JOSE MARIA COLLEGE

Philippine-Japan Friendship Highway, Sasa, Davao City

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL DEPARTMENT
S.Y. 2018-2019

________________________________________________________________

PEER INFLUENCE AND STUDENTS’ MOTIVATION

OF SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
________________________________________________________________

Mulay, Angela Seth M.

Mulay, Azee T.

Oliveros, Michaela Marie A.

Omandam, Angelline A.

Omosora, Aleen Grace Abegail T.

Pacabis, Luchie Mae B.

Sadia, Lester E.

Saguilongan, Elmar L.

Solmoro, Sebastian A.

Tabla, Caesar S.

MARCH 2020
 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

According to Sukkyung You (2011), many studies have suggested that peers

have a powerful influence on school adjustment, attitudes, and behaviors. However,

there is a paucity of systematic investigations on the relationship between peer

influence and student motivation in school engagement. Therefore, this study

investigated the relationship of peer influence via students’ motivational factors such as

locus of control and academic expectation. These findings are understandable in that

the students’ acceptance within the peer group is one of the key measures of

positive/negative school experiences. Perceived support from peers can give students a

sense of motivation and help students see the importance of pursuing academic

success.

International Context

According to Castrogiovanni (2002), a peer group is defined as a small group of

similarly aged, fairly close friends, sharing the same activities in schools. Peer groups or

cliques have two to twelve members, with an average of five or six. Peer groups provide

a sense of security and they help students to build a sense of identity. Students are well

aware that they influence each other. Lashbrook (2000) reported on a national Gallup

poll release that surveyed 13- to 17-year-olds. It was found that 40% of the sample cited

peer influence, when asked why they thought the Columbine High School shooting

happened. This research shows that peer influence can be a scary phenomenon for the

school setting.
 2

National Context

In the School of San Pablo College, located in San Pablo City, Laguna out of 100

students that are surveyed 82 students are influenced by drugs because of their peers,

but the kinds of peer influence that they encounter have changed tremendously in year

2002. There society had negative peer influence, they are more likely their peer

influence can influence everything from what a student engages in drug related or other

delinquent behavior, Nicole Marie Howard (2014). In this study, it shows the peer

influence can be a hindrance of one’s motivation that if your peers influence you to do

negative things, it is on your will to follow or disregard the given deeds. It is also said

there that a student can be affected by how their peers act and react and because they

are the ones that you are always with, it has a big possibility that you will be influenced

by them not by forcing you but with your willingness.

Local Context

In Digos City, particularly in Cor Jesu College Senior High School studied that

one of the effects of peer influence is computer games, peer group negatively affect

students to spent time on playing computer games than studying. Computer games are

found to be affecting student’s attendance and focused in school. 39% are said that

computer games cannot totally affect their school performance, while 61% are agreed

that they are more focused on playing computer games than attending class and even

participating in school events (Razonable, 2018). Therefore we conclude that peer

influence can really have a big impact to one’s motivation whether positively or
 3

negatively, it is also said that by how your peers act and react you can also adapt it to

yourself and do the same thing as what your peers are doing.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine if there is a significant relationship between peer

influence and students’ motivation of senior high school students in Jose Maria College.

1. What is the level of peer influence of senior high school students in Jose Maria

College in terms of:

1.1 Positive Peer Influence and;

1.2 Negative Peer Influence

2. What is the level of students’ motivation of senior high school students in Jose

Maria College in terms of:

2.1 Intrinsic and;

2.2 Extrinsic;

3. Is there a significant relationship between peer influence and students’ motivation

of senior high school students in Jose Maria College?

 4

Hypothesis

Ho: There is no significant relationship between peer influence and student’s

motivation of Jose Maria College.

The following parts below rejects the null hypothesis of this study. Below are the

discussions of each part.

According to a study of Sayama (2000). At the State University of New York in

Binghamton, conducted a study to see if “grades are contagious”. She had 160 high

school students fill out a survey, asking them to list their best friends or close friends.

The students then received a list of each students’ class rank from junior to senior year,

those students who hung out with low-achieving friends saw their grades decrease over

the same period of time.

The study showed that peer group had an influence on students’ academic

performance in two folds; positively and negatively. For instance, findings indicated that

48 students out of 120 (40%) had a positive influence on students’ academic

performance at the selected schools. This is because associate with friends based on

shared characteristics. In this context, peer group had friends who liked studying

together at the schools. That meant that if peer group had interest in studying hard and

performed well, it is likely that they would influence their fellow students to perform

better like them.

 5

The finding concurs with that of Landau (2002) that students who form positive

peer group make more effort during learning, doing social activities, also fear to engage

in delinquent activities. In the same study, the finding is similar to Tope (2011) and

Mwinsukha (2009) who found out that peer group can influence students in academic

performance either in the positive or negative way. However, findings from the study

indicated that 72 students (60%) had a negative influence on students’ academic

performance at the schools. This result concurs with that of Howard (2004) that

negative peer influence does exist and should be an educational related professional

issue. The fact that use friends as coping devices, in this study the influence of peer

group to students in academic performance was found to be lower than expected.

A student’s larger social circle had an effect on the overall performance of that

student over the course of the year. However, that doesn’t mean that one close friend is

going to have as big of an impact. In fact, the close friend is less likely to have an

impact. Certainly, a behavior change to student after one friend either appears or

disappears from your student’s life, then it might be time to take notice, but overall, one

friend that doesn’t perform as well isn’t going to stop your student from achieving their

own academic success.

 6

Scope and Delimitations

This study is conducted to determine if there is a significant relationship between

the experienced peer influence and the student's motivation of senior high school in

Jose Maria College.

This study aims to know the level peer influence experienced in terms of positive

peer influence and negative peer influence. Furthermore, this study also aims to identify

the level of student’s motivation in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic.

The participants for this research are those senior high school students in Jose

Maria College for the academic year 2019-2020 respectively. It is for the reason that the

senior high school students are prominent in socializing. According to a survey, college

stage is where many friends and overall lifelong connections.

 7

Significance of the Study

School. This study will help the school to produce top students' and the school will be

widely known because of its excellency.

Faculty. This study will help the faculty to easily impart knowledge to students'

especially to those who are inspired.

Guidance. This study will help the guidance counsellor to know the reasons behind

students' behavior and to guide them on their way to success.

Parents. This study will help the parents to be complacent about their students’

company and their status in the institution.

Students. This study will help the students' to be more motivated in studying and will

strive hard due to the good influence of their peers.

Future researchers. This study can help the future researchers in their study to add up

more information regarding to the relationship of Peer influence and

students' motivation.
 8

Conceptual Framework

The indicators for the independent variable are the peer influence which are the

positive influence and negative influence. On the other hand, the indicators for the

dependent variables are two dimensions of students’ motivation are the intrinsic and

extrinsic.

Independent Variables Dependent Variables

Peer Influence Students’ Motivation

Positive Peer influence Intrinsic

Negative Peer influence Extrinsic

Figure 1. The conceptual framework of the variables and the indicators

 9

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on Baumeister’s and Leary’s (2002) study of

belongingness hypothesis where it concluded that there is genetically a need to belong.

According to the theorists, human beings have an almost universal need to form and

maintain at least some degree of interpersonal relationships with other humans. There

is this strong effects on individuals within an ongoing relational bond. Existing evidence

supports the hypothesis that the need to belong is a powerful, fundamental and

extremely affects people’s motivation.

In regard to this theory of belongingness hypothesis, Buss (2000) also pointed

out that the presence of others and the attention of others are important social rewards.

Kramer and Brewer (2001) that if an individual can feel the belongingness in social,

people are more likely to work and cooperate for the greater good of the group. In that

case when individuals are surrounded by their peers then there is really a connection

between them to their behaviors and motivation.

Also, Fischhoff, Cromwell, and Kipke (2004) cited a systems theory perspective,

arguing that groups that provide a lot of positive feedback encourage action to maintain

good feelings. These good feelings are often reported in peer groups. Furthermore,

Ryan (2000) stated that peers are one of the models that can be source of motivation.

By observing how others perform it causes other person to change their viewpoints and
 10

behavior. Accordance with this theory, peers do really contribute to the construction of

positive identities for some adolescence but negative identities for others (Downs and

Rose, 2000).

Therefore, the researchers have found out that this theory stated above supports

this study and that human beings are fundamentally and pervasively motivated by a

need to belong that is, by a strong desire to form and maintain enduring interpersonal

attachments. If a person will feel that they belong, they will most likely to be motivated

and inspired to work. How a specific group works, it has a tendency that individuals can

adapt their behavior, actions, and deeds. Moreover, it also prove that peers can really

affect a person’s behavior, how other people act will either influence them negatively

and positively.
 11

Definition of Terms

The following terms are operationally defined based on how it is used in the study

Extrinsic. Motivation that comes from outside where we perform a behavior or engage

in an activity because of an external award such as money and things.

Influence. Power to have an important effect on someone. It somehow influence a

person to change some certain behaviors and attitude.

Intrinsic. Motivation that comes from within where we do things purely out of self-

satisfactory or because it is naturally satisfying for us.

Negative Peer Influence. Friends that shows negative influence that changes attitudes

and behaviors negatively.

Peer Group. Depicts a level of friendship, people who we socialize and interact

with, support in defining identity, interest, abilities, and personality.

Peer Influence.  It is when you choose to do something you are willingly to do, not

being forced by your peers. It can either affect in a positive and negative

ways.

Positive Peer Influence. Friends that shows positive influence that changes attitudes

and behaviors positively.

Student Motivation. Naturally has to do with students to encourage them to work with

things better.

.
 12

Review of Related Literature

The relationship within the group with its peers are co-related with each other,

hence the direction of this particular relationship should be monitored were these

relationships should go considering all possible factors correlated within the groups

outcome. Peer influence among teenagers does not directly affect them in a negative

way but it varies in how much and how the students receive the climate of the peers

coming from the group (Mosha, 2017). When a student is influenced and motivated by

peers he will perform excellent at school and got good grades in academics. Getting the

support needed coming from the peer group, student tend to excel and exceed its

capability and concentrate more pertaining to his studies and do good in the academic

tasks in school.

Peer group is important in the social context that plays a vital role in society and

to determine the academic achievement that affect during development relatively with

each other. School that the students attend to serves an institution among students that

determine their learning capacity based on the school environment that gives the

learning experience toward students. Interactions between students with their age

mates appeal to enhance their learning capacity under the guidance of an adult

educator (Kinderman, 2016). Hence, the behavior of an individual have seen similarities

among the group due to the effect of their peers, it is still difficult to relate the
 13

consequences that the individual within the group are similar with each other or social

to be pursuing their intentions together to have similar outcomes.

Peer Influence

Peer influence has predominantly negative connotations and received most

attention in the context of problem behaviors during adolescence. Indeed, extent

research has shown that hanging out with the wrong crowd may increase deviant

behaviors through processes of social reinforcement or “peer contagion” (Dishon &

Tipsord, 2011). Importantly however, the very same social learning process reinforced

normative and pro-social talk in non-delinquent adolescent days. This highlights the

benefits of hanging out with the right crowd and shows that imitation and social

reinforcement in the peer context can also shape positive development. This section

provides an overview of behavioral research that has examined peer socialization or

pro-social behaviors during adolescence, as well as the application or peer process in

interventions to promote positive adjustment outcomes.

According to Santrock (2010), Peers are the individuals who are about the same

age or maturity level. Peer influence is defined as when people your own age

encourage you to do something or to keep from doing something else. The more subtle

from or peer influence, it involves changing one’s behavior to meet the perceived

expectations of others. When it comes to more important issues like moral values,

parents still remain more influential than the peer. Educators and parents should be

aware that peer groups provide a variety of positive experience for adolescents.

Peer groups provide a forum where teens construct and reconstruct their

identities, also stated that at no other stage of development is one’s sense of identity so

unstable. A peer-labelling process may be contributing to the construction of positive

 14

identities for some adolescents but negative identities for others. Unfortunately,

members of groups may accept negative labels, incorporate them into their identity, and

through the process of secondary deviance, increase levels of deviant behavior.

Teenagers learn about what is acceptable in their social group by “reading” their friends’

reactions to how they act, what they wear, and what they say. The peer group gives this

potent feedback by their words and actions, which either encourages or discourages

certain behaviors and attitudes. Anxiety can arise when teens try to predict how peers

will react, and this anxiety plays a large role in peer influence. Also Black stated that

self-conscious worrying about how others will react to future actions is the most

common way adolescents are influenced by their peers. When a teen who take an

unpopular stand and goes against the expectations or norms of the peer group, he or

she is at risk for being ridiculed. Ridicule is not an easy thing to accept at any age, let

alone when you are twelve or thirteen years old. This leads to the topic of peer

pressure, Black (2002).

Peer influence in close friendships pro social behavior is a broad and

multidimensional construct that includes cooperation, donation, and volunteering

(Padilla - Walker & Carlo, 2014). Given the association between pro-social engagement

during adolescence and a range of adult positive adjustment outcomes, it is crucial to

understand how peers can promote these behaviors. There is consistent evidence that

best friends influence pro-social behaviors. In adolescent best friend dyad, a friend’s

pro-social behavior is related to an individual’s pro-social goal pursuit, which, in turn, is

associated with an individual’s pro-social behavior. These effects are moderated by

friendship characteristics, including friendship quality and closeness between friends. In

particular, a friend’s pro-social behavior is most likely to influence adolescents own pro-
 15

social behavior when there is a strong positive relationship and greater closeness

between friends. Moreover, not only do actual behaviors but also perceived peer

expectations about positive behaviors in the classroom predict greater pro social goal

pursuit and subsequent sharing, cooperating, and helping. These results underscore

that getting along with peers is a powerful social motive to behave in positive pro-social

ways. Together, this work suggests that social influence on pro-social behavior is likely

explained by processes of social learning.

Positive Peer Influence. Contrary to popular belief, not all peer influence is

negative. Spending more time with peers does not always translate into trouble. Peer

influence can, in fact, keep youth participating in religious activities, going to meetings,

and playing on sports teams, even when they are not leaders (Lingren, 2000).

The peer group is the first social group outside the home in which the child

attempts to gain acceptance and recognition. Peer group is an important influence

throughout one’s life but they are more critical during the developmental years of

childhood and adolescents, (Oxford, 2001).

As supported by Bali et al (2002). Peer group as an agent of socialization is the

most important socializing agent for the developing child. Peer group is the pivot of

social change and during interaction peers; the child’s life is transformed from the

helpless child into a mature adult. In the study of Smith and Pellegrini (2001). The need

for affection or closeness is often greater than the need to do the right thing. For some

adolescents who feel isolated and abandoned by members of the family, being part of a

peer group provides such individual with acceptance and security not available at home.

Negative Peer Influence. According to the eyes of Alderman (2000) is ability

tracking, involves separating students at different achievement in school in the past.

 16

Ability grouping forces isolation among students at different achievement levels, with

each group forming its own peer culture. Low achievers are isolated from models of

achievement motivation and more effective strategies to succeed. In essence, ability

tracking forces students to form groups that may not result in the best outcome. High

achieving students can benefit from interacting with low achieving students and vice

versa. Peer influence affects the attitudes, values or behaviors to conform to those of

the influencing group or individual. A negative peer group is a factor in lower test scores

according to Johnson (2000). Having negative peer group may encourage a student to

have some vices like drinking, smoking, taking drugs and other factors causes

absenteeism or cutting classes that drag down their performance in school. Some peer

groups forces their friends to do something even if they don’t really want it because they

are shy to their friends to refuse in a particular activity and sometimes it is called “Kill

Joy” if you can’t go along or join with them.

According to Damm (2017) peer influence from members of one’s peer group

can influence another to drink, smoke, cheat on a test, participate in sexual activities,

lying, skipping class etc. The list is endless. Peer influence in high school is both

harmful and effective because it can lead to teen depression, high stress levels,

negative behavior issues, and poor decision-making and affect the students’ motivation.

Peer influence is something that can make high school an even bigger obstacle. There

are several types or peer pressure that can affect each individual differently like; making

a person feel bad for not doing something, so that they eventually will, threatening to

end a relationship or a friendship, simply seeing all your peers doing something or

wearing something.
 17

According to Kleinschmidt (2017), in a large group, such as crowd at school or a

sports team, the peer influence is generally unspoken and directed towards how to

dress, how to interact, what music to listen to and what activities to engage in,

according to the article “Adolescents and Peer Pressure”, published on the University of

Michigan website. In a group setting, teenagers can remain quiet or behave as though

they are going along with the crowd to avoid drawing attention to themselves. While this

can work to some extent, teens must be aware that they can get into trouble just by their

association with the crowd in question. Teens may feel the effects or peer influence

more intensely from their close friends due to the fact that they care about them and

value their opinions. The pressure exerted from a best friend can feel more personal

and forceful than that from a larger group, according to the University of Michigan.

Students’ Motivation

Educational psychologists have long recognized the importance of motivation for

supporting student learning. More recently, the Partnership for 21st Century Skills has

identified initiative as one of the life and career skills necessary to prepare students for

post-secondary education and the workforce (Emily, April 2011). Motivation refers to

“the reasons underlying behavior” (Guay et al., 2010, p. 712). Paraphrasing Gredler,

Broussard and Garrison (2004) broadly define motivation as “the attribute that moves us

to do or not to do something” (p. 106).

Intrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is motivation that is animated by personal

enjoyment, interest, or pleasure. As Deci et al. (2000) observe, “Intrinsic motivation

energizes and sustains activities through the spontaneous satisfactions inherent in

effective volitional action. It is manifest in behaviors such as play, exploration, and

challenge seeking that people often do for external rewards”.

 18

More over researchers often contrast intrinsic motivation with extrinsic

motivation, which is motivation governed by reinforcement contingencies. Traditionally,

educators consider intrinsic motivation to be more desirable and to result in better

learning outcomes than extrinsic motivation (Deci et al., 2000).

On the other hand, Turner (2000) considers motivation to be synonymous with

cognitive engagement, which he defines as “voluntary uses of high-level self-regulated

learning strategies, such as paying attention, connection, planning, and monitoring”.

As Broussard and Garrison note, those pursuing the first question developed a range of

new theories regarding self-efficacy, attributions, and self-worth. Bandura (2000)

defines perceived self-efficacy as “judgments of how well one can execute courses of

action required to deal with prospective situations”

Eccles and Wigfield (2002) elaborate on Bandura’s description, defining self-

efficacy as an individual’s confidence in his or her “ability to organize and execute a

given course of action to solve a problem or accomplish a task” .

According to Bandura’s (2002) self-efficacy theory, efficacy is the major

determinant of effort, persistence, and goal setting.

Empirical research supports this notion, suggesting that individuals with higher

self-efficacy tend to be more motivated and successful on a given task (Pintrich &

DeGroot, 2000). Self-efficacy has also been associated with the use of cognitive

strategies, and self-efficacy perceptions predict achievement over and above actual

ability levels.

Extrinsic. According to Stipek (2000), early approaches to the study of motivation

were rooted in the literature on extrinsic reinforcement. Within this literature, all

behavior, including achievement, was believed to be governed by reinforcement

 19

contingencies. Proponents of this approach included B.F. Skinner, who identified

different types of rein forcers. Positive reinforces, or rewards are consequences that

increase the probability of a given behavior they were made contingent on, whereas

negative rein forcers are consequences that increase the probability of a given behavior

by removing or reducing some negative external stimulus. Punishment, on the other

hand, refers to unpleasant consequences that decrease the probability of a given

behavior. Under this framework, the teacher’s job is clear: to use good grades and

praise to reward desired behavior and bad grades or loss of privileges as punishment.

According to Mike (2014) a lithium alumni; extrinsic are all other reasons that

drive us to do something. That means you perform the behavior for reasons other than

the love of doing it. Extrinsic motivation refers to any motivation that is extrinsic to the

behavior or activity. There are many extrinsic motivations because we do things for

many different reasons. All are extrinsic motivations for doing something.

According also to Schicker, that external motivation often creates pressure and,

contrary to what you may think your brain just doesn’t work well under pressure. You

become less happy. The brains levels of the neurotransmitters serotonin and dopamine

decrease. Without those neurotransmitters your cognitive skills like creativity, memory,

and learning are weaker.

Motivation is a tricky multifaceted thing. Like all extrinsic motivators, goals narrow

your focus. That’s one reason they can be effective; they concentrate the mind. But as

you’ve seen, a narrowed focus exacts a cost. For complex or conceptual tasks, offering

a reward can blinker the wide-ranging thinking necessary to come up with an innovative

solution. Likewise, when an extrinsic goal is paramount – particularly a short-term,

measureable one whose achievement delivers a big payoff – its presence can restrict
 20

your view of the broader dimensions of your behavior. As the cadre of business school

professors write, ‘Substantial evidence demonstrate that in addition to motivating

constructive effort, goal setting can induce unethical behavior (Pink, 2016).

Peer Influence and Students Motivation

Adolescence gaining social support from its peers is an important factor to cope

with different problems and illnesses by letting go of emotions by talking someone.

Social support plays an important role for teenagers to lessen the effects of stressful

situations and stressors through the support of the peers in the group. Despite the

various studies conducted for understanding the effects of peer group in student’s

academic performance, no one has yet understood the nature of peer effects among

students. Knowing how the teenagers interact with their peers and how they interact

with each other and how presence of peer group affect student’s academic achievement

in school plays an important role for various categories and even the whole educational

system. Peer pressure is commonly described as peers encouraging other teenagers to

do things. Peer pressure is also caused by parent’s lack of supervision towards their

children during adolescence, children tend to enjoy their peers company and spend with

their peers more during the adolescence period. There are different factors that could

affects student’s academic performance in school whether it’s their family is giving

proper guidance and motivation to their children with the healthy and harmonies

interaction with their surroundings. Students interactions with its peers could help

enhance their capability and increase their academic performance in school because
 21

they could seek help from their peers that could serve as a motivation than working

alone (Esen & Gundogdu 2010).

Peer influence could easily affect the self-esteem of students that an important

factor adolescence. Individual adapt attitudes towards a certain aspect that they

encountered or they are aware of. In many events student fantasizing and visualizing

what they dreamed to became through with their colleagues atmosphere. Eventually,

they pursue their choices through with the influence of peer pressure. The pressure

among peer group among its member may engage to do undesired things or negative

behavior with the presence of a particular peer group leader who engage its member to

do deviant acts or promote undesirable things to the group. Peer group is important in

the social context that plays a vital role in society and to determine the academic

achievement that affect during development relatively with each other. Adaptive

behavior of the development increases become broader and complex and as the age

increases. School that the students attend to serves an institution among students that

determine their learning capacity based on the school environment that gives the

learning experience toward students. Thus choosing major courses within an institution

are major choices a student intends to make but it is affected by their interactions

among other students. Hence, the behavior of an individual have seen similarities

among the group due to the effect of their peers, it is still difficult to relate the

consequences that the individual within the group are similar with each other or social to

be pursuing their intentions together to have similar outcomes. Interactions between

students with their age mates appeal to enhance their learning capacity under the

guidance of an adult educator (Chen, 2008).

 22

Studies on peer acceptance demonstrate that social status in the classroom is

related to feelings of belonging in school, academic engagement, and achievement.

From kindergarten to post-secondary education, when students experience rejection

from their peers, this limits their participation in classroom activities. Conversely, when

children are accepted by their peers and feel included, this fosters motivation and

learning in school. Popularity seems to be different from peer acceptance; when

children aim to become popular, this goal can be detrimental to their achievement

(Kiefer & Ryan, 2008).

Studies on friendships have similarly shown that peer characteristics are

connected to children’s decisions for academic versus non-academic activities during

class time and beyond, to engagement with schoolwork, as well as to their ability

attributions for success and failure, and their values of academic standards, their

academic aspirations, classroom participation, school involvement, and overall

adjustment to school. Overall, the relations with academic achievement seem consistent

with that view (Ryan, 2001). Similarly, studies on smaller cliques and peer networks of

students who frequently interact with one another (SCM groups) have also shown that

the characteristics of a child’s group members are related to that child’s motivation.

Thus, early adolescents’ peer group affiliations are connected to their tendencies to

drop out from school, their engagement in the classroom and in school, as well as their

academic achievement. Most studies on peer influences rely on co relational designs.

For such studies, four recommendations can be made to heighten the chances that

actual influence effects are identified: Peer influence effects can be approximated if

studies are longitudinal, if peer selection effects can be separated from influence

effects, if aggregate scores of peer group antecedents can be formed that have inter-
 23

individual differences, and if time windows for examinations are consistent with the

nature of the target phenomenon under study. Multi-level analyses are preferable

because of interdependencies between the individual and peer data. Another important

aspect of adolescent peer groups is motivation. The difference between motivation and

engagement is that motivation is more focused on student cognition underlying

involvement in schoolwork (i.e., beliefs) and engagement is more focused on actual

involvement in schoolwork (i.e., behavior). Ryan (2000) found that peer groups were

influential regarding changes in students’ intrinsic value for school (i.e., liking and

enjoying) as well as achievement (i.e., report card grades). The peer group was not,

however, influential regarding changes in students’ utility value for school (i.e.,

importance and usefulness). It was found that associating with friends who have a

positive affect toward school enhanced students’ own satisfaction with school, whereas

associating with friends who have a negative affect toward school decreased it (Ryan,

2000).

For a long time, conclusions about social influences from students’ peers were

based entirely on correlations using concurrent data, assuming that similarity between

individuals and those peers was partly a product of social influence. However, with

correlational data, important alternative explanations are based on peer selection

effects (homophily) or on reciprocal effects: Friends may have become friends because

they had similar values or interests already; better-liked children may perform better in

school because children who do well in school are better liked; crowds of “brains” may

have simply found a home for themselves and are not particularly influenced

academically by their likewise “brain-y” peers (Kandel, 2008).

 24

A study by Bankole and Ogunsakin investigated the influence of peer group on

the academic performance of secondary school students in Ekiti State where a total of

225 secondary school students were randomly selected from five mixed secondary

schools. The finding showed that peer relationship influence academic performance of

secondary school students. Relying on longitudinal panel data from Texas,

Hoxby estimate substantial peer effects on student achievement by comparing the

idiosyncratic variation in adjacent cohorts race and gender composition within a grade

within a school. The author argues that the identification strategies are credibly free of

selection biases because the between –cohort peer variations are beyond the easy

management of parents and schools

METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the method of the research. It covers: research design,

research subjects, research instruments, sampling method, research procedure and

statistical treatment of the data that will be used for accurate data analysis and

interpretation.

Research Design

This study uses non-experimental correlative research design. This is a type of

research method in which a researcher measures two variables, understands and

assess the statistical relationship between them with no influence from any extraneous

variable (Bhat, 2019). The researchers chose this design because this study involves

two variables and also aims to assess the relationship between the two variables; peer

influence and students’ motivation, as what was stated above.

Research Subject
 25

Four hundred fifty (450) students in the whole population of senior high school

students were chosen as the sample size for the respondents of this study. From Grade

11 to Grade 12, 30 students were selected randomly in each classroom. All in all, there

are 15 classrooms that comprise the whole senior high school in Jose Maria College.

The researchers chose them as participants because they are the ones who are

exposed with peers and are congruent with the researchers study.

Data Gathering Technique

The researchers used questionnaires and then conducted series of surveys with

the senior high school students.

Research Instruments

This study uses researcher-made questionnaire to gather the needed data. The

draft of the questionnaire was drawn out based on the researcher’s reading, previous

studies, professional literature, published and unpublished thesis relevant to the study.

In the preparation of the instrument, the requirements in the designing of good data

collection instrument were considered. It has twenty (20) items in the survey

questionnaire. In independent variable which is peer influence that has ten (10)

questions and has two (2) indicators which are positive peer influence and negative

peer influence having five (5) items each indicator and the dependent variable is

students motivation that has ten (10) questions and has two (2) indicators which are

extrinsic and intrinsic having five (5) questions each indicator. It uses Likert scale

because it will give the respondent to choose among five (5) options. Likert-type or

frequency scale use fixed choice response formats and are designed to measure

attitudes or opinions (Bowling, 1997). These ordinal scales measures level of

 26

agreement and disagreement. It comprises the scale, the range, verbal description, and

the description level.

5-Strongly Agree. Indicates that respondents express high values manifested or

beyond expectation.

4-Agree. Indicates that respondents express high values manifested frequently or

done now and then, all the time.

3-Moderately Agree. Indicates that respondents express values moderately

manifested frequently or done now and then, in short interval time.

2-Disagree. Indicates that respondent’s statement manifested low values or

practical now and then at long interval time.

1-Strongly Disagree. Indicates that respondent’s describe very low value in the

statement is not manifested at all.

Parameter Limit

Scale Range of Means Rating Value Descriptive

Equivalent

5 4.3-5.0 Strongly Agree Very High

4 3.5-4.2 Agree High

3 2.7-3.4 Moderately Agree Moderate

2 1.9-2.6 Disagree Low

1 1.0-1.8 Strongly Disagree Very Low

 27

Sampling Method

The researchers conducted stratified random sampling among the research

participants. This sampling method involves division of a population into smaller groups

known as strata. The strata are formed based on the members’ shared characteristics

(Kenton, 2019). This method of sampling was chosen because the researchers divided

the senior high school per year level into groups – the strata which is their respective

sections.

Research Procedure

This study follows the following:

1. Choose a topic. Researchers find and choose their own topic.

2. Letter of approval. Researchers make a request letter for the approval of the

senior high school principal for conducting the survey in Grades 11 to 12

students.

3. Draft the questionnaire. The researchers made their own questionnaire that

would answer the statement of the problems.

4. Administer the survey. The researchers went to each of the sections and let

30 students answer given with enough time to finish answering.

5. Tabulate and analyze the data. Researchers tabulate all the data that was

gathered after the survey and applied the statistical treatment used in this

study.
 28

6. Interpret the data and come up with the conclusions. The researchers get

the average to come up with the results and right conclusions.

Statistical Treatment of the Data

The following statistical tools are used to analyze the data.

Frequency. This was used to show that the data stipulates the frequency of the

demographic profile of the respondents.

Mean. This was used to determine the level of peer influence experienced and

the student’s motivation of the senior high school students in Jose Maria College.

Pearson r. This was used to determine the relationship of peer influence and

students motivation of the senior high school students in Jose Maria College.

The degree of linear relationship was interpreted by using a range of values for

the correlation coefficient according to Brase as cited by Laurista, Macabasa, and

Suganob (2015) as shown below:

Correlation Coefficient

Coefficient of Correlation Interpretation as to the

Degree of Extent of Relation

±0.90 to ±1.00 Very high correlation; very dependable

relationship

±0.70 to ±0.89 High correlation; marked relationship

±0.40 to ±0.69 Moderate correlation; substantial

 29

relationship

±0.20 to ±0.39 Low correlation; definite but small

relationship

Less than ±0.20 Negligible correlation

RESULTS

This chapter presents the results of the data gathered in illustrative tables as well

as its interpretation.

Table 1
Level of Peer Influence of Senior High School Students

Peer Influence Mean Description

Positive Peer Influence 3.4 Moderate

Negative Peer Influence 1.9 Low

Overall 2.7 Moderate

As found in table 1, it shows that the general degree of peer influence of the

senior high school students of Jose Maria College is moderate with a mean of 2.7. The
 30

peer influence has two indicators; positive peer influence with the depiction of moderate

with a mean of 3.4, negative peer influence with the portrayal of low with a mean 1.9.

Table 2
Level of Students’ Motivation of Senior High School Students
Students’ Motivation Mean Description

Intrinsic 4.1 High

Extrinsic 4.0 High

Overall 4.1 High

In table 2, it is expressed that the general degree of students’ motivation of the

senior high school students in Jose Maria College is high with a mean of 4.1. The

students’ motivation has two indicators; intrinsic motivation with a portrayal of high with

a mean of 4.1, and extrinsic motivation with a depiction of high with a gathering a mean

of 4.
 31

The researchers conducted a survey and this table shows the result of peer

influence and students’ motivation of senior high school students in Jose Maria College.

Table 3
Relationship between Peer Influence and Students’ Motivation
Peer Influence Students’
Motivation
Peer Influence Pearson Correlation 1 .066
Sig. (2-tailed) .170
N 428 428
Students’ Motivation Pearson Correlation .066 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .170
N 428 428
**Correlation is significant at the .001 level (2-tailed)

The table shows the p-value of the pearson correlation analysis of this study

is .170. It reveals that the p-value is higher than the alpha level of significance 0.05.
 32

Thus, there is no significant relationship between students’ motivation and peer

influence of the senior high school students of Jose Maria College.

DISCUSSIONS

The results of the survey shows that there is no significant relationship between

peer influence and students’ motivation. These are the implications and interpretation of

the results that the researchers gathered.

In table 1, it shows that in the overall level of peer influence of the senior high

school students in Jose Maria College is moderate. It represents that the peer influence

can affect whether it is positive or negative. Hence, having friends who believe that

academic achievement is important and beneficial for students (Brown, 2000). The first

indicator which is positive peer influence depicts that it is moderate, it means that the

senior high school students in Jose Maria College can strongly be affected by their

peers positively. The second indicator which is negative peer influence is described as

low, therefore students are not greatly influenced by their peers negatively. In that case,
 33

we can obviously know that peers might influence and affect student both positive and

negative.

In Table 2, the overall result of students’ motivation of the senior high school

students in Jose Maria College is described as high which means, it is strong. It shows

the indicators of students’ motivation which is intrinsic which results to high as it

gathered a mean of 4.1 and it means that a person has high pleasant experiences

associated with the behavior itself and extrinsic described as high, gathered an average

of 4.0 which means that a person’s motivation is high for external rewards,

acknowledgments and appreciation and the consequences associated with it. It is the

drive you have to work toward your goals to put effort into self-development and to

achieve personal fulfillment (Ackerman, 2002). Staying motivated as a student is one of

the toughest task in achieving success in education. Sometimes learning is indeed a

complicated challenge for most students and it is important to get the motivation to work

hard and achieve something valuable in life. Even though learning and education can

be difficult, if you focus on improving your own motivation level then you will certainly

achieve your goal (Brianne, 2001).

In Table 3, it shows that the two indicators; peer influence and students’

motivation of senior high school students in Jose Maria College has no noteworthy

relationship. This shows the peer influence doesn't influence the students’ motivation of

senior high school students in Jose Maria College. It proves that the null hypotheses is

accepted that means peer influence and students’ motivation do not correlate with each

other. It says likewise that the students are fine to be with their companions. This table

likewise discusses that the invalid speculation is acknowledged and it results to

 34

moderate correlation therefore, peer influence and students’ motivation of the senior

high school students of Jose Maria College has a substantial relationship. This proves

that even you have or you do not have peers, it does not affect your motivation as a

student. Supported by Pagliarni (2011) says that “whatever kind of influencers you have

in your surroundings some will drag you down or they will be your energizers. On the

other hand, whatever peers you have you will always tell you are on the mission to

reach your goal”. As long as you are focused and determined to reach success, your

motivation will not be affected by the influences you may encounter.

CONCEPTUAL FIGURE

Chart Title
4

3.5

2.5

1.5

0.5

0
Positive Peer Influence Negative Peer Influence Overall
 35

Figure 1. Level of Peer Influence of the Senior High School Students of Jose
Maria College

Chart Title
4.12

4.1

4.08

4.06

4.04

4.02

3.98

3.96

3.94
Intrinsic Extrinsic Overall

Figure 2. Level of Students’ Motivation of the Senior High School Students of

Jose Maria College
Findings

This part of the research paper shows the results of the conducted survey on

determining the relationship between peer influence and students’ motivation of senior

high school students in Jose Maria College.

1. The level of peer influence experienced by the senior high school students is

moderate for positive peer influence and low for negative peer influence.
 36

2. The level of student motivation that the senior high school students have is high

for intrinsic motivation and high for extrinsic motivation.

3. There is no significant relationship between peer influence and students

motivation of the senior high school students.

Conclusion

In 2002, Baumeister’s and Leary’s study of belongingness hypothesis where it

concluded that there is genetically a need to belong. The wholeness of this study is all

about the relationship between the students’ motivation and the peer influence that the

senior high school students possess. Through this, the researchers proved that

statement by giving out surveys to be filled up and calculating the results. It is later

found out that the null hypothesis formulated by the researchers is accepted. The

students’ motivation of senior high school students in Jose Maria College are not

affected by their peers. Since this study is focused solely on the senior high school
 37

students, other researchers can do this on junior high school students or other

respondents on a specific location. Furthermore, the important contribution of this study

is to help students to be aware that their motivation are not greatly affected by their

peers, it means that ones’ motivation does not rely to their peers, but only depends to

themselves.

Based on our result it is clear enough that peers do not affect students'

motivation especially when their motivation is high enough. If a person’s motivation is

high it means that with or without the influence of peers to students' motivation, it will not

be altered and will still remain to the level of motivation they set to themselves. One's

motivation is not highly affected if its motivation was derived from intrinsic and extrinsic

form of motivation not from the influence of their peers.

 38

Recommendation

In this section, the researchers determined different areas where further work

was required as well as some recommendations that could give supplementary

assistance to the people that are significant in the study.

School. That they will implement clubs and each student should have one club to join.

Faculty. That they should impose rewards to students who will excel in school

performances.

Guidance. That they will conduct a symposium regarding awareness about peer

influence.

Students. That they should participate and join a specific club to improve their skills

and socialize.

Parents. That they should support their children and give them rewards not just when

they excel in school but also in doing household chores.

Future Researchers. That they may conduct the study with the different respondents to

identify and prove that there is a relationship between peer influence and

students’ motivation and also conduct a research regarding peer groups and

students’ motivation.
 39

BIBLIOGRAPHY

You, S. (2011), Peer influence and adolescents’ school engagement: Elsevier

and Dr Zafer Bekirogullari.

Castrogiovanni, D. (2002) Adolescence peer groups retrieved January 24 2002.

Retrieved from http// inside. Bard.Edu/academics/specialproj/ darling/adolescence.

Lashbrook, J. (200). Exploring the Emotional Dimension of Adolescent Peer

Influence: Academic Journal Article

Howard (2014). In relation to academic performance and socialization among

adolescence: A literature review retrieved from

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/PEER-INFLUENCE-IN-RELATION-TO-

ACADEMIC-PERFORMANCE-Howard/

ec7a1033e184a7f9576a3c4f329a99a698664584

Razonable (2018). Computer games and academic performance senior high

school students in Mindanao. Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/37644007/COMPUTER

GAMES_AND_ACADEMIC_PERFORMANCE_SENIOR_HIGH_SCHOOL_STUDENTS

_IN_MINDANAO

Sayama (2000). How Your Children's Friends Affect Their Grades. Retrieved

from https://www.google.com/amp/s/mercury.postlight.com/amp%3furl=https://

www.nymetroparents.com/article/How-Your-Children-s-Friends-Affect-Their-Grades

Landau, A. (2002). Peer groups and educational outcomes. Retrieved

from http//inside.bard.edu/academics/specialproj/bullying/group2/Alison.html.
 40

Mosha, (2017). The influence of peer group on academic performance of

adolescent students in secondary schools in Tanzania: Research Journal of Educational

Studies and Review, http://pearlresearchjournals.org/journals/rjesr/index.html

Guzman, M. T (2007). Friendship, peer influence, and peer pressure during the

teen years.University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension,

Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Retrieved from:

http://extension.unl.edu/publications

Kinderman, T. (2016). Peer group influences on students’ academic motivation.

Handbook of Social Influences in School Contexts,

Doi:10.4324/9781315769929.ch3

Zhang, H.(2010).Peer effects on student achievement: an instrumental variable

approach Using School transition data. Department

of Economics The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Retrieved from:

http://www.wise.xmu.edu.cn/Labor2010/Files/Labor2010_HongliangZhang_Pap r.pdf

Alderman, K. (2000). School groups and peer motivation. Retrieved January 24,

2004, from: http://www3.uakron.edu/education/safeschools/peer/peer.html

Black, S. (2002). When students push past peer influence. The Education

Digest, 68, 31-36.

Ryan, A.M. (2000). Peer groups as a context for the socialization of adolescents’

motivation, engagement, and achievement in school. Educational Psychologist, 35, 101-

112.

Lingren, H.G. (1995). Adolescence and peer pressure. Retrieved January 24,

2004, from: http://www.ianr.unl.edu/pubs/family/nf211.htm

 41

Chen, X., Chang, L., Liu, H., & He, Y. (2008). Effects of the peer group on the

development of social functioning and academic achievement: A longitudinal study in

Chinese children. Child Development, 79, 235 – 251.

Ryan, & G. W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships and adjustment at school (pp.

135-164).

Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Kindermann, T. A. (2007). Effects of naturally-existing peer groups on changes in

academic engagement in a cohort of sixth graders. Child Development, 78, 1186-1203.

Ryan, A. M., Jamison, R. S., Shin, H., & Thompson, G. N. (2012). Social

achievement goals and adjustment at school during early adolescence. In A. Ryan & G.

Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationships and adjustment at school (pp. 165-186). Charlotte, NC:

Information Age.

Ryan, A. M. (2001). The peer group as a context for the development of young

adolescent motivation and achievement. Child Development, 72, 1135–1150.