のことです。

元々は、同調圧力という意味をあらわす”peer pressure”という英単語から生まれた言葉です。この英単語をさらに分解すると、peerは仲間、pressureは圧力という2つの意味に分けられます。

日本では昔から、他人の気持ちを察することや、他人を思いやる精神が美徳とされてきました。

そのため日本企業は、海外企業と比べてピア・プレッシャーが強いと言われています。

2種類のピア・プレッシャー

ピア・プレッシャーを分解すると、2種類に分けられます。

この2種類のピア・プレッシャーは、どのような理由で生まれたかによって分類されます。

それぞれのピア・プレッシャーを例と共に見ていきましょう。

1. 相互監視のピア・プレッシャー

2種類のピア・プレッシャーの1つが、相互監視のピア・プレッシャーです。

ピア・プレッシャーとは周囲の人々からの様々な圧力だと説明しました。

周囲に複数の人々がいる状況は、集団に属しているといえます。集団の例として職場やチームなどがあります。

そしてこの職場やチームといった集団に存在する、同僚や仲間からの同調圧力によって生まれるのが、相互監視のピア・プレッシャーです。

例として、周りが取っていないから有給が取りづらい、周りが残業していると、やるべきことが終わっても定時に帰りづらいなどがあります。

2. 相互配慮のピア・プレッシャー

2種類のピア・プレッシャーの内もう1つは、相互配慮のピア・プレッシャーです。

ここまでの説明だけでは、ピア・プレッシャーはネガティブなものだと感じるでしょう。

しかし、皆で足並みを揃えようと周囲に配慮する助け合いの心から生まれる、相互配慮のピア・プレッシャーも存在します。

例として、掃除当番の人が体調不良で欠勤した時には、ピアプレッシャーによって自主的に他の人が代わりに掃除をするでしょう。そして後日、ピア・プレッシャーによって今度は欠勤した人が、代わりに掃除をしてくれた人が掃除当番の日に掃除をするでしょう。

このようにピア・プレッシャーには、仕事の負担を平等にするというポジティブな面もあります。

詳細については、次の URL をご覧ください。……

ピアプレッシャーとは

「ピアプレッシャー」のピア（peer）は「仲間」、プレッシャー（pressure）は「圧力」という意味。ピアプレッシャーは、「同調圧力」とも呼ばれるとおり、周囲の価値観ややり方に合わせなければいけない、と感じてしまう心理的圧迫感のことです。

ピアプレッシャーが意識されやすいのが、休暇の取得や定時退社といった場面。 株式会社パーソル総合研究所主任研究員として多くの講演やセミナーに登壇している小林祐児氏は、ピアプレッシャーと「残業」との関係を次のように述べています。

我々が聴取した数十の組織特性・風土特性の中で、最も残業時間を増やしていた組織要因は「周りの人が働いていると帰りにくい雰囲気」でした。しばしば残業要因として指摘される「過剰品質の追求」や「意思決定に根回しが必要」といった組織要因よりも、この「帰りにくい同調圧力」が最も残業に影響していました。

（引用元：ダイヤモンド・オンライン｜残業発生のメカニズムを解明、職場が長時間労働に麻痺する病理とは　太字による強調は編集部が施した）

このように、集団において互いに行動を見張ることを「相互監視」といいます。意識的でなくても、互いに監視し合うことにより、行動が制限されてしまうのです。

しかし、ピアプレッシャーの本来の意味は、皆で足並みをそろえようと周囲に配慮する「緊張感」。そのため、ピアプレッシャーはポジティブに作用することもあります。有限会社シャープマインド代表でマーケティング心理学に詳しい松尾順氏は、「同調」について次のように話しています。

例えば、集団で飛ぶ渡り鳥たちは、最も風を受け、エネルギーを消耗しやすい先頭の役割を交替でこなしています。そうすることで、目的地に確実に行くことが可能になります。（中略） 同じ行動が取れるからこそ、いざという時、力を合わせて外敵に立ち向かったりすることができる。すなわち、「同調」は、お互いを助け合うことにつながっている。（後略）

（引用元：ITmedia ビジネスオンライン｜“同調”がお互いの絆を深める　太字による強調は編集部が施した）

この観点だと、ピアプレッシャーにおいて働く意識は「相互監視」というより「相互配慮」でしょう。ピアプレッシャーが存在する職場では、仕事の負担を平等にしようという意思が強まります。

朝の掃除が義務づけられているとしたら、平等に割り振られるでしょう。社長がやることはなくとも、若い社員などのグループ内で当番が決まり、仕事が特定の誰かに押しつけられることはありません。

また、当番の人間が体調不良で欠勤したときも、ピアプレッシャーが働き、ほかの誰かが「今日は私が代わりますよ」と申し出ます。そして欠勤した人は、「じゃあ今度、あなたの当番の日に私がやりますので」と気遣うでしょう。これが、ピアプレッシャーがポジティブに働き、相互配慮が生まれている職場なのです。

つまり、ピアプレッシャーとは、その集団の性質や構成員しだいで、作用が変化するものだといえます。

詳細については、次の URL をご覧ください。……

「Peer Pressure」のミュージックビデオ（YouTube動画）

「Peer Pressure」のmp3／ストリーミングはこちら

「Peer Pressure」が収録されているアルバムはこちら

「Peer Pressure」の歌詞と和訳

＼歌詞と和訳の続きをみる／

詳細については、次の URL をご覧ください。……

Children and adolescents[edit]

Children[edit]

Imitation plays a large role in children’s lives; in order to pick up skills and techniques that they use in their own life, children are always searching for behaviors and attitudes around them that they can co-opt. In other words, children get influenced by people that are important in their lives such as friends, parents and even YouTubers, celebrities, singers, dancers, etc. This may explain why children with parents who eat unhealthy or don’t live active lifestyles can conform to creating habits just like their parents as young adults. Children are aware of their position in the social hierarchy from a young age: their instinct is to defer to adults’ judgements and majority opinions.^[5] Similar to the Asch conformity experiments, a study done on groups of preschool children showed that they were influenced by groups of their peers to change their opinion to a demonstrably wrong one.^[6]
Each child was handed a book with two sets of images on each page, with a groups of differently sized animals on the left hand page and one animal on the right hand, and each child was asked to indicate the size of the lone animal. All the books appeared the same, but the last child would sometimes get a book that was different. The children reported their size judgements in turn, and the child being tested was asked last. Before the child was to be tested, however, there was a group of children working in conjunction with the researchers. Sometimes, the children who answered before the test subject all gave an incorrect answer. When asked in the presence of the other children, the last child’s response was often the same as his or her peers. However, when allowed to privately share their responses with a researcher the children proved much more resistant to their peers’ pressure, illustrating the importance of the physical presence of their peers in shaping their opinions.^[6]

An insight is that children can monitor and intervene in their peers’ behavior through pressure. A study conducted in a remedial kindergarten class, in the Edna A. Hill Child Development Laboratory at the University of Kansas, was designed to measure how children could ease disruptive behavior in their peers through a two-part system. After describing a series of tasks to their classroom that included going to the bathroom, cleaning up, and general classroom behavior, teachers and researchers would observe children’s performance on the tasks. The study focused on three children who were clearly identified as being more disruptive than their peers. They looked at their responses to potential techniques. They utilized the two-part system: first, each student would be given points by their teachers for correctly completing tasks with little disruption (e.g. sitting down on a mat for reading time), and if a student reached three points by the end of the day they would receive a prize. The second part brought in peer interaction, where students who reached three points were appointed “peer monitors” whose role was to lead their small groups and assign points at the end of the day. The results were clear-cut, showing that the monitored students’ disruption dropped when teachers started the points system and monitored them, but when peer monitors were introduced the target students’ disruption dropped to average rates of 1% for student C1, 8% for student C2, and 11% for student C3 (down from 36%, 62%, and 59%, respectively). Even small children, then, are susceptible to pressure from their peers, and that pressure can be used to effect positive change in academic and social environments.^[7]

Adolescence[edit]

Adolescence is the time when a person is most susceptible to peer pressure because peers become an important influence on behavior during adolescence, and peer pressure has been called a hallmark of adolescent experience.^[8][9] Children entering this period in life become aware for the first time of the other people around them and realize the importance of perception in their interactions. Peer conformity in young people is most pronounced with respect to style, taste, appearance, ideology, and values.^[10] Peer pressure is commonly associated with episodes of adolescent risk taking because these activities commonly occur in the company of peers.^[9] Affiliation with friends who engage in risk behaviors has been shown to be a strong predictor of an adolescent’s own behavior.^[11] Peer pressure can also have positive effects when youth are pressured by their peers toward positive behavior, such as volunteering for charity, ^[12] excelling in academics, or participating in a service project.^[13] The importance of peers declines upon entering adulthood.^[14]

Even though socially accepted children are more prone to experience higher, more frequent, positive fulfillments and participate in more opportunities, research shows that social acceptance (being in the popular crowd) may increase the likelihood of engaging in risky behavior, depending on the norms in the group. Groups of popular children showed a propensity to increase risky, drug-related and delinquent behavior when this behavior was likely to receive approval in their groups. Peer pressure was greatest among more popular children because they were the children most attuned to the judgments of their peers, making them more susceptible to group pressures.^[15] Gender also has a clear effect on the amount of peer pressure an adolescent experiences: girls report significantly higher pressures to conform to their groups^[16] in the form of clothing choices or speech patterns.^[17] Additionally, girls and boys reported facing differing amounts of pressures in different areas of their lives, perhaps reflecting a different set of values and priorities for each gender.^[16] Both boys and girls are susceptible to peer pressure, but what it revolves around is defining the values, beliefs, or attitudes that their peer groups have or deeply desire. For girls, it definitely revolves around how they look, whereas for boys, it might come down to athleticism or intellect. Either way peer pressure tends to follow the trends with the current world.

Peer pressure is widely recognized as a major contributor to the initiation of drug use, particularly in adolescence.^[18] This has been shown for a variety of substances, including nicotine^[19][20] and alcohol.^[21] While this link is well established, moderating factors do exist. For example, parental monitoring is negatively associated with substance use; yet when there is little monitoring, adolescents are more likely to succumb to peer coercion during initiation to substance use, but not during the transition from experimental to regular use.^[22] Caldwell and colleagues extended this work by finding that peer pressure was a factor leading to heightened risk in the context of social gatherings with little parental monitoring, and if the individual reported themselves as vulnerable to peer pressure.^[23] Conversely, some research has observed that peer pressure can be a protective factor against substance use.^[24]

Peer pressure produces a wide array of negative outcomes. Allen and colleagues showed that susceptibility to peer pressure in 13- and 14-year-olds was predictive of not only future response to peer pressure, but also a wider array of functioning.^[25] For example, greater depression symptomatology, decreasing popularity, more sexual behavior, and externalizing behavior were greater for more susceptible teens. Of note, substance use was also predicted by peer pressure susceptibility such that greater susceptibility was predictive of greater alcohol and drug use.

Smoking[edit]

Substance use is likely not attributed to peer pressure alone. Evidence of genetic predispositions for substance use exists^[26] and some have begun to examine gene x environment interactions for peer influence. In a nationally representative sample, adolescents who had genetic predisposition were more likely to have good friends who were heavy substance users and were furthermore, more likely to be vulnerable to the adverse influence of these friends.^[27] Results from specific candidate gene studies have been mixed. For instance, in a study of nicotine use Johnson and colleagues found that peer smoking had a lower effect on nicotine dependence for those with the high risk allele (CHRNA5).^[28] This suggests that social contexts do not play a significant role in substance use initiation and maintenance and that interventions for these individuals should be developed with genetics in mind as well.

Drinking[edit]

Though the impact of peer influence in adolescence has been well established, it was unclear at what age this effect begins to diminish. It is accepted that such peer pressure to use alcohol or illicit substances is less likely to exist in elementary school and very young adolescents given the limited access and exposure. Using the Resistance to Peer Influence Scale, Sumter and colleagues found that resistance to peer pressure grew as age increased in a large study of 10- to 18-year-old.^[29] This study also found that girls were generally more resistant to peer influence than boys, particularly at mid-adolescence (i.e. ages 13–15). The higher vulnerability to peer pressure for teenage boys makes sense given the higher rates of substance use in male teens.^[30] For girls, increased and positive parental behaviors (e.g. parental social support, consistent discipline) have been shown to be an important contributor to the ability to resist peer pressure to use substances.^[31]

It is believed that peer pressure of excessive drinking in college comes down to three factors: being offered alcohol, modeling and social norms. Offering alcohol can be both a kind gesture or the other extreme which is forceful. Modeling is being a “copycat” and following your friends then finally you have the social norms which are drinking. There are two reasons why people do it; because everyone does it, or as a means to fit into social groups. On entering college most people begin to increase their amount of alcohol intake, this is more so true to those who do not live at home. This would be because you have shifted from being influenced by your parents to being influenced by your college peers.^[32]

Prevention[edit]

Substance use prevention and intervention programs have utilized multiple techniques in order to combat the impact of peer pressure. One major technique is, naturally, peer influence resistance skills.^[33][34] The known correlational relationship between substance use and relationships with others that use makes resistance skills a natural treatment target. This type of training is meant to help individuals refuse participation with substance use while maintaining their membership in the peer group. Other interventions include normative education approaches (interventions designed to teach students about the true prevalence rates and acceptability of substance use),^[34] education interventions that raise awareness of potential dangers of substance use, alcohol awareness training and classroom behavior management. The literature regarding the efficacy of these approaches, however, is mixed.^[34][35][36] A study in Los Angeles and Orange Counties that established conservative norms and attempted to correct children’s beliefs about substance abuse among their peers showed a statistically significant decrease in alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana use^[34] but other studies that systematically reviewed school-based attempts to prevent alcohol misuse in children found “no easily discernible pattern” in both successful and failed programs.^[35] A systematic review of intervention programs in schools conducted by Onrust et al. found that programs in elementary school were successful in slightly reducing a student’s likelihood to abuse drugs or alcohol. However, this effect started to wear off with programs that targeted older students. Programs that targeted students in grades 8–9 reduced smoking, but not alcohol and other drug abuse, and programs that targeted older children reported no effect at all.^[37]

In a non-substance context, however, research has showed that decision-making training^[38] can produce concrete gains in risk perception and decision-making ability among autistic children. When administered the training in several short sessions that taught the children how to recognize risk from peers and react accordingly, the children showed through post-training assessments that they were able to identify potential threats and sources of pressure from peers and deflect them far better than normal adolescents in a control group.^[38]

Peer pressure and sexual intercourse[edit]

There is evidence supporting the conclusion that parental attitudes disapproving sex tends to lead toward lower levels of adolescent unplanned pregnancy.^[39] These disparities are not due solely to parental disposition but also to communication.^{[citation needed]}

A study completed in Cape Town, South Africa, looked at students at four secondary schools in the region. They found a number of unhealthy practices derived from peer pressure: condoms are derided, threats of ridicule for abstinence, and engaging in sexual activity with multiple partners as part of a status symbol (especially for males). The students colloquially call others who choose abstinence as “umqwayito”, which means dried fruit/meat. An important solution for these problems is communication with adults, which the study found to be extremely lacking within adolescent social groups.^[40]

Literature reviews in this field have attempted to analyze the norms present in the interactions and decision making behind these behaviors. A review conducted by Bongardt et al. defined three types of peer norms that led to a person’s participation in sexual intercourse: descriptive norms, injunctive norms, and outright peer pressure. Descriptive norms and injunctive norms are both observed behaviors and are thus more indirect forms of pressure, but differ in one key aspect: descriptive norms describe peers’ sexual behaviors, but injunctive norms describe peers’ attitudes toward those behaviors (e.g. approval or disapproval). The last norm defined by the study is called “peer pressure” by the authors, and is used to describe direct encouragement or pressure by a person’s peers to engage in sexual behavior.

The review found that indirect norms (descriptive and injunctive) had a stronger effect on a person’s decision to engage in sexual behavior than direct peer pressure. Between the two indirect norms, descriptive norms had a stronger effect: people were likely to try what they thought their peers were engaging in rather than what they thought had approval in their peer group.^[41]

Additionally, studies have found a link between self-regulation and likeliness to engage in sexual behavior. The more trouble a subject had with self-regulation and self-control growing up, the more they were likely to fall prey to peer pressure that would lead them to engage in risky sexual acts. Based on these findings, it may be a good idea to prevent these through either a decision-making program or by targeting adolescents’ ability to self-regulate against possible risks.^[42]

詳細については、次の URL をご覧ください。……

sex ed, sex education, animation, cartoon, music video, peer pressure, friends, amazeorg, moreinfolessweird, smoking, drinking, drugs, alcohol, stealing, relationships, decisions, friendship, healthy, education, sex, puberty, consent, communication, rejection, family, healthy relationships, unhealthy relationships, listening, violence, respect, fighting