Unstructured Socializing with Peers, Low Self-Control, and Substance Use

• Date: 01 January 2022
• Published date: 01 January 2022
• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20967939
• Author: Peter S. Lehmann,Anna Leimberg
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X20967939

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2022, Vol. 66(1) 3 –27

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20967939

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

Unstructured Socializing with

Peers, Low Self-Control, and

Substance Use

Anna Leimberg1 and Peter S. Lehmann2

Abstract

Research consistently finds that unstructured socializing with peers and low self-control

are both positively associated with substance use among adolescents. However, largely

absent from the literature is a consideration of whether unstructured socializing with

peers and low self-control have differential and interactive effects when predicting

usage of different classifications of drugs. The current study addresses these issues

using data collected on a statewide sample of middle school and high school students

who participated in the 2017 Florida Youth Substance Abuse Survey. Results indicate

that (1) unstructured socializing with peers is a stronger predictor of soft drug use

than low self-control, (2) low self-control is a stronger predictor of hard drug use

than unstructured socializing with peers, and (3) the effect of unstructured socializing

on both soft and hard drug use is diminished among adolescents who are lower in

self-control.

Keywords

unstructured socializing with peers, low self-control, FYSAS, drug use, interactive

effects

Introduction

Previous research has thoroughly investigated the routine activity perspective, which

attempts to explain the relationship between opportunity and crime (Kennedy et al.,

1990; Lotz & Lee, 1999; Lynch, 1987; Reyns et al., 2011). Similarly, criminologists

also have given ample consideration to whether a key cause of crime is low self-control

1Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA

2Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, TX, USA

Corresponding Author:

Anna Leimberg, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Florida International University, 11200

Southwest 8th Street, Miami, FL 33199, USA.

Email: Aleimber@fiu.edu

967939IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X20967939International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyLeimberg and Lehmann

research-article2020

4 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 66(1)

(Gottfredson & Hirschi, 1990). Importantly, research from both lines of inquiry finds

that situational opportunity variables and low self-control are among the strongest pre-

dictors of antisocial behavior (LaGrange & Silverman, 1999; Meldrum et al., 2009;

Vazsonyi et al., 2002, 2017).

Routine activity theory suggests that crime occurs when there is a convergence in

space and time of three elements: a motivated offender, a suitable target, and a lack of

capable guardianship (Cohen & Felson, 1979). Several decades ago, Osgood et al.

(1996) proposed a new rationale that reformulated the focus of the theory from victim-

ization to criminal opportunity (Anderson & Hughes, 2009). Specifically, they argue

delinquency should be more likely to occur among adolescents who spend more time

with their peers, in the absence of authority figures, and without having a particular

agenda (Anderson & Hughes, 2009; Osgood et al., 1996).

In an effort to extend the framework proposed by Osgood et al. (1996), many schol-

ars have tested the association between unstructured socializing with peers and deviant

behavior. In particular, researchers have devoted substantial attention to studying

whether unstructured socializing with peers is associated with the use of “soft” drugs

such as alcohol, marijuana, and cigarettes (Anderson & Hughes, 2009; Augustyn &

McGloin, 2013; Gage et al., 2005; Hundleby & Mercer, 1987; Meldrum & Clark,

2015; Staff et al., 2010). However, it is less clear whether unstructured socializing

with peers influences the use of “hard” drugs, such as cocaine, prescription drugs,

amphetamines, and heroin (see Barnes et al., 2007; Flannery et al., 1999; Hawdon,

1999; Wallace & Bachman, 1991).

The lack of attention devoted to examining the relationship between unstructured

socializing with peers and hard drug usage could be due to the fact that unstructured

socializing may not be as suitable a predictor of this outcome as other variables. For

example, a trait such as low self-control (Beaver et al., 2009) may be a better predictor

of hard drug use than unstructured socializing with peers since those characterized as

having low self-control tend to be oriented toward impulsiveness and are more likely

to partake in high risk-taking behavior, including the use of hard drugs (Tibbetts &

Whittimore, 2002). While a lack of self-control has been shown to be positively asso-

ciated with drug use in several studies (Gibbs & Giever, 1995; Keane et al., 1993;

Sorenson & Brownfield, 1995), some research suggests that low self-control is a stron-

ger predictor of the use of cocaine, heroin, PCP, and LSD than of alcohol and mari-

juana use (Baron, 2010; Pokhrel et al., 2007). Thus, there could be substantial

differences in the factors that predict the use of soft drugs relative to hard drugs, and

unstructured socializing with peers and low self-control appear to be two candidate

variables worth investigating when assessing the differential predictability of soft ver-

sus hard drug use.

In addition to differential effects, unstructured socializing with peers and low self-

control also might have interactive effects when explaining drug use. Prior research

examining the interaction between opportunity variables and low self-control, how-

ever, has primarily focused on explaining general delinquency (e.g., theft, assault, and

property crime) and not specific categories of drug use (Hay & Forrest, 2008; LaGrange

& Silverman, 1999; Thomas & McGloin, 2013). Thus, extending the focus to the