During adolescence, friends become increasingly important. Adolescents spend more time with peers and turn to peers for support more often (e.g., Helsen et al.,
2000), and close friendships become more intimate (Selfhout et al.,
2009). Whereas close friendships have many positive effects, such as providing social support (Cornwell,
2003) and protecting against maladjustment (Waldrip et al.,
2008), several studies have also shown
depression socialization among adolescents, which is a process by which friends’ (non-clinical) depressive symptoms predict increases in adolescents’ depressive symptoms (e.g., Giletta et al.,
2011). Because there is inconsistency in findings on depression socialization (Neal & Veenstra,
2021), the current study tested whether some adolescents may be more sensitive to the effects of friends’ depressive symptoms on their own depressive symptoms than others, depending on baseline depressive symptoms and three dimensions of autonomous functioning.
Depression Socialization
Friends tend to be similar in their level of depressive symptoms (Stone et al.,
2013), partly because adolescents tend to select friends who are similar to them and break off friendships with peers who are more dissimilar (i.e., selection processes; Van Zalk et al.,
2010a) and partly because friends affect each other and become more similar over time (i.e., socialization processes; Van Zalk et al.,
2010a). The interpersonal theory of depression emphasizes socialization processes and states that relationships with others can cause or exacerbate symptoms of depression (Coyne,
1976). Adolescents with high levels of depressive symptoms may, for example, induce negative moods in their friends when they show many negative and few positive emotions or when they use maladaptive interaction and coping styles, such as repeated reassurance seeking, negative feedback seeking and co-rumination. In addition, friends may imitate these maladaptive interaction behaviors and coping styles, such as co-rumination (Schwartz-Mette & Rose,
2012) and depressogenic attributional style (Stevens & Prinstein,
2005). As such, depression socialization between close friends may occur through mechanisms of mood contagion or imitation. These effects may be most pronounced during early adolescence, when youth are particularly vulnerable to the effects of peer influence (Laursen & Veenstra,
2021).
Dyadic studies on socialization between close friends indeed showed that friend depressive symptoms predict adolescent depressive symptoms, while controlling for previous depressive symptoms when averaging all of one adolescent’s close friends (Goodwin, Mrug, Borch, & Cillessen,
2012), and in both reciprocated and unreciprocated friend dyads (Stevens & Prinstein,
2005). Some studies report depression socialization to be equal in size across age and gender, when comparing early and mid-adolescence (Schwartz-Mette & Smith,
2018) or when comparing children and adolescence (Schwartz-Mette & Rose,
2012), whereas others only found depression socialization in girls (Giletta et al.,
2011) or found that gender interacted with other personal characteristics, such as popularity or social anxiety, to predict sensitivity to depression socialization (Prinstein,
2007). However, most studies on depression socialization do not examine other potential moderators beside age or gender. Further evidence for depression socialization comes from network studies examining socialization within the broader peer group, although the evidence is also mixed: A recent systematic review on depression socialization in adolescence using stochastic actor-oriented models showed that 4 out of 7 studies found significant socialization effects, but was not able to explain why some studies do find depression socialization and others do not, and whether there are moderators that may explain the mixed findings (Neal & Veenstra,
2021). The current study improved on the previous literature by taking into account that not all adolescents may be equally sensitive to depression socialization. More specifically, this study aimed to examine the moderating effect of baseline depressive symptoms and autonomous functioning.
Individual Differences in Depression Socialization
According to the integrated environmental sensitivity framework (Pluess,
2015), some people are more sensitive to their environment than others. An individual’s sensitivity to depression socialization may depend, for example, on adolescents’ initial level of depressive symptoms. Adolescents with lower levels of depressive symptoms may be more psychologically resilient against adversity and other negative influences (Poole et al.,
2017), and may be less likely to be affected by friends who score higher on depressive symptoms. Instead, they may have the resources to support friends who experience difficulties. Adolescents with higher levels of depressive symptoms may be more vulnerable and sensitive to their friends’ depressive symptoms as they likely are less able to cope with others’ emotional difficulties compared to adolescents with lower levels of depressive symptoms (Orzechowska et al.,
2013). In line with these ideas, depression socialization within friendship dyads has been found to be stronger for adolescents who reported higher levels of personal distress (Prinstein,
2007). Also, in a study of adolescents and their romantic partners, having a partner with high levels of sadness was particularly detrimental for adolescents who also reported more sadness. It is likely that similar effects occur within close friendships, where adolescents who are more vulnerable in terms of higher levels of depressive symptoms may be more sensitive to depression socialization. However, this has not been examined in friendship dyads. The current study tested whether adolescents’ baseline depressive symptoms may make them more vulnerable to friends’ depressive symptoms.
Furthermore, adolescents’ vulnerability to depression socialization may depend on their level of autonomous functioning (Allen et al.,
2006), which can be defined as one’s perception of freedom to behave and believe based on intrinsic motivation rather than external pressures (Soenens et al.,
2018). Previous research has shown that higher levels observed autonomy in mother-child interactions are associated with lower vulnerability to peer substance use socialization (Allen et al.,
2012), whereas higher levels of observed autonomy-relatedness behaviors in friend interactions increased vulnerability to peer substance use (Allen et al.,
2022). As autonomous functioning may be expressed differently across different contexts, the current study distinguishes three dimensions of autonomous functioning that differ in terms of context specificity, ranging from the broad context of overall perceived autonomy to the narrow context of specific situations in a close friendship (Steinberg & Silverberg,
1986): General autonomy, peer resistance, and friend adaptation.
General autonomy is a dimension of autonomous functioning in the broadest sense and refers to one’s general sense of volitional functioning (Soenens et al.,
2018) or the extent to which people follow their own wants, needs, and beliefs rather than complying with external wishes and other people’s beliefs. Adolescents who are more autonomous may be less affected by friends’ negative mood and interaction styles and thereby less sensitive to depression socialization. Adolescents who have a stronger self-concept clarity, or sense of who they are, which is one aspect of autonomy, were found less likely to be affected by friends’ socialization of delinquency (Levey et al.,
2019). Similarly, adolescents who perceive to have a stronger choice in how they act, feel and think may be less sensitive to depression socialization. To the authors’ knowledge, the current study is the first to test whether autonomy may affect vulnerability to depression socialization.
Whereas general autonomy applies to different social contexts,
peer resistance can be seen as a dimension of autonomous functioning that takes place specifically within the peer group context and can be defined as the extent to which adolescents can resist pressure from their peers. More specifically, it refers to being able to stick to one’s own opinion and refuse when an adolescent is asked or pressured by friends to something they do not want to do or would not do if they were alone (Santor et al.,
2000), including but not limited to risk-taking and rule-breaking behavior. Adolescents who are better able to resist peers and stay true to their own wishes, ideas, and needs, may be better able to distinguish between the self and the other in friendships and thereby be less sensitive to the negative mood and maladaptive coping and interaction styles of friends that are associated with depression socialization (Schwartz-Mette & Rose,
2012). As such, it is possible that adolescents who are more resistant to peer pressure are less sensitive to depression socialization. However, just like general autonomy, this has not been tested before.
Whereas general autonomy and peer resistance as dimensions of autonomous functioning operate in a broader social context
, friend adaptation focuses on the context of dyadic relationship in which the depression socialization is assumed to take place. It can be defined as the extent to which adolescents accept their friends’ viewpoints in interactions, rather than maintaining their own viewpoints. This type of autonomous functioning mirrors the way adolescents develop autonomy from parents (Allen et al.,
2006). Friend adaptation, like social conformity, can be overt or internal (Sowden et al.,
2018): Overt compliance relates to the extent to which adolescents overtly agree with their friend (e.g., to keep the peace, to make a decision, to be liked), whereas internal acceptance relates to the extent to which adolescents internally accept their friends’ opinion as their own (e.g., they are convinced that they were wrong before or change their mind). Adolescents who showed more overt compliance in a conversation task were more sensitive to friends’ socialization of externalizing problem behavior (Allen et al.,
2006). Possibly, higher levels of overt compliance make adolescents more sensitive to not just socialization of observable behaviors, such as externalizing problems, but also to depression socialization, although this has not been tested before.
The literature on internal acceptance is scarce, and to the authors’ knowledge there are no studies on internal acceptance in the friendship context, in relation to depressive symptoms or to other socialization processes. Studies on peer influence typically examine how behavior changes when adolescents are in the presence of their friends (i.e., overt compliance), but it remains unclear whether these changes persist when they are alone (i.e., internal acceptance). Yet, to fully understand the effects of peer influence beyond the interaction, it is important to understand to what extent adolescents internalize peer influence. On the one hand, internal acceptance may reflect a lack of autonomous functioning, perhaps even more so than overt compliance, as it can be seen as instability in one’s beliefs. Based on this view, it can be expected that adolescents who score high on internal acceptance are more sensitive to their friends’ influence, including the effect of their depressive symptoms. On the other hand, internal acceptance may reflect higher levels of autonomous functioning, when it is viewed as the autonomous decision to change one’s mind. As such, it would be expected that internal acceptance does not make adolescents more sensitive to depression socialization, or even less sensitive. Therefore, the current study explores the effects of both overt compliance and internal acceptance separately.
Although general autonomy, peer resistance, and friend adaptation stem from different theoretical backgrounds, they can all be seen as different dimensions of autonomous functioning, which operate in different contexts and may increase or decrease adolescents’ sensitivity to their friends’ depressive symptoms (e.g., Allen et al.,
2006). Although there is some overlap in the sense that they all measure some type of sensitivity to others, they tap into difference processes: Having a general sense of autonomy does not necessarily translate to never complying to peer pressure, and pressure from the general group can have a different effect on individuals than differences in opinion with friends. Also, while complying with or conforming to friend influence may indicate a lack of autonomy, it could also reflect a voluntary, autonomous decision to comply with friends in that moment, and might have benefits as well, such as higher relationship quality (Allen et al.,
2022). Thus, it can be expected that there may be differences between (some of) the constructs, although they have not yet been studied together. Therefore, the current study aimed to examine to what extent these dimensions are different and overlapping.
Although the main interest of this study is the potential moderating effect of autonomous functioning in depression socialization, it is possible that general autonomy, peer resistance, and friend adaptation also directly affect depressive symptoms. Autonomous functioning is necessary for healthy development, and a lack of autonomous functioning may result in psychosocial problems. Previous studies have shown that low general autonomy is associated with low self-esteem, negative affect (Patrick et al.,
2007), and depressive symptoms (Van der Giessen et al.,
2014), low levels of peer resistance were associated with an increase in depressive symptoms, and overt friend adaptation is related to an increase in depressive symptoms (Allen et al.,
2006). The current study tested whether adolescents who score higher on autonomous functioning report lower levels of depressive symptoms.