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.