Peer Group Composition Constraints in Program Targeting

Download image · 1200 × 630 PNG

In Simple Words

Think of placing all struggling students together in one isolated classroom; without high-performing classmates to set positive daily habits, the group can reinforce disruptive behaviors instead of learning constructive ones.

Applicants to NYC’s summer jobs program

Had a prior arrest
3% of applicants
No prior arrest
97% of applicants

Observed applicant composition, 2005–2008. The study did not test whether changing this mix would improve outcomes or prevent harmful peer effects.

See source →

Research question

Restricting social program enrollment exclusively to high-risk youth maximizes direct statistical returns per slot, but risks concentrating negative peer dynamics, which can counteract treatment benefits.

Participants

N = 163,447 applicants (97% low-risk youth, 3% at-risk youth with prior arrests), New York City.

Study Design

Theoretical and empirical evaluation of peer spillover dynamics in lottery slot allocation models.

Results

While 100% of crime reduction cost savings ($652–$1,250 per participant) stem from the 3% at-risk subgroup, universal open-enrollment programs embed at-risk youth in a broader peer group where 97% of participants have no criminal record, preventing adverse peer contagion.

Takeaway

1. Maintain a baseline proportion of low-risk peers in youth employment interventions to preserve constructive social norms and prevent negative peer spillover effects.

Source and citation

See source →

Related findings