To Örebro University

Multiethnic societies typically aim to have immigrant and native youths mix and be friends, preferably in all contexts in which they spend time. Schools and neighbourhoods are the two settings where youths spend the most time with peers during adolescence. The present study explored the in- and out-of-school peer groups of 174 immigrant junior high school pupils (Mean age = 14.39) who attended an integrated school but lived in a segregated neighbourhood. A person-oriented approach was used and cluster analyses were conducted both within and across the two settings. The results show that youths mostly have the same kind of friendship formations in both settings, regardless of the ethnic composition of each setting. In terms of adaptation, the results consistently show that for boys, having only immigrant friends is related to problematic adaptation in both settings. No relationship between peer formations and adaptation was found for girls. The study highlights the importance of considering gender and viewing youths as embedded in systems of multiple settings, in order to achieve true integration.

This study examines selection and influence related to delinquent behaviors of immigrant and nonimmigrant adolescents attending three majority-immigrant schools (54% to 65.2% immigrant) and four minority-immigrant schools (11.1% to 25.1% immigrant) in one community. The sample included 1,169 youths (50.4% male; 24.2% immigrant) initially between the ages of 12 and 16 years (M =13.92, SD = 0.85). Results showed that immigrant and nonimmigrant adolescents were similar to their peers on delinquent behaviors, and peer selection and social influence operated in a complementary manner to explain this similarity. The processes did not differ between immigrants and nonimmigrants or between school contexts, suggesting that immigrants do not differ from nonimmigrants on either the prevalence or the processes behind delinquency.

We proposed that for adolescents living in disadvantaged neighborhoods schools environments could create a contrast to the out-of-school settings. We proposed two contrast effects, in which experiences that are better than expected are perceived as even better. First, we hypothesized that adolescents in disadvantaged neighborhoods would perceive their schools as more open to their influence than youths in advantaged neighborhoods, due to the contrast with the typical home environments in these neighborhoods. Second, compared with adolescents in advantaged neighborhoods, we expected adolescents in disadvantaged neighborhoods to perceive their schools as secure and safe due to the contrast they would make to their more threatening and dangerous neighborhoods. Because these contrast effects, we predicted that youths in disadvantaged neighborhoods would perceive their school as safe havens to a higher extent than other youths. We tested the idea using a sample of 1,390 adolescents living in disadvantaged and advantaged neighborhoods (M_age = 14.34, SD = 1.01). Both contrast effects were supported at the neighborhood level. Compared with adolescents in advantaged neighborhoods, those in disadvantaged neighborhoods perceived their schools as allowing more student influence and as equally safe. Adolescents in disadvantaged neighborhoods also perceived their schools as safe havens more than adolescents from advantaged neighborhoods. The results were significant independent of immigrant status, but they were more salient for immigrant adolescents in these neighborhoods. In conclusion, for adolescents in disadvantaged neighborhoods, a school setting perceived as safe and open to influence can function as a contrast to the out-of-school settings.