908 PALUCK AND SHEPHERD Table3 Behavioral Change Among Individuals With More Ties to Intervention Social Referents Public behavio Variable Wave Purchaband 033018 -0890.30 -120060 -069036 050018 210-06 0.1102 -0.0704 -229847 -0.54026 791.29 0312 0208 1g5 Log likelihood -83.63 -144.11 eferents at Wave 3 were marginally less likely to be cited for within the collective.which is captured in our analyses by their 30.SE=0.60n= 05)Dis We also s of social referents might he strongly her nomir plinary in and r .74 ed with teach ing others' 01 and r ffect is particularly socially risky.given that they are more ablet ction or support peers who belong to their more intimate,close bea oral chanees In this section.we dec ose our main findings to sepa harassmen ctive norms ncluding separate variables for the number of ties to widel y.for official eader students are significantly different in size.we report the Behavioral Change Among Individuals With More Ties to Intervention Social Referents Widely known students and cliaue leader The rate coour hypothesis okay to step back from ink ssment.A few differences emerged from Wave I to Wave 2omytiestonciaueleadtcrstodemtspmctictedalowerkchood 49 SE 20=01)and only ties to widely known student students choose to socially interact with them across situations predicted a lower likelihood of perceiving that it is normal to mindreferents at Wave 3 were marginally less likely to be cited for harassment-related disciplinary infractions (OR
0.50, SE
0.36, p
.06), and for all disciplinary infractions generally (
.30, SE
0.60, p
.05). Disciplinary action taken by the school correlated strongly with springtime teacher nominations of stu￾dents who “create a negative school environment” (r
.42, p  .001, for harassment-related disciplinary infractions, and r
.74, p  .001, for all disciplinary infractions). Neither type of disci￾plinary infraction correlated with teacher nominations from the beginning of the year (r
.01 and r
.05, respectively). Wristband purchases. Students with more ties to interven￾tion social referents over and above ties to control at Wave 3 purchased significantly more wristbands bearing the anti￾harassment slogan (OR
1.65, SE
0.18, p
.01). Summary: Behavioral changes. As predicted, significant de￾creases in harassment behavior and increases in anti-harassment behavior accompanied improvements in perceived prescriptive collective norms about harassment among students with more ties to intervention social referents. This finding holds for teacher nominations across a two-wave survey, for official school disci￾plinary records, and for directly observed student behavior (see Table 3). Behavioral Change Among Individuals With More Ties to Intervention Social Referents Widely known students and clique leaders. The separate effects of widely known and clique leader students. The above evidence supports our hypothesis that when students think about the collective social norms of a school, they heavily weight the perceived actions of widely known and clique leader students who serve as social referents. The effect of these social referents is stronger to the extent that students choose to socially interact with them across situations within the collective, which is captured in our analyses by their measured number of ties to the intervention social referents in the school social network. We also predicted that the two types of social referents might be particularly effective along different dimensions, given their pat￾tern of social ties. Specifically, given the widespread social ties and relatively high social status of widely known students, they might be particularly effective at influencing others’ perceptions of collective norms. Likewise, clique leaders might be particularly effective at influencing norms of local subgroups and behavior that is particularly socially risky, given that they are more able to sanction or support peers who belong to their more intimate, closed subgroups. In this section, we decompose our main findings to separately test the effects of widely known and clique leader intervention social referents. We ran analyses similar to those reported above, including separate variables for the number of ties to widely known intervention social referents and to clique leader interven￾tion social referents. Where the effects of widely known and clique leader students are significantly different in size, we report the contrast using postestimation Wald tests. Collective and close friend norms. Contrary to our predic￾tions, widely known and clique leader students were similarly effective at communicating collective school norms to the students tied to them (see Table 4). Students with ties to widely known and clique leader treatment students were more likely to perceive that students at the school believe it is okay to step back from conflict by not defending friends, and there are negative emotional effects of harassment. A few differences emerged from Wave 1 to Wave 2; only ties to clique leader students predicted a lower likelihood of perceiving that it was normal to start drama at the school (
.49, SE
.20, p
.01), and only ties to widely known students predicted a lower likelihood of perceiving that it is normal to mind Table 3 Behavioral Change Among Individuals With More Ties to Intervention Social Referents Teacher nominations School disciplinary action Public behavior Variable Defends others: Wave 3 Contributes to negative environment: Wave 3 All action: Wave 3 Harassment related: Wave 3 Purchased wristband: Wave 3 Ties to intervention social referents 0.33‡ (0.18) 0.89
(0.36) 1.20
(0.60) 0.69‡ (0.36) 0.50
(0.18) Total number ties 0.01 (0.02) 0.07‡ (0.04) 0.10 (0.07) 0.05 (0.04) 0.02 (0.02) Male 0.35‡ (0.20) 1.45
(0.40) 2.19
(0.67) 0.74
(0.33) 0.11 (0.25) Attended last year 0.01 (0.21) 0.07 (0.42) 0.07 (0.67) 0.05 (0.32) 0.36 (0.25) GPA 0.31
(0.13) 0.82
(0.28) 2.29
(0.44) 0.54
(0.26) 0.07 (0.16) Wave 1 Teacher nomination 0.78
(0.12) 1.01
(0.25) Constant 0.13 (0.38) 2.51
(0.81) 7.94
(1.29) 1.12‡ (0.64) 1.55
(0.49) N 227 227 227 209 227 Adj. R2 0.312 0.208 0.195 Log likelihood 83.63 144.11 Note. Coefficients are regression coefficients, except for harassment-specific disciplinary behaviors and wristband purchases, which are reported as log odds. Standard errors are provided in parentheses. Ties to intervention social referents is a count variable of the number of times respondents indicated that they spent time with an intervention student. Total ties is a count variable of the number of times a respondent indicated that they spent time with any other student at the school. “Male” is a dummy variable (0
female, 1
male), as is “Attended last year,” (0
no, 1
yes), which captures sophomores and other students who attended a different school the previous year. “GPA” is a continuous variable measuring student grade-point average from the 2009 –2010 school year. The regression includes fixed effects: six dummy variables (not shown) that index for each individual whether their total number of ties to intervention and control social referents at Wave 1 was zero, one, two, three, four, five, or six. Fixed effects account for the fact that individuals in the network have a different probability of exposure to the treatment social referents. ‡ p  .10.
p  .05. 908 PALUCK AND SHEPHERD This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.