Personality and Individual Differences 76 (2015) 129134

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Person  environment interactions on adolescent delinquency:

Sensation seeking, peer deviance and parental monitoring
Frank D. Mann a,, Natalie Kretsch a,1, Jennifer L. Tackett c,2, K. Paige Harden b,3, Elliot M. Tucker-Drob b,4
a
University of Texas at Austin, Department of Psychology, 108 E. Dean Keeton Stop A8000, Austin, TX 78712, United States
b
University of Texas at Austin, Department of Psychology and Population Research Center, 108 E. Dean Keeton Stop A8000, Austin, TX 78712, United States
c
University of Houston, Department of Psychology, 126 Heyne Bldg, Houston, TX 77204-5022, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sensation seeking is a personality trait that is robustly correlated with delinquent behavior in
Received 16 May 2014 adolescence. The current study tested specic contextual factors hypothesized to facilitate, exacerbate
Received in revised form 10 October 2014 or attenuate this risk factor for adolescent delinquency. Individual differences in sensation seeking, peer
Accepted 27 November 2014
deviance, parental monitoring and self-reported delinquent behavior were assessed in a sample of 470
Available online 20 December 2014
adolescents. Peer deviance partially mediated the effects of sensation seeking and parental monitoring
on adolescent delinquency. We also found evidence for a three-way interaction between sensation
Keywords:
seeking, peer deviance and parental monitoring, such that the highest rates of delinquency occurred from
Delinquency
Adolescence
the concurrence of high sensation seeking, high peer deviance, and low levels of parental monitoring.
Sensation seeking Results highlight the importance of considering peer- and family-level processes when evaluating
Peer deviance personality risk and problematic adolescent behavior.
Parental monitoring 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Mediation
Moderation

1. Introduction paper, we consider the relations between sensation seeking and

two social contexts: deviant peers and parental monitoring.
Sensation seeking, dened as a disposition to select and prefer Peer deviance is a robust contextual correlate of adolescents
novel, stimulating, or exciting experiences, is an intrapersonal risk delinquent behavior (Kandel, 1986), an association that reects
factor for delinquent behavior (Harden, Quinn, & Tucker-Drob, social selection and social inuence (Burk, Vorst, Kerr, & Stattin,
2012; Harden & Tucker-Drob, 2011; Popham, Kennison, & Bradley, 2011; Wills & Cleary, 1999). Social selection is a process by which
2011). Population-average developmental increases in sensation adolescents with dispositions toward delinquency select (and are
seeking and delinquent behavior co-occur across adolescence selected into) deviant peer groups (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990;
(Moftt, 1993; Steinberg et al., 2008), and individual differences Kandel, 1978). Social inuence occurs when befriending and social-
in longitudinal changes in sensation seeking account for much of izing with deviant peers increases ones likelihood to engage in
the adolescent spike in delinquent behavior (Harden et al., 2012). delinquent behavior. Sensation seeking may play both mediating
As personality risk for adolescent delinquency, sensation seeking and moderating roles in these peer dynamics.
may index a reaction range for the emergence of delinquency As a mediator, sensation seeking may be a psychological mech-
(Nigg, 2006), with environmental contexts possibly mediating anism of social selection, shaping who an adolescents friends are.
and/or moderating this risk. Researchers have therefore begun to For instance, afliating with deviant peers may be one way that
examine specic contextual factors that facilitate, exacerbate or adolescents high in sensation seeking nd a socialecological niche
attenuate personality risk for delinquent behavior. In the current that is conducive to their motivational and behavioral dispositions.
Consistent with this hypothesis, afliation with deviant peers has
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 (512) 471 3516. been found to mediate the link between sensation seeking and
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (F.D. Mann), natalie.kretsch@gmail. marijuana use (Hampson, Andrews, & Barckley, 2008; Yanovitzky,
com (N. Kretsch), [email protected] (J.L. Tackett), [email protected] 2005).
(K.P. Harden), [email protected] (E.M. Tucker-Drob). As a moderator, sensation seeking may also play a role in social
1
Tel.: +1 (512) 471 3516. inuence, affecting how an individual responds to peer inuence.
2
Tel.: +1 (713) 743 4847.
3 High sensation seekers may be more responsive to the immediate
Tel.: +1 (512) 471 1124.
4
Tel.: +1 (512) 232 4225. rewards of peer interaction and approval and thus more vulnerable

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.11.055
0191-8869/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
130 F.D. Mann et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 76 (2015) 129134

to deviant social inuence. Consistent with moderating relations between sensation seeking, peer deviance and parental
between personality and contextual risk, behavior genetic research monitoring.
has found evidence for gene  peer deviance interaction effects,
whereby genetic risks on substance use are exacerbated among
2. Method
adolescents with deviant peers (Harden, Hill, Turkheimer, &
Emery, 2008). Although the specic genetic vulnerabilities under-
2.1. Participants
lying these effects are unknown, other research has shown that
sensation seeking is a heritable personality trait (Koopmans,
Participants were 470 adolescent siblings (identical and frater-
Boomsma, Heath, & van Doornen, 1995) that partly accounts for
nal twins5), ages 1317 years, from the Texas Twin Project (Harden,
heritable variation in adolescent delinquency (Harden et al.,
Tucker-Drob, & Tackett, 2013). Participants were identied from
2012). These ndings suggest the effects of peer groups on delin-
public school rosters and recruited via telephone call and/or mailing
quent behavior may be intensied when genetic risk for delin-
to join an on-going twin registry. The sample was 52% male (48%
quencyincluding risk conferred by high sensation-seekingis
female). The racial composition of the sample was 58% non-Hispanic
present.
Caucasian, 21% Hispanic/Latino, 11% AfricanAmerican, 1% Native
Finally, the negative effects of sensation seeking on adolescent
American, 2% East Asian, 3.0% Southeast Asian and 4% mixed-race/
delinquency may wane in protective environments. Parental mon-
other. The highest level of education completed by parents ranged
itoring, dened by Dishion and McMahon (1998, p. 61) as parent-
from 6th grade to graduate school. Approximately 7% of parents
ing behaviors involving attention to and tracking of the childs
did not complete high school, 7% completed no more than high
whereabouts, activities, and adaptations, is a protective factor
school, 3% completed a vocational or technical degree, 19% attended
that may mitigate the deleterious effects of various risks on adoles-
college but did not obtain a degree, 6% completed an associate
cent behavior (Hill & Tyson, 2009; Lac & Crano, 2009). From the
degree, and 58% a bachelor degree or higher.
perspective of social control theory (Hirschi, 1969), antisocial
Participants were assessed in the summer, and they had either
behavior is prevented by bonds to conventional society, including
been enrolled in high school during the previous school year or
parents. Parental monitoring, by both constraining certain behav-
were expected to enroll in the fall. Verbal and written consent
iors and by communicating awareness and caring about adoles-
was obtained from participants, and the study was granted a
cents activities, may function as a key mechanism of social
federal certicate of condentiality to ensure honest reporting
control (Longmore, Manning, & Giordano, 2013). Specically,
without risk of legal sanction. Parents completed a survey, and
parental monitoring may buffer the negative effects of high sensa-
adolescents visited the laboratory, during which time they
tion seeking by preventing adolescents afliation with deviant
completed a number of computerized tasks and a survey. Trained
peers and by limiting the inuence of those peers (Kiesner,
research assistants administered all tasks; different research assis-
Poulin, & Dishion, 2010; Steinberg, Fletcher, & Darling, 1994). In
tants assessed each sibling separately.
a large sample of adolescents, lower levels of peer deviance medi-
ated the protective effect of parental monitoring on alcohol use
(Kim & Neff, 2010). Moreover, a study with late adolescents found 2.2. Measures
that the relation between peer inuence and drinking behavior
was moderated by parental monitoring (Wood, Read, Mitchell, & 2.2.1. Parental education
Brand, 2004). Finally, molecular genetics research has found evi- Parents reported their highest completed level of education on a
dence of a gene  parental monitoring interaction, whereby 22-point scale, ranging from grade school to a professional or doc-
genetic risks for externalizing behavior decrease under high levels torate degree. Ratings for both parents were standardized and then
of parental monitoring (Dick et al., 2009, 2011). used to calculate a mean score.

1.1. Goals of the current study 2.2.2. Sensation seeking

Individual differences in sensation seeking were measured
Building off previous research, we test ve hypotheses in this using the Brief Sensation Seeking Scale (BSSS), which consists of
study. First, high levels of sensation seeking and peer deviance 8 items. For example I would like to explore strange places and
and low levels of parental monitoring will independently predict I prefer friends who are excitingly unpredictable. Items were
adolescent delinquency. Second, peer deviance will partially medi- rated on a scale ranging from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly
ate the effect of sensation seeking on delinquent behavior, such Agree). Previous research has found that the BSSS shows high reli-
that adolescents high in sensation seeking will select deviant peer ability and construct validity (Hoyle, Stephenson, Palmgreen,
groups and, in turn, increase risk for delinquency. Third, peer devi- Lorch, & Donohew, 2002; Stephenson, Hoyle, Palmgreen, & Slater,
ance will also moderate the association between sensation seeking 2003).
and delinquency, such that adolescents high in sensation seeking
will be more vulnerable to the inuence of deviant peers. Fourth,
2.2.3. Peer deviance
peer deviance will mediate the protective effect of parental moni-
Peer deviance was measured with an 22-item self-report ques-
toring on delinquent behavior, such that high levels of parental
tionnaire adapted from Thornberry, Lizotte, Krohn, Farnworth, and
monitoring will prevent adolescents from afliating with deviant
Jang (1994), which asked adolescents how many of their friends
peers and, in turn, prevent exposure to contextual risk for delin-
engage in various delinquent behaviors, including stealing and
quency. Fifth, the protective effects of parental monitoring will
destroying property, and prosocial behaviors, such as participating
be highest for youth high in both intra- and inter-personal risk.
in school activities and getting along with teachers. Items were
Therefore, we hypothesize that parental monitoring will moderate
rated on a scale ranging from 1 (None of them) to 4 (All of them).
the combined inuence that sensation seeking and peer deviance
has on delinquency, such that a three-way interaction between
5
sensation seeking, peer deviance and parental monitoring will be Although twin samples are often used to conduct behavioral genetic analyses, the
focus of the current paper is on the phenotypic associations between study
observed. Although many of the individual pieces of this model constructs. Accordingly, twin pair resemblance is not used to make inferences about
have been tested in previous research, this study is the rst to test genetic inuences. (Standard errors and parameter estimates were statistically
a comprehensive model that includes a three-way interaction corrected for non-independence of observations within twin pairs.)
 F.D. Mann et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 76 (2015) 129134 131

Fig. 1. Path diagram of mediating and moderating pathways to adolescent delinquency. Note: Unstandardized path coefcients reported. Focal predictors and self-reported
delinquency standardized. Product terms computed from standardized predictors. 95% condence intervals reported in parentheses. Male = 0, female = 1. 3 = sensation
seeking  peer deviance  parental monitoring interaction. Interaction terms regressed on age, gender and parental education, and all covariances among interaction terms,
covariates and study variables were estimated these associations are not illustrated for ease of presentation. Results are therefore estimates from a fully saturated model.

Prosocial items were reverse scored before aggregating items to 2.3. Data analysis
form a composite scale.
Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling in the
software program Mplus version 7.1 (Muthn & Muthn, 1998
2.2.4. Parental monitoring
2010). All standard errors and model statistics were adjusted for
Parental monitoring was measured using a 15-item self-report
nonindependence of data from children living in the same
questionnaire adapted from Capaldi and Patterson (1989). Items
household (Asparouhov & Muthn, 2006). Age trends and gender
examined household rules and parental knowledge about friends
differences associated with delinquency are well documented
and activities. Seven items assessed parental knowledge about
(Moftt, 1993; Simourd & Andrews, 1994), and differences in
adolescents friends and activities, which were rated on a scale
parental education may confound parental monitoring and adoles-
ranging from 1 (They dont know) to 3 (They know a lot). Eight items
cent delinquency. Therefore, age, gender and parental education
assessed parental control over adolescents friends and activities,
were treated as covariates in all analyses. Peer deviance and paren-
and were rated on a 3-point scale (1 = Never, 2 = Sometimes,
tal monitoring scales were log-transformed to correct for positive
3 = Always). For example, participants were asked whether they
skew, and all focal predictors (but not age, gender and parental
need permission to go out on weekends. All items were aggregated
education) were standardized prior to computing interaction terms
to form a composite scale.
and conducting analyses. Inspection of the distribution of adoles-
cent-report delinquency indicated the presence of a oor effect
2.2.5. Delinquency (i.e., left-censoring), as is common with measures of delinquency,
A 36-item self-report measure adapted from Survey, Huizinga, which tend not to index minor social offenses. We therefore
Esbensen, and Weiher (1991) was employed. Adolescents were employed a Tobit model to produce unbiased parameter estimates
asked if they had ever engaged in a number of delinquent behav- for censored data (Muthn, 1990; Tobin, 1958).
iors, ranging from minor offenses to relatively severe crimes. Minor The full model t is illustrated in Fig. 1. Mean-centered age,
offenses include, been loud, rowdy, or unruly in a public place gender and parental education were included as covariates of
and been suspended or expelled from school. Serious offenses sensation seeking, peer deviance, parental monitoring, and delin-
include, sold marijuana or hashish (pot, weed, hash) and car- quency. Direct paths from sensation seeking, peer deviance, and
ried a hidden weapon (a knife or a gun). Items were assessed on a parental monitoring to delinquency were estimated, as well as
3-point scale (1 = Never, 2 = Once, 3 = More than once). indirect paths from sensation seeking and parental monitoring
132 F.D. Mann et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 76 (2015) 129134

through peer deviance. To evaluate moderating hypotheses, two- Table 2

way interactions between each combination of focal predictors Total, direct & indirect effects on delinquency.

were estimated (sensation seeking  peer deviance, sensation Total Direct Indirect
seeking  parental monitoring, peer deviance  parental monitor- B S.E. B S.E. B S.E.
ing), as well as a three-way interaction (sensation seeking  peer
Sensation seeking .420 (.044) .347 (.042) .073 (.017)
deviance  parental monitoring). Parental monitoring .240 (.040) .115 (.041) .125 (.022)

Note: Mediator variable = peer deviance. B = unstandardized path coefcients for

3. Results standardized variables. S.E. = standard error. p(two-tailed) < .01. p(two-tailed) < .001.

Table 1 summarizes descriptive and reliability statistics and

zero-order correlations among study variables. Results from the full
model are illustrated in Fig. 1. Note that because focal predictors than girls (b = .197, 95% CI = .358, .037, p < .05) and were also
were standardized, the main effects can be interpreted as popula- more likely to report deviant peer afliation (b = .191, 95%
tion-average effects, i.e., effects holding all moderators at their CI = .380, .001, p < .05). Conversely, girls were more likely to be
mean levels. In support of our rst hypothesis, sensation seeking monitored by their parents (b = .290, 95% CI = .116, .464, p < .01).
(b = .347, 95% CI = .264, .430, p < .001), peer deviance (b = .375, In sum, covariates and mediating and moderating pathways among
95% CI = .305, .445, p < .001) and parental monitoring (b = -.115, focal predictors accounted for more than a third of the variance in
95% CI = .195, .035, p < .01) had signicant main effects on ado- adolescents self-report delinquent behavior (R2 = .35).
lescent delinquency, even after controlling for age, gender and
parental education. Second, high sensation seeking adolescents 4. Discussion
(b = .194, 95% CI = .111, .278, p < .001) and adolescents with lower
levels of parental monitoring (b = .334, 95% CI = .425, .215, This study documents a nexus of mediating and moderating
p < .001) reported higher levels of peer deviance. Tests of indirect pathways between adolescent sensation seeking, social contexts,
effects (see Table 2) indicated that afliation with deviant peers and delinquent behavior. We nd that, rather than conferring a
partially mediated the association between sensation seeking and uniform level of risk, sensation seeking may be better conceptual-
delinquency (b = .073 95% CI = .039, .106, p < .001), as well as paren- ized as providing a reaction range (Nigg, 2006), which results in
tal monitoring and delinquency (b = .125, 95% CI = .168, .083, higher or lower levels of delinquent behavior in the presence of
p < .001). That is, these results indicate that delinquency increases certain contextual factors. Specically, higher sensation seeking
by approximately .07 standard deviations for every standard devi- is translated into deviant behavior when peers provide opportuni-
ation increase in sensation seeking via the effect of sensation seek- ties for delinquent behavior and when they lack parents who mon-
ing on increased peer deviance. Likewise, adolescent delinquency is itor and regulate their behavior.
predicted to decrease by approximately .13 standard deviations for Furthermore, results suggest that adolescents prone to person-
every standard deviation increase in parental monitoring via the ality risk may be more likely to engage in delinquent behavior
effect of parental monitoring on reduced peer deviance. because they often choose to befriend delinquent peers (i.e., medi-
In support of our moderation hypotheses, there were signicant ation by social selection). In the context of deviant peers, these
two-way interactions between sensation seeking and peer deviance high sensation-seekers may also be more susceptible to peer inu-
(b = .122, 95% CI = .066, .179, p < .001), sensation seeking and paren- ence, which further exacerbates risk for delinquency (i.e., modera-
tal monitoring (b = .068, 95% CI = .120, .016, p < .01), and peer tion by socialization). Thus, personality guides the search for, and
deviance and parental monitoring (b = .072, 95% CI = .115, selection of, socialecological niches that are conducive to ones
.030, p < .01). There was also a signicant three-way interaction proclivities and, furthermore, moderates social inuence in the
between sensation seeking, peer deviance and parental monitoring form of heightened vulnerability to contextual inuence (Caspi,
(b = .123, 95% CI = .182, .064, p < .001), such that the associa- Roberts, & Shiner, 2005). In fact, personality traits such as sensa-
tion between sensation seeking and delinquency was magnied tion seeking may represent risk in one context, but resiliency in
among adolescents who socialized with deviant peers and who another (Nigg, 2006; Tackett, 2006). Clear delineation of specic
were low in parental monitoring. See Fig. 2 for a plot of the simple contextual factors is therefore essential to better understand the
slopes from the three-way interaction. associations between sensation-seeking and consequential adoles-
Note that, controlling for all other predictors, older adolescents cent outcomes.
were monitored less by parents (b = .165, 95% CI = .241, .090, The three-way interaction documented in the current study sug-
p < .001), and reported higher levels of sensation seeking (b = .111, gests that the pathway between personality risk, peer groups and
95% CI = .029, .193, p < .01) and delinquent behavior (b = .173, 95% delinquency is heightened in unrestrictive social environments,
CI = .108, .257, p < .001). Boys reported more delinquent behavior including environments facilitated by low levels of parental

Table 1
Zero-order correlations, descriptive & reliability statistics.

N = 470 a M (SD) R Sex SS PD PM PE DEL

Age 15.545 (1.185) 13.5717.99 .033 .127 .137 .203 .047 .262
Sex 0.470 (0.500) 0 = M, 1 = F .044 .145 .151 .046 .164
SS .718 3.179 (0.693) 1.135.00 .318 .270 .165 .457
PD .867 1.732 (0.334) 1.052.91 .415 .233 .495
PM .801 2.624 (0.286) 1.073.00 .153 .409
PE .808 17.247 (2.879) 6.0022.0 .086
DEL .877 6.432 (7.303) 0.0050.0

Note: Descriptive statistics for untransformed variables & correlations for transformed variables are reported. a = Cronbachs alpha. M = mean. (SD) = standard deviation.
R = range. SS = sensation seeking. PD = peer deviance. PM = parental monitoring. PE = average of parental education. DEL = delinquent behavior. p(two-tailed) < .01.

p(two-tailed) < .001.

 F.D. Mann et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 76 (2015) 129134 133

Fig. 2. Sensation seeking  peer deviance  parental monitoring interaction on delinquency. Note: Simple slopes calculated from parameters shown in Fig. 1. Predicted
delinquency displayed for low ( 1r), average and high (+1r) peer deviance. Panels present sensation seeking  peer deviance interaction across high (+1r), average and low
( 1r) parental monitoring.

monitoring. In other words, delinquency emerges when individuals In conclusion, the current study provides evidence for specic
with certain behavioral dispositions select risky social environ- contextual factors that exacerbate and mitigate a well-established
ments, which is more likely to occur in families that allow adoles- marker of personality risk: sensation seeking. We found that sensa-
cents to afliate with whomever they choose. Moreover, the tion seeking, deviant peer groups and parental monitoring interact
moderating effect of parental monitoring suggests that, even if par- to predict adolescent delinquency: Sensation seeking is most
ents fail to prevent adolescents from afliating with deviant peers, strongly related to delinquency in the context of more deviant
parents may still buffer the negative effects of peer deviance by peers and lower parental monitoring. These results highlight the
restricting socialization. For example, even if adolescents afliate importance of considering theoretically grounded, synergistic
with deviant peers, parental monitoring may limit social inuence intersections among intrapersonal and contextual factors when
to relatively benign settings, like school classrooms, the cafeteria elucidating the pathways that lead to adolescent delinquency.
and supervised extracurricular activities; as opposed to risky envi-
ronments, like unsupervised parties and late-night joy rides. Acknowledgements
The current study builds off previous longitudinal work indicat-
ing that deviant peers predict future levels of adolescent delin- We would like to thank Daniel Briley, Marie Carlson, Amanda
quency (Curran, Stice, & Chassin, 1997; McCabe et al., 2005), and Cheung & Laura Engelhart for thoughtful comments on previous
that parental monitoring predicts future involvement with deviant drafts of this article. This work was supported by NIH grant
peer networks (Dishion, Patterson, Stoolmiller, & Skinner, 1991). R21-AA020588. The Population Research Center at the University
The current project, however, used cross-sectional data. Therefore, of Texas at Austin is supported by National Institutes of Health
these results do not allow us to make causal inferences about the (NIH) center grant R24-HD042849. Grant sponsors did not assist
associations uncovered. Future research using longitudinal data in the development of the study design, collection of data, analysis
will allow us to examine whether sensation seeking prospectively and interpretation of data, the writing of the manuscript or the
predicts deviant peer afliation or whether such afliations pro- decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
spectively predict individual delinquency. Additionally, the key
constructs of interest were all measured using adolescent self- References
report. Adolescents may overestimate their peers involvement in
delinquent behavior and/or their peers similarity to themselves Asparouhov, T., & Muthn, B. (2006, August). Multilevel modeling of complex
survey data. In Proceedings of the joint statistical meeting in seattle (pp. 2718
(Bauman & Ennett, 1996). Importantly, the current results are 2726).
broadly consistent with research that has used peers reports of Bauman, K. E., & Ennett, S. T. (1996). On the importance of peer inuence for
their own behavior to measure peer deviance (Harden et al., 2008). adolescent drug use: Commonly neglected considerations. Addiction, 91,
185198.
Finally, this study focused on parental monitoring, as measured Burk, W. J., Vorst, H. V. D., Kerr, M., & Stattin, H. (2011). Alcohol use and friendship
by adolescents perceptions of parental rules and knowledge. dynamics: Selection and socialization in early-, middle-, and late-adolescent
Specic monitoring behaviors, however, are dynamically related peer networks. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 73, 8998.
Capaldi, D. M., & Patterson, G. R. (1989). Psychometric properties of fourteen latent
to other dimensions of the family system. Parental rules may be
constructs from the Oregon Youth Study. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag
communicated with empathy and respect for the adolescents Publishing.
autonomy or may be experienced as intrusive and controlling Caspi, A., Roberts, B. W., & Shiner, R. L. (2005). Personality development: Stability
and change. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 453484.
(Grolnick, 2003; Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010). Parental knowl-
Curran, P. J., Stice, E., & Chassin, L. (1997). The relation between adolescent alcohol
edge may stem from parents active surveillance efforts or from use and peer alcohol use: A longitudinal random coefcients model. Journal of
adolescent self-disclosure, and the latter is most strongly associ- Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 130140.
ated with lower delinquent behavior, both cross-sectionally and Dick, D. M., Latendresse, S. J., Lansford, J. E., Budde, J. P., Goate, A., Dodge, K. A., et al.
(2009). Role of GABRA2 in trajectories of externalizing behavior across
longitudinally (Kerr, Stattin, & Burk, 2010; Stattin & Kerr, 2000). development and evidence of moderation by parental monitoring. Archives of
Additionally, relations between delinquency and parental monitor- General Psychiatry, 66, 649657.
ing are reciprocal: Deviant teenagers disclose less information to Dick, D. M., Meyers, J. L., Latendresse, S. J., Creemers, H. E., Lansford, J. E., Pettit, G. S.,
et al. (2011). CHRM2, parental monitoring, and adolescent externalizing
their parents and are more likely to select unstructured settings behavior evidence for geneenvironment interaction. Psychological Science, 22,
that are difcult for parents or other adults to monitor (Kerr 481489.
et al., 2010; Laird, Pettit, Bates, & Dodge, 2003). Overall, previous Dishion, T. J., Patterson, G. R., Stoolmiller, M., & Skinner, M. (1991). Family, school,
and behavioral antecedents to early adolescent involvement with antisocial
research on parental monitoring suggests that the interactive peers. Developmental Psychology, 27, 172180.
effects found in the current study may be further conditioned by Dishion, T. J., & McMahon, R. J. (1998). Parental monitoring and the prevention of
aspects of the family system that facilitate adolescent self- child and adolescent problem behavior: A conceptual and empirical
formulation. Clinical Child & Family Psychology Review, 1, 6175.
disclosure, including parentchild attachment and previous histo-
Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA:
ries of problem behavior. Stanford University Press.
134 F.D. Mann et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 76 (2015) 129134

Grolnick, W. S. (2003). The psychology of parental control: How well-meaning McCabe, S. E., Schulenberg, J. E., Johnston, L. D., OMalley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., &
parenting backres. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Kloska, D. D. (2005). Selection and socialization effects of fraternities and
Hampson, S. E., Andrews, J. A., & Barckley, M. (2008). Childhood predictors of sororities on US college student substance use: A multi-cohort national
adolescent marijuana use: Early sensation-seeking, deviant peer afliation, and longitudinal study. Addiction, 100, 512524.
social images. Addictive Behaviors, 33, 11401147. Moftt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial
Harden, K. P., Hill, J. E., Turkheimer, E., & Emery, R. E. (2008). Geneenvironment behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674.
correlation and interaction in peer effects on adolescent alcohol and tobacco Muthn, B. (1990). Moments of the censored and truncated normal distribution.
use. Behavior Genetics, 38, 339347. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 42, 241250.
Harden, K. P., Quinn, P. D., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2012). Genetically inuenced Muthn, L. K., & Muthn, B. O. (19982010). Mplus users guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles,
change in sensation seeking drives the rise of delinquent behavior during CA: Muthn & Muthn.
adolescence. Developmental Science, 15, 150163. Nigg, J. T. (2006). Temperament and developmental psychopathology. Journal of
Harden, K. P., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2011). Individual differences in the Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 47, 395422.
development of sensation seeking and impulsivity during adolescence: Popham, L. E., Kennison, S. M., & Bradley, K. I. (2011). Ageism, sensation-seeking,
Further evidence for a dual systems model. Developmental Psychology, 47, and risk taking behavior in young adults. Current Psychology, 30, 184193.
739746. Simourd, L., & Andrews, D. A. (1994). Correlates of delinquency: A look at gender
Harden, K. P., Tucker-Drob, E. M., & Tackett, J. L. (2013). The texas twin project. Twin differences. Forum on Corrections Research, 6, 2631.
Research and Human Genetics, 16, 385390. Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). A theoretical upgrade of the concept of
Hill, N. E., & Tyson, D. F. (2009). Parental involvement in middle school: A meta- psychological control: Proposing new insights based on self-determination
analytic assessment of the strategies that promote achievement. Developmental theory. Developmental Review, 30, 7499.
Psychology, 45, 740763. Stattin, H., & Kerr, M. (2000). Parental monitoring: A reinterpretation. Child
Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Development, 71(4), 10721085.
Hoyle, R. H., Stephenson, M. T., Palmgreen, P., Lorch, E. P., & Donohew, R. L. (2002). Steinberg, L., Albert, D., Cauffman, E., Banich, M., Graham, S., & Woolard, J. (2008).
Reliability and validity of a brief measure of sensation seeking. Personality and Age differences in sensation seeking and impulsivity as indexed by behavior
Individual Differences, 32, 401414. and self-report: Evidence for a dual systems model. Developmental Psychology,
Kandel, D. B. (1978). Homophily, selection, and socialization in adolescent 44, 17641778.
friendships. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 427436. Steinberg, L., Fletcher, A., & Darling, N. (1994). Parental monitoring and peer
Kandel, D. B. (1986). Processes of peer inuences in adolescence. In R. K. Silbersein & inuences on adolescent substance use. Pediatrics, 93, 10601064.
K. Eyferth (Eds.), Development as action in context (pp. 203227). Berlin Stephenson, M. T., Hoyle, R. H., Palmgreen, P., & Slater, M. D. (2003). Brief measures
Heidelberg: Springer. of sensation seeking for screening and large-scale surveys. Drug and Alcohol
Kerr, M., Stattin, H., & Burk, W. J. (2010). A reinterpretation of parental monitoring Dependence, 72, 279286.
in longitudinal perspective. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20(1), 3964. Survey, D. Y., Huizinga, D., Esbensen, F. A., & Weiher, A. W. (1991). Are there
Kiesner, J., Poulin, F., & Dishion, T. J. (2010). Adolescent substance use with friends: multiple paths to delinquency? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 82,
Moderating and mediating effects of parental monitoring and peer activity 83118.
contexts. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 56, 529556. Tackett, J. L. (2006). Evaluating models of the personalitypsychopathology
Kim, Y. M., & Neff, J. A. (2010). Direct and indirect effects of parental inuence upon relationship in children and adolescents. Clinical Psychology Review, 26,
adolescent alcohol use: A structural equation modeling analysis. Journal of Child 584599.
& Adolescent Substance Abuse, 19, 244260. Thornberry, T. P., Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Farnworth, M., & Jang, S. J. (1994).
Koopmans, J. R., Boomsma, D. I., Heath, A. C., & van Doornen, L. J. (1995). A Delinquent peers, beliefs, and delinquent behavior: A longitudinal test of
multivariate genetic analysis of sensation seeking. Behavior Genetics, 25, interactional theory. Criminology, 32, 4783.
349356. Tobin, J. (1958). Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables.
Lac, A., & Crano, W. D. (2009). Monitoring matters: Meta-analytic review reveals the Econometrica, 26, 2436.
reliable linkage of parental monitoring with adolescent marijuana use. Wills, T. A., & Cleary, S. D. (1999). Peer and adolescent substance use among 6th9th
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 578586. graders: Latent growth analyses of inuence versus selection mechanisms.
Laird, R. D., Pettit, G. S., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2003). Parents monitoring- Health Psychology, 18, 453463.
relevant knowledge and adolescents delinquent behavior: evidence of Wood, M. D., Read, J. P., Mitchell, R. E., & Brand, N. H. (2004). Do parents still matter?
correlated developmental changes and reciprocal inuences. Child Parent and peer inuences on alcohol involvement among recent high school
Development, 74, 752768. graduates. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 18, 1930.
Longmore, M., Manning, W., & Giordano, P. (2013). Parentchild relationships in Yanovitzky, I. (2005). Sensation seeking and adolescent drug use: The mediating
adolescence. In M. Fine & F. Frank (Eds.), Handbook of family theories A content- role of association with deviant peers and pro-drug discussions. Health
based approach. New York and London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. Communication, 17, 6789.