Being influenced negatively can easily be changed to being influenced positively depending upon who you're around

I think this would yield results that are more showing of the influence of peers because it's the participants actual friends, they know these people, they have connections to these people.

I think this is important, not only the variety of experiments, but also seeing how the participants act in real life before and after the experiment. Did they show more involvement in prosocial actions? Less? Whish group were they in? I think it would be interesting to see the lasting effects on the participants from the experiments.

Even if this is the case (The participants changing their decisions based on what they think the rest of the group is going to answer) that is still an example of peer influence, the decisions of others' are possibly influencing the participant's decisions.

People do these things because they believe they will get a positive response from their peers or from the group in addition to the fact that they believe their peers would also be willing to take the risk themselves. I feel like those things go hand in hand, if you believe someone around you would take the risk, then you might believe you would get negative feedback if you don't take the risk and vise versa if you do take the risk.

I have experienced this. I have been in situations where I think people around me would do something, so I feel like I have to do it as well.

The subject is looking at what someone is doing, or would do, and taking that into consideration when they are making their decision.

In this study they have determined that the presence of peers effect the subject at hand in certain domains of or situational behaviors. Which means in one situation someone could be effected by the presence of peers, and in another situation, the same exact person might not be effected by the presence of peers because of the specific situation.

This shows that people are worried about what others' think about them, whether it's a decision or not, they are concerned about what the people around them think about them.

This is something that I think about often. Is someone influenced by their friends or family more? I feel like it definitely depends upon your age, obviously when you're young, you look up to your parents, but it's easier to relate to and agree with someone your own age. However, when you get older, you learn that your parents are wise and know a lot of things that would be a benefit to you. I think it's a really interesting thing and/or topic to think about.

Although the trend of the trajectory was going back to the baseline, we have to think about this in a real life situation. If someone were to be enticed to drink alcohol, an addictive substance, would they be likely to not drink just because they are not around their friends? Obviously we cannot know for sure, but we definitely need to make sure we use this information in situations that we know peer pressure is relevant in real life.

So, there was a difference in the way the participants thought initially (obviously because they are all their own person with their own thought), but the testing of the prosocial and antisocial both overrode these differences and yielded results that show influence from their respective feedback.

Receiving positive feedback from the group and/or your peers.

Here, you can see that the participant is acknowledging that they care about what others' think about their decision.

The adolescents were seen making their decisions based off of the groups' social norms.

Although we are malleable and vulnerable in our adolescent years, that also means we are able to be positively influenced even more in these years of our lives.

I think with this test, it shows that the effects of peer pressure is not just immediate, but rather it has lasting changes that occur within the person who is being pressured. For example, if someone who has never gone to church, is influenced by their friends to go to church with them and is praised for it, then they will, either consciously or subconsciously want to go to church again because they had a positive response from their friends. The same is true when being negatively influenced, if someone is enticed to drink for the first time by their friends and their friends produce a positive response to them drinking, then they are more likely to drink again because of that respose.

The control group in this instance is crucial because they show that without any influence from others, their actions don't really change. If we apply this to the real world, if you have a young child that is never exposed to any outside influence other than you, your child is going to act like you because that's all they know, in the same instance, the test subjects with no influence only know what they think rather than the thoughts of others so they are going to act how they think to be right.

Again, this is a prime showcase of peer influence, just in a more positive way.

This shows clearly that the influence of the peers directly related to the subjects answers, since they knew people were watching, they performed how they think they wanted them to. However, Once the peers went offline and were no longer giving feedback, the subject's answers went back close to what they were answering in the first block because they knew no one was watching and/or giving feedback.

This is showing that both the prosocial and the antisocial groups were influenced by their respective pieces of feedback.

This could just be because of the students themselves that were in each group, but this point to a direct relation to the pressure the feedback provided.

This could potentially add to the pressure, putting a face to a piece of feedback. Knowing that they are "actual" people giving feedback.

It's important to note that they have two different groups that are part-taking in this, some that are being praised for giving to the group and some that are receiving poorer feedback for higher donations to the group.

I feel like if I was a part of this experiment that this would effect my decisions. If I knew that someone was watching and judging my decisions I would subconsciously change my original answers to answers that I think the people watching would approve of. It may just be something that is wired into our minds, that we have to accommodate our answers/actions based upon who is watching.

I feel like it's important that they are the same age as the test subjects, in my experience you are subject to influence a lot more with people your age compared to people considerably older or younger than you.

In this paragraph, they create a real world incentive for the test subjects, so that they choose the situation they would actually choose in real life.

Many people don't usually think about the positive impacts of peer pressure, but here it says that peers tend to have a positive influence on prosocial behavior.

Even when the spectator group was offline, the subjects made similar decisions to that of the first rounds of the game, which could be a result of peer pressure/influence.

In another source I read through, they did an experiment with direct and indirect examples of peer pressure and the students only seemed to respond to the direct source of peer pressure. I think that direct forms of peer pressure are the main source of peer pressure rather that the indirect forms.

I never really thought of it this way, the fact that adolescents may be picking up these bad behaviors because they're told to do the opposite. I believe that our hearts are not as pure as we think they are, when Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit and brought sin into this world, we have all now been born with sin, therefore I believe that there is something within us that desires to go against good... there is evil within us that wants to succeed, and maybe that's where this rebellion comes from that we see being mentioned here.

In our adolescent years, I feel like our brains/minds and opinions are so malleable that it's incredibly easy for people to be influenced by people during this stage of their lives.

A huge part of peer pressure is what those around you think of you. We, as humans, tend to be so focused on what others think of us, we strive for the approval of others and, in turn, that makes us do things that we would not usually do to "be a part" of the group.

I have experienced both the positive and negative effects of peer pressure. When I was exposed to the negative peer pressure, I felt like I was at one of the lowest points in my life, but when I experienced the positive peer pressure, I felt like I was at one of the highest moments in my life.

At first I kind of skipped over this, like it was something that was just normal to read, but going back over it, it really made me think about it. A good kid, someone who has never been know to do something like this, changes just like that because they are exposed to that type of behavior. If you really think about it, we are and act like who we are exposed to, which gets into philosophy. If you are never exposed to bad behavior, you won't act bad, your mind has not been exposed to it, there's no way for your mind to know what that certain "bad behavior" is so how can you act that way? I don't know, I just thought it was very interesting.

This shows that peer influence does, like we typically see, creates vulnerability especially in adolescents. It also shows that peer influence can be positive as well as negative which is something we typically overlook.