INFLUENCE AND SELECTION PROCESSES IN WEAPON CARRYING DURING ADOLESCENCE: THE ROLES OF STATUS, AGGRESSION, AND VULNERABILITY*

154 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Network–Behavior Dynamics (2013, background): “In addition, these researchers have found that antisocial adolescents were nominated by others as friends and were more restrictive than others in the number of friendships that they mentioned (see also Dijkstra, Cillessen, & Borch, 2013; Dijkstra et al., 2010).”
Transformations in adolescent peer networks (2011, background): “In addition, Dijkstra et al. (2010) found that adolescents with a high level of problem behavior tended not only to be more popular, referring to the number of nominations received, than others with a low level of problem behavior but also to be more restrictive in the number of friendship…”
Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics (2015, background): “…the idea that social networks tend to diffuse behavioural norms and shape individual’s characteristics as diverse as happiness (CACIOPPO et al., 2009), smoking (MERCKEN et al., 2010), drinking (STEGLICH et al., 2010), criminality (DIJKSTRA et al., 2010) or obesity (CHRISTAKIS and FOWLER, 2007).”
Why Do Criminals Obey the Law? The Influence of Legitimacy and Social Networks on Active Gun Offenders (2009, background): “A recent network related study (Dukstra et al. 2010) suggests that gun carrying among adolescents is associated with popularity within delinquents and, as such, we anticipate that networks more saturated with criminal ties might also have a positive effect on gun carrying.”