Peer pressure is a social phenomenon that “involves changing one’s behavior to meet the perceived expectations of others” (Burns). Although this phenomenon affects all age groups, adolescents are particularly susceptible due to structural changes in their brains. Peer pressure often seeps into various aspects of teenagers’ lives, impacting both their observable behaviors and internal motivations. Yet, this raises several questions on how modern justice systems should approach rehabilitation in juvenile criminals: Should youth offenders be held responsible for a crime they committed under the influence of a peer? Does incarceration effectively teach juvenile delinquents how to withstand peer pressure? To prioritize the effective reintegration of juvenile delinquents into society, modern justice systems must first understand peer pressure’s scope of influence and why it occurs.
Peer Pressure’s Impact on Adolescent Behaviors
To start, peer pressure affects adolescents’ external behaviors both in and out of school. According to Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (1977), the cognitive process behind peer influence involves noticing a behavior, remembering it, being able to replicate it, and having an incentive to replicate that behavior. Although the process itself is internal (i.e., not visible to an outsider), its consequences can be external, impacting teenagers’ performance in academic settings. One study from the Journal of Political Economy randomly assigned adolescents into peer groups to study together for an exam. The experiment showed how studying with more persistent peers raised one’s overall GPA, whereas studying with risk-prone students had the opposite effect.
Although Bandura’s Social Learning Theory may not be the sole justification for this result, one must recognize that the external pressure placed on teenagers affects their ability to learn at school. When surrounded by peers that display negative academic pressures (i.e., active choices that prevent adolescents from learning), teenagers are more likely to underperform (Wentzel 1994), cheat, or engage in risky behaviors (Steinberg and Monahan 2007). On the other hand, when surrounded by positive peer influences, adolescents may become more motivated to perform well in school and engage in healthy lifestyle behaviors (Ryan 2000). Yet, the extent of peer influence lies far beyond how adolescents actively learn at school, as peers can also impact teenagers’ tolerance for committing crimes.
In 2008, Dr. Laurence Steinberg published the “Spotlight Game,” an online game where teenagers must decide to stop or go at a yellow-light intersection. The first time, the participant plays while assuming no one is watching them. The second time, however, the adolescent hears their friends’ voices through a speaker and is notified that their friends are observing them. When adolescents were told that their peers were nearby, they experienced more car accidents in the virtual game, providing a glimpse into the tangible influence that peers have on adolescents beyond academics. Although this game may not accurately reflect how adolescents behave in reality, this simulation illustrates how adolescent behavior differs by manipulating one variable: peer presence.
Internal Causes of Peer Pressure in Adolescents
Oftentimes, neuroscientists can gain insight into individuals’ external behaviors by reflecting on their internal motivations. In the case of peer pressure, adolescents undergo significant cognitive changes during this time, which makes them especially vulnerable to conforming to a group identity. Although the Social Learning Theory simply outlines the process of peer influence taking place, there is also a theory known as the Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). This theory postulates that an individual’s identity is influenced by the social categories that they are a part of, ranging from nationality and religion to the peer groups that adolescents interact with at school.
Tajfel and Turner believed that placing oneself in such categories is a means of guarding one’s self-esteem, providing a sense of shared purpose, and rooting oneself in a group identity. However, doing so can motivate adolescents to form a subconscious boundary between “us” and “them,” stereotype those with different identities, and lose individuality as a sacrifice for assimilation. For instance, according to the International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, social media has amplified stereotypes regarding what “success, beauty, and popularity” represent. As a result, adolescents in the 21st century are more susceptible to developing low self-esteem, depression, and social withdrawal when they do not meet the expectations of a seemingly universal audience.
Although some may argue that teenagers can avoid social media, thereby avoiding the emotional costs associated with it, peer pressure is not simply a 21st century issue. Rather, there is a timeless psychological basis behind peer pressure: the longing for social belonging. Sarah-Jayne Blakemore, a Cognitive Neuroscience professor at the University of Cambridge, elucidates how the social brain, “the network of brain regions that are involved in understanding other people,” undergoes a rapid transformation during adolescence. There is an increase in chemicals that heighten pleasure from risk-taking. In turn, this makes the limbic system, the brain region that triggers human reward systems, more sensitive in adolescents.
In other words, adolescent brains directly view social acceptance from their peers as a reward for their risky behavior. Hence, this continues the cycle of teenagers 1) understanding what “belonging” means from social media, 2) assimilating to and being rewarded for behaviors that match those descriptions, and 3) continuing to revise one’s identity to meet the ever-changing requirements of what it means to belong. Certainly, these are not the only factors that provoke adolescents to yield to peer pressure, as family dynamics, household security, and bullying also play a significant role in how sensitive adolescents are to peer influence (Bhujbal, et. al). Still, this unceasing cycle suggests that public legal systems must intervene in teaching adolescents how to withstand the negative impacts of peer pressure.
Peer Pressure’s Impact on Juvenile Detention Systems
All in all, peers have an increasing presence in one’s habits and decision-making skills during adolescence, impacting both their external behaviors and internal motivations. Consequently, this raises the dilemma of how adolescents should be punished for crimes. Because adolescent behavior changes with different peer influences, Michael Corriero, the founder of the New York Center for Juvenile Justice, advises that the primary goal when addressing juvenile crimes “should be that of rehabilitation and not a punitive one.” Still, there continues to be a discrepancy in current juvenile detention centers and what contemporary policy-makers advocate for.
In the United States, two-thirds of juvenile facilities are correctional-style, meaning that adolescent criminals are confined from society when they commit a crime. Although correctional-style facilities were designed to protect the youth offenders and provide a safe space for rehabilitation, adolescents in punitive detention centers are shown to be “20.7 percent more likely to re-offend in subsequent time years” (Lotti). Furthermore, HMP Feltham A, a youth detention center for youth criminals in England and Wales, was reported to have the “levels of violence now highest of any prison in the country.” Although this statistic may be in part due to gang behavior among the criminals, it has also been reported that this particular detention center experienced a 68% increase in the use of force, and that classes were temporarily paused in 2023 due to adolescents’ aggressive behavior. In other youth detention centers in England, adolescent criminals report feeling that they are in constant “survival mode,” and the chief inspector of prisons voiced that “60% of those released from YOIs [Young Offender Institutions] typically reoffending [reoffend] within a year.” In the short-term, adolescent criminals’ behavior may only involve exhibiting aggressive behaviors in youth crime centers. Yet, in the long-term, incarceration prevents adolescents from becoming functionally mature members of society, as brutality often comes at the cost of permanent mental scars.
At the core of these trends, there are underlying systemic issues in juvenile detention centers that require immediate action. Current juvenile systems worldwide prioritize incarceration, falsely believing that 1) adolescents are solely responsible for committing a crime, and 2) that enough punitive measures would lead to rehabilitation. However, juvenile criminals do not need a life behind bars to learn how to become functional members of society. What juvenile delinquents truly need is a standardized universal framework that ensures access to quality education, mental health services, and physical therapy in detention centers. This framework should not be built solely on the question, “What will most quickly cease aggressive behavior in detention centers?” but on the recognition that external pressures and internal changes shape adolescent behavior.
Modern International Actions Regarding Youth Crime
In the United Kingdom, the government has recently kick-started a 10-year plan that provides funding to ensure that adolescents can readily access mental health services from a trusted adult. The government hopes that investing more in mental health services may decrease the proportion of youth committing crimes. Internationally binding treaties, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), have protected youth offenders from receiving the death penalty. Yet, to this day, there continues to be a heated debate on the degree of punishment that juvenile criminals deserve. In 2026, Kansas strengthened consequences for juvenile crime, arguing that although rehabilitation should be the central focus, the safety of the community is jeopardized when youth criminals are at large. As numerous youth offenders in Kansas have been referred to foster care agencies in recent years, there have been various reported cases of youth criminals abusing, beating, or even hospitalizing those in the foster care facilities to which they were sent.
Solutions to Incarceration in Juvenile Crime Centers
Given the various underlying layers of adolescent behavior, the issue of juvenile delinquency does not have a black-and-white solution. This issue is multifaceted, requiring the collaboration of policymakers, neuroscientists, and psychologists who prioritize the long-term well-being of the adolescents at hand. In particular, modern justice systems must recognize the significant influence that peer pressure exerts on adolescents, both at a behavioral and psychological level. Rather than banishing youth criminals through force and aggression, policy-makers should break this endless cycle of abuse on the next generations and advocate for community-based rehabilitation. Although it may seem counterproductive to provide criminals with a leeway to threaten public safety, studies have shown time and time again that humans intrinsically have a need to belong and feel a sense of purpose in a greater community. Especially given that these humans are teenagers, neuroscientists and psychologists should raise further awareness on how significantly peer pressure impacts adolescents in their rehabilitation process. Together, policymakers and scientists have the power to change juvenile delinquents’ trajectories for life by understanding the various underlying layers behind adolescents’ actions. Interacting with peers who seek active growth can motivate youth criminals to adopt such patterns into their own lives, both increasing the safety of the broader community and the long-term success of adolescent criminals.
Conclusion
The first step towards rehabilitation of juvenile criminals is in recognizing that peer pressure is both a timeless and modern issue. While the desire for social belonging and the cognitive changes during adolescence are timeless phenomena, the pressures of a fast-paced society, social media amplification, and incarceration in crime centers reflect the modern struggles of adolescents in the 21st century. Despite these new challenges, juvenile systems can change the lives of youth criminals with increased public awareness and attention on community-based rehabilitation. Similar to how adolescents’ internal changes often translate to external behavior, justice systems should attempt to bridge the gap between their intentions and actions, making youth crime centers not a symbol of societal estrangement but a representation of compassion, rehabilitation, and growth.
By: Minchae (Kaylyn) Kim
Write and Win: Participate in Creative writing Contest & International Essay Contest and win fabulous prizes.
About the Author
