Keywords
habits - peer behaviors - peer effect - peer influence - peer pressure - and peer status
Introduction
Peer influence is a phenomenon where an individual follows his friends. Adolescence tends to follow it blindly than any other age groups. They even share their secrets with their classmates and strive to believe them as role models. Adolescence is a delicate stage that must be handled with caution because it is such a pivotal time in everyone's life. During this time, the individual is bursting with energy and passion. It is a period of growth and development in all streams of life. It is a period where one can transform into a better self by molding their character and personality that influences a person's destiny. At the same time, it is a time when people are more likely to engage in nefarious behaviors such as drug misuse and other habits. Teachers in schools and colleges could play an essential role in detecting role shifts in their pupils and guiding them in the proper route[1].
The study focuses on how undergraduates' attitudes and behaviors develop over time. Youth can have a beneficial or harmful impact on their peers. The study focuses on the extent of peer influence on undergraduate's lifestyle behaviors. As a result, the study may raise awareness among youngsters about the positive and negative impacts of peer influence[2].
Peers are the ideal people with whom one may readily talk and interact. They are critical in the lives of all young people. As they spend most of their time together during the day, they would like to observe and imitate each other's activities, character, behaviors, and so on.[3] Adolescence is when one's personality is still developing; peer influence would aid in physical and mental growth by assisting one another. However, it could have a detrimental effect on them at times. They may be prone to vices such as drunkenness, smoking, and drug misuse. As a result, maintaining a balance in peer influence is critical. According to the Social Learning Theory, teenagers do not need to see and adopt a particular behavior; instead, they need to believe that their peers approve it to pick similar acts. Peers can significantly impact how an adolescent looks, speaks, eats, acts sexually, utilizes social media, adopts and accepts violent, anti-social behavior, and many other elements of their lives.[4]
According to various research findings, peers play a critical role in various areas of adolescence lives positively or negatively. It is nearly impossible to get through adolescence period without being impacted somehow.[5]
Aims of the Study Include
-
To assess the influence of peer pressure on lifestyle behaviors among undergraduate students.
-
To find an association between the influence of peer pressure on lifestyle behaviors and selected baseline variables.
Materials and Methods
The study design was a descriptive survey design to assess the peer influence on lifestyle behaviors among undergraduate students in selected professional colleges. The target population of the study comprised four professional colleges. The sampling technique used in the study was proportionate stratified simple random sampling technique. The investigator divided the population into strata based on the year of the study of their course and the 323 subjects were selected through simple random technique proportionately from each strata. The required sample size was calculated using the below mentioned formula.[6]
Sample size =Z 2 * (p) * (1-p)
where
-
Z = Z value (e.g., 1.96 for 95% confidence level)
-
p = percentage picking a choice from the previous literatures, expressed as decimal
-
c = confidence interval, expressed as decimal
1.96*1.96 * (70) * (1-.70)
After obtaining their written consent, 323 undergraduate students were included in the study group. Ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee before starting the project. The tool used for the survey was the structured rating scale to assess the peer influence on lifestyle behavior along with the baseline proforma were formulated by the investigator and validated by seven experts in the field. There was 100% agreement for most of the items. Appropriate corrections were done and tool was finalized. Baseline proforma consisted of seven items seeking information about age, gender, hostellers or day scholars, parent's occupation, enjoy being in the peer group, place of residence, whom do you like to approach when you are in trouble and area of permanent residence. The structured rating scale to assess the peer influence on lifestyle behaviors consisting of 22 questions related to buying choices, exercising, personality, and communication, food choices, healthy mind, social media, and use of gadgets, and smoking and alcoholism. Each correct answer has a “1,” and the wrong answer “0.” The maximum score of the rating scale is 22. The scores were categorized as “High Influence” (88–110), “Moderate Influence” (66–87), “Low Influence” (44–65), “No Influence” (43–22). The reliability of the tool was determined using the Split half method and the Karl Pearson correlation coefficient calculation, which was found as 0.89. As a result, the instrument was regarded as reliable.
The data collection was done through an online survey using Google forms after obtaining the permission to conduct the study from the respective authorities. The investigator sent the online link of the informed consent, instructions to the participants and the rating scale to assess the peer influence on lifestyle behaviors through class coordinators of each batch to obtain the data from the students, and then it was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Statistical Analysis
The grading of the peer influence was done with frequency and percentage distribution, and the sub-domains of the rating scale to assess the peer influence were computed by mean, SD, maximum, minimum, and mean percentage. The association of peer influence with baseline variables was examined using the Chi-square test.
Results
Section 1: Description of Baseline Characteristics
[Table 1] depicts the distribution of baseline variables of the subjects. Out of 323 subjects, majority of 52.3% (169) were from the BSc Nursing and the least 9.3% (30) from MLT.
Table 1
Frequency and percentage distribution of subjects according to their baseline variables: N = 323
|
SI. No.
|
Baseline variables
|
f
|
Percentage
|
|
1.
|
Program
|
|
|
|
BSC Nursing
|
169
|
52.3
|
|
BPT
|
91
|
28.2
|
|
MLT
|
30
|
9.3
|
|
BASLP
|
33
|
10.2
|
|
2.
|
Year of studying
|
|
|
|
2nd year
|
124
|
38.4
|
|
3rd year
|
105
|
32.5
|
|
4th year
|
94
|
29.1
|
|
3.
|
Age in years
|
|
|
|
17–18
|
19
|
5.9
|
|
19–20
|
190
|
58.8
|
|
21–22
|
101
|
31.3
|
|
23–24
|
12
|
3.7
|
|
≥ 25
|
1
|
0.3
|
|
4.
|
Gender
|
|
|
|
Male
|
38
|
11.8
|
|
Female
|
285
|
88.2
|
|
5.
|
Place of stay
|
|
|
|
Hosteller
|
237
|
73.4
|
|
Day scholar
|
86
|
26.6
|
|
6.
|
Father's occupation
|
|
|
|
Private sector
|
194
|
60.1
|
|
Government sector
|
32
|
9.9
|
|
Agricultural sector
|
62
|
19.2
|
|
Retired
|
25
|
7.7
|
|
Not applicable
|
10
|
3.1
|
|
7.
|
Mother's occupation
|
|
|
|
Private sector
|
21
|
6.5
|
|
Government sector
|
73
|
22.6
|
|
Homemaker
|
228
|
70.6
|
|
Not applicable
|
1
|
0.3
|
|
8.
|
Enjoy being in peer group
|
|
|
|
Yes
|
299
|
92.6
|
|
No
|
24
|
7.4
|
|
9.
|
Approachable person
|
|
|
|
Family
|
172
|
53.2
|
|
Friends
|
133
|
41.2
|
|
Teachers
|
1
|
0.3
|
|
Others
|
17
|
5.3
|
|
10.
|
Area of residence
|
|
|
|
Urban
|
163
|
50.5
|
|
Rural
|
160
|
49.5
|
Among the age group, the majority of 58.8% (190) belonged to 19–20 years.
In gender, females constituted the vast percentage of 88.2 (285) and 73.4% (237) of the subjects were hostellers.
Most of the subject's father's occupation were in private sectors (194, 60.1%), and the majority of (228, 70.6%) their mothers were homemakers. A high majority (299, 92.9%) of subjects enjoyed being in the peer group. Most subject's approachable person in their need was family and friends 53.2% and 41.2%, respectively. Among the subjects, 163 (50.5%) undergraduates belonged to an urban area, and ∼160 (49.5%) belonged to rural areas.
Section II: Description of Peer Influence on Lifestyle Behaviors
The data show that 65.3% of undergraduates had moderate peer influence, 5% had strong peer influence, 29.4% had low peer influence, and 0.3% had no influence ([Table 2]).
Table 2
Frequency and percentage distribution of subjects according to the grading of peer influence
|
Sl. No.
|
Grading
|
Score
|
f
|
Percentage
|
|
1.
|
High influence
|
88–110
|
16
|
5.0
|
|
2.
|
Moderate influence
|
66–87
|
211
|
65.3
|
|
3.
|
Low influence
|
44–65
|
95
|
29.4
|
|
4.
|
No influence
|
22–43
|
1
|
0.3
|
The data presented in [Table 3] shows the area-wise analysis of peer influence on lifestyle behaviors. The most significant percentage of peer impact (79.3%) was found in personality and communication, while the lowest in smoking and alcoholism (36.6%). Other sections with the highest mean percentages were healthy mind (74.8%), exercising (71.1%), food choices (68.2%), buying choices (64.9%), social media (45.7%), and use of gadgets (45.7%), respectively. The mean percentage of the total score was 64.58. Though the peer influence was much evident in the data, the highest percentage of influence was reflected in positive behaviors such as personality and communication, healthy mind, and exercising.
Table 3
Area wise analysis of Peer Influence on lifestyle behaviors by using Mean, Standard Deviation and Mean Percentage: N = 323
|
Area
|
Mean
|
SD
|
Maximum
|
Minimum
|
Mean percentage
|
|
Buying choices
|
9.74
|
2.04
|
15
|
3
|
64.9
|
|
Exercising
|
14.23
|
2.43
|
20
|
4
|
71.1
|
|
Personality and communication
|
11.90
|
1.91
|
15
|
3
|
79.3
|
|
Food choices
|
10.24
|
2.06
|
15
|
3
|
68.2
|
|
Healthy mind
|
11.23
|
2.09
|
15
|
3
|
74.8
|
|
Social media and use of gadgets
|
8.21
|
2.45
|
15
|
3
|
54.7
|
|
Smoking and alcoholism
|
5.49
|
2.63
|
15
|
3
|
36.6
|
|
Total score
|
71.04
|
10.67
|
110
|
32
|
64.58
|
Section III: Association between Peer Influence on Lifestyle Behaviors among Undergraduates with Selected Baseline Variables
[Table 4] shows the association between peer influence on lifestyle behaviors and selected baseline variables using the chi-square test. To test the significance, the following hypothesis was used.
Table 4
Association between peer influence and selected baseline variables: N = 312
|
Sl. No.
|
Baseline variables
|
≤70
(median)
|
>70
(median)
|
χ2
|
p-Value
|
|
1.
|
Program
|
|
|
6.39
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.429
|
|
BSC Nursing
|
82
|
87
|
|
BPT
|
43
|
48
|
|
MLT
|
16
|
13
|
|
B.ASLP
|
16
|
17
|
|
2.
|
Year of Studying
|
|
|
2.98
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.567
|
|
2nd year
|
56
|
67
|
|
3rd year
|
56
|
49
|
|
4th year
|
45
|
49
|
|
3.
|
Age in years
|
|
|
10.32
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.699
|
|
17–18
|
7
|
12
|
|
19–20
|
97
|
92
|
|
21–22
|
47
|
54
|
|
23–24
|
5
|
7
|
|
≥ 25
|
1
|
0
|
|
4.
|
Gender
|
|
|
9.47
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.005***
|
|
Male
|
10
|
28
|
|
Female
|
147
|
137
|
|
5.
|
Place of stay
|
|
|
4.41
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.077
|
|
Hosteller
|
110
|
127
|
|
Day scholar
|
47
|
38
|
|
6.
|
Father's occupation
|
|
|
7.77
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.656
|
|
Private sector
|
94
|
99
|
|
Government sector
|
16
|
16
|
|
Agricultural sector
|
32
|
30
|
|
Retired
|
13
|
12
|
|
Not applicable
|
2
|
8
|
|
7.
|
Mother's occupation
|
|
|
8.91
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.486
|
|
Private sector
|
10
|
11
|
|
Government sector
|
34
|
38
|
|
Homemaker
|
112
|
116
|
|
Not applicable
|
1
|
0
|
|
8
|
Approachable person
|
|
|
14.94
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.031*
|
|
Family
|
93
|
79
|
|
Friends
|
53
|
79
|
|
Teachers
|
0
|
1
|
|
Others
|
11
|
6
|
|
9
|
Residence
|
|
|
4.52
(Fisher's exact test)
|
0.066
|
|
Urban
|
71
|
92
|
|
Rural
|
86
|
73
|
*p < 0.05 (significant).
***p≤0.001 (very highly significant).
H1: There will be a significant association between peer influence on lifestyle behaviors among undergraduates with selected baseline variables.
The test findings suggest that the 'p' value of majority of variables were more than 0.05 (at 5% level of significance) and thus it was not significant except in gender (0.005) and approachable person in need (0.03), which clearly states that there is no significant association between peer influence and selected baseline variables.
Discussion
According to the findings, of 323 subjects, the majority (52.3%) belonged to the BSc Nursing program, while the least (9.3%) belonged to the MLT program. Among the age group, the majority (58.8%) of students were from 19–20 years. A vast number (285, 88.2%) were females, and 73.4% of subjects were hostellers. A majority (299, 92.9%) of subjects enjoyed being in the peer group. Most subject's approachable person in their need is family and friends of 53.2% and 41.2% respectively. Among the subjects, 163 (50.5%) undergraduates belonged to urban and ∼160 (49.5%) belonged to rural areas.
The finding of the peer influence on lifestyle behaviors shows that the majority of 211 (65.3%) undergraduates had moderate influence, 95 (29.4%) had low influence, 16 (5.0%) had a strong influence, and 1 (0.3%) had no influence.
The most significant peer impact (79.3%) was evident in personality and communication, smoking and alcoholism (36.6%). Other sections with the highest mean percentages were healthy mind (74.8%), exercising (71.1%), food choices (68.2%), buying choices (64.9%), social media (45.7%), and use of gadgets (45.7%), respectively. Similar observations were made by Kocak et al indicates that 5.97% had a statistically significant effect on eating habits.[7]
A study to investigate the peer pressure on young adults' product purchase decisions of the University of Botswana, indicated a two-factor solution of peer influence using combined product data, peer influence by normative influence was ∼54.48%, and informational influence was by 13.36%.[8]
Another study investigated the impact of peer pressure on cigarette smoking among Ethiopian high school and university students. The findings show that 15.9% of students had a significant impact of peer pressure on cigarette smoking.[9]
The findings suggest a strong influence of peer pressure on various factors. Peer groups like to interact with each other and take advice on everything, which would help them get updated on the latest trends and developments worldwide. Most of the time, peer influences positively help them, but they could also result in destructive behaviors.[10] Hence, the study emphasizes the importance of having an optimum peer influence in building healthy behaviors and habits among peers, which would help them to have a healthy lifestyle. Peers are the best medicine to relieve tensions and worries to live in this fast-paced life. Therefore, the researcher believes that the study findings would give insights to people regarding the effects of peer pressure.
Moreover, the study showed a significant relationship between peer influence and baseline variables such as gender and approachable person in need, but no such relationship existed for other variables.
Similar observations were noted by investigators in Kenya who assessed peer pressure among secondary school adolescents in Nyahururu Laikipia country. Their results revealed that peer pressure influences demographical factors such as age, class, and gender. There was a significant association between peer pressure and demographic variables.[11]
Conclusion
The study's findings showed that 65.3% of undergraduates had moderate peer influence on various lifestyle behaviors. It may vary from individual to individual. Hence, it can be concluded that peer influence plays a crucial role in one's health. Educators and parents can play a vital role in making aware of these facts in our children's minds to mold them into better citizens of the country.
