The Power of Peers: Hoe persoonlijke ervaringen met … · Giletta, Slavich, Rudolph, Hastings, Nock, & Prinstein (2018). Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry . Peer Victimization
Post on 26-Feb-2021
1 Views
Preview:
Transcript
The Power of Peers: Hoe persoonlijke ervaringen met leeftijdsgenoten tot immuunsysteemactivatie kunnen leiden bij adolescenten
Matteo Giletta
Department of Developmental Psychology
Tilburg University
Social Relationships
Humans = Social species
Innate human need to belong
Peer Relations in Adolescence
Changes in social network Increased autonomy
Increased time spent with peers
Changes in quality of peer relations
Biological changes = Puberty Increased orientation (social motivation) toward peers
Increased peer sensitivity
Enhanced emotional and physiological responses to peers
Negative Peer Experiences and Health
Fatigue
Sleep problems
Adulthood Adolescence
Great Smoky Mountain Study
(Wolke et al., 2013)
British National Child Development
Study (Takizawa, 2014)
Underlying Processes
How do peer experiences has such enduring consequences on both mental and physical health?
Guiding theoretical frameworks
Biological embedding model (Miller et al., 2011) How does stress “get under the skin”?
Human social genomics Social signal transduction theory (Slavich & Cole, 2013)
Inflammation
Stress and Inflammation
Slavich & Cole, 2013
Social stress can trigger inflammatory responses
Social evaluative stressors
Upregulation proinflammatory genes
Downregulation antiviral and antibody-related genes
Conserved Transcriptional Response to
Adversity (CTRA; Cole, 2014)
Inflammation and Health
Slavich & Irwin, 2014
Consequences of elevated inflammation Physical health
Mental health
Depressive symptoms
Anxiety symptoms
Peripheral inflammation can reach the CNS
Inflammation in the CNS induces “sickness behaviors”
Inflammation alters the synthesis reuptake of monoamine and reduces availability of serotonin (Miller et al., 2009)
Peer relations and inflammation
? Immune Cell
Social-Evaluative Stressors Negative Peer Experiences
Peer Preference and Inflammation
Peer preference = (social) belonging to the peer group
Sociometric procedure Who do you like the most?
Who do you like the least?
Standardized like – dislike nominations
Peer preference Systemic
inflammation Internalizing symptoms
Marieke de Bruine
TRAILS Tracking Adolescents' Individual Lives Survey
604 Dutch adolescents (55% girls) from Tracking Adolescent Individual Live Survey (De Winter et al. 2005)
Peer preference
hsCRP
Internalizing symptoms
12 14 15 17 16 18 19 13 16 19
Results
Longitudinal effects of peer preference on internalizing symptoms via C-reactive protein
Peer preference CRP Internalizing symptoms T3
Internalizing symptoms T2
Internalizing symptoms T1
-.08*
.53***
.60***
-.060†
Χ2 = 46.387 Df = 21 RMSEA = .047 CFI = .960 TLI = .936 SRMR = .036
Conclusions
Peer preference and systemic inflammation Prospective effects (3 years later) using objective measurement
of social environment
Peer preference as index of social connection
Low peer preference = risk for survival
Inflammation and internalizing problems Systemic inflammation did not predict changes in internalizing
problems over time
To what extent and when does inflammation pose risk for internalizing problems?
Sensitization Hypothesis
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Stress Stress Stress
Stre
ss r
esp
on
se
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Stress Stress Stress
Stre
ss r
esp
on
se
Sensitization Hypothesis
Neuro-inflammatory sensitization (Slavich & Irwin, 2014)
Exposure to social stress may result in enhanced inflammatory responses to subsequent stressors
Lower levels of stress trigger inflammation
Proinflammatory phenotype (Miller et al., 2011)
Evidence concerning family adversity
Peer Victimization and Inflammation
Laboratory social stress
Acute inflammatory
responses
Peer victimization
Role of Cognitions
Individual differences in cognitive processes Expectations, perception and appraisal
of social situations
Perception of social threat is key to activate pathways to inflammation
Slavich & Cole, 2013
Diathesis-Stress Model
Laboratory social stress
Acute inflammatory
responses
Peer victimization
Cognitions
Negative cognitive style
Attribute negative events to internal, stable and global causes
Hopelessness
Project ARCH Adolescent Relationships, Coping, and Health
Participants 220 clinically-referred girls
14.71 years (SD = 1.29)
64% Caucasian, 24% African-American
Inclusion criteria 12-16 years old
History of mental health concerns in the two prior years
Caregiver available to participate
No active psychosis, mental retardation or pervasive developmental disorders
PI: Mitch Prinstein
Study Design
3 mth 6 mth 9 mth Baseline
Phone interviews
Interview and questionnaires
3 hours
Baseline saliva
20 min post-speech
30 min 40 min
Lab visit
Retention rate 80-91%
Speech task
Modified TSST (Kirschbaum et al., 1993)
Cytokines
Interview and questionnaires
3 hours
Baseline saliva
20 min post-speech
30 min 40 min Speech task
Pro-inflammatory cytokines Interleukin-6 (IL-6)
Interleukin-1β (IL-1β)
Tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α)
Measures
Baseline laboratory session
Questionnaire based-measures Peer victimization (overt, relational, and reputational; RPEQ; Prinstein
et al., 2001)
Hopelessness (HSC; Kazdin, Rodgers, & Colbus, 1986)
Negative cognitive style (ACSQ; Hankin & Abramson, 2002) 5 Interpersonal scenarios
Average across inferential styles about causes, consequences, and the self
Depressive symptoms (MFQ; Costello & Angold 1988)
Covariates Body mass index, medication, illness, caffeine intake
Measures
Follow-up assessment (9-months)
Semi-structured interview
Depressive symptoms (MFQ; Costello & Angold 1988)
Life stress assessment (Youth Life Stress Interview; Rudolph & Flynn, 2007)
Narrative of stressful life events between baseline and follow-up
“Objective coding” (coding teams) of severity scores for interpersonal and nonintepersonal stress
Latent Change Score Models
Outcome: cytokine responses to the social stress task
Latent Change Score Models
Outcome: cytokine responses to the social stress task
Latent Change Score Models
Outcome: cytokine responses to the social stress task
-0,5 -0,4 -0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3
Hopelessness
Negative cognitive style
Peer victimization
Pre-stress cytokine
Standardized coefficients
TNF-α
IL-1β
IL-6
***
*
*** ***
**
**
Giletta, Slavich, Rudolph, Hastings, Nock, & Prinstein (2018). Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry
Peer Victimization X Hopelessness
-0,2
-0,15
-0,1
-0,05
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
0,25
0,3
Low High
IL-6
ch
ange
s
Peer victimization
High Hopelessness
Low Hopelessness
Outcome: IL-6 responses to the social stress task
b = 0.71**
b = -0.01
Giletta et al. (2018). JCPP
Peer Victimization X Hopelessness
Outcome: IL-1β responses to the social stress task
-0,3
-0,2
-0,1
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
Low High
IL-1
β c
han
ges
Peer victimization
High Hopelessness
Low Hopelessness
b = 0.83***
b = -0.21
Giletta et al. (2018). JCPP
Peer Victimization X Hopelessness
Outcome: TNF-α responses to the social stress task
-0,25
-0,2
-0,15
-0,1
-0,05
0
0,05
0,1
0,15
0,2
Low High
TNF-
α c
han
ges
Peer victimization
High Hopelessness
Low Hopelessness
b = 0.32†
b = -0.57**
Giletta et al. (2018). JCPP
Supplementary Analysis
Robustness of findings
Identical results when adjusting for SES, BMI, family climate, recent illness, same-day caffeine intake, smoking, birth control and medication use
Consistency of findings
Results consistent across subtypes of peer victimization (overt, relational, and reputational)
Conclusions
Peer victimization enhances inflammatory stress responses
Key role of cognitive vulnerability Diathesis-stress model
Implications Biological embedding
Is inflammation a primary mechanism linking negative peer experiences to health?
Does inflammation predict depression?
Depressive symptoms
Stress-induced inflammation
Interpersonal stress
Linear Regressions
Outcome: Depressive symptoms at 9 months follow-up
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5
Stress-induced inflammation
Interpersonal stress
Baseline depression
Standardized coefficients
TNF-α
IL-1β
IL-6*
*** ***
***
*** ***
***
TNF-α responses X Interpersonal Stress
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
Low High
Dep
ress
ive
sym
pto
ms
follo
w-u
p
Recent interpersonal stress
High TNF-α responses
Low TNF-α responses
b = 0.019***
b = 0.01†
IL-1β responses X Interpersonal Stress
0
0,1
0,2
0,3
0,4
0,5
0,6
0,7
0,8
Low High
Dep
ress
ive
sym
pto
ms
follo
w-u
p
Recent interpersonal stress
High IL-1β responses
Low IL-1β responses
b = 0.017***
b = 0.01
Supplementary Analysis
Noninterpersonal stress
No main effect
No interaction effects
Pre-stress cytokines
No main effect
No interaction effects
Conclusions
Inflammation as important factor in the development of depression in adolescence
Support different research lines
Peer Power Project
Ongoing multiwave study (N=200) examining the effects of
peer relations on inflammatory markers
Fall 2016
Spring 2017
Fall 2017
1st year high-school 2nd year high-school
Measures
Peer experiences (self- and peer-reported) Individual differences (rejection sensitivity, personality) Inflammation (C-reactive protein; cytokines; gene
expression)
Spring 2018
Retention rate > 85%
Peer Power Project
Developmental psychopathology perspective
Development Peer relations
Immune system
Development
Development
Adolescent behavior
Ongoing Project
5 times a day X 10 days
Phase 1 Phase 2
Questionnaire Peer nominations ESM
Phase 3
Peer experiences Individual differences
Laboratory social stressor
Spring 2019
Thank you!
m.giletta@uvt.nl
Mitch Prinstein (UNC)
George Slavich (UCLA)
Tineke Oldehinkel (Groningen University)
Marieke de Bruine
Lisa Schreuders
top related