Alex C. Manhães and Yael Abreu-Villaça consulted on study design, interpretation of results and manuscript preparation. Fernanda Nunes Alpelisib nmr and Kélvia Ferreira-Rosa gathered necessary behavioral data and participated in the initial draft of manuscript. Maurício dos S. Pereira and Regina C. Kubrusly gathered necessary biochemical data. All authors contributed

to the final manuscript and have approved the final manuscript. No conflict declared. The authors are thankful to Ulisses Rizzo for animal care. “
“In this paper, we identified patterns of alcohol and other drug (AOD) involvement during the decade following adolescent AOD treatment and developmental outcomes in emerging adulthood. We described six trajectory classes in text and visually presented the patterns of alcohol, marijuana and other drug engagement in Fig. 1. In the published work, two blocks of the figure were incorrect, such that the patterns shown

selleck for Late Adolescent Resurgence and Frequent Drinkers/Drug Dependent were switched. Below is the correct Fig. 1. “
“A widely held assumption is that young people engage in smoking and other risk behaviors (e.g., alcohol or cannabis use) because their peers pressure them to do so. This assumption taps into one of the frequently applied theoretical models of peer influence, implying an active, only explicit form of peer influence. As a result, most mass-media campaigns and school smoking-prevention programs focus on countering peer pressure by teaching young people refusal and resistance skills. Nevertheless, susceptibility to peer pressure in young people is not limited to adolescents but also includes young adults (see also review of Borsari and Carey, 2001). So far, the findings of survey studies, focusing on this active peer influence, show inconsistent findings (Perrine and Aloise-Young, 2004, Slater, 2003 and Urberg et al., 1990) and experimental studies

are lacking. Moreover, scholars question whether the outcomes of survey studies are valid and reliable (Arnett, 2007 and Michell and West, 1996). Thus, we still know little about the effects of peer pressure on adolescent and young adult smoking. An important question that needs to be addressed is whether this assumption and theory of active peer influence is valid. An alternative explanation for the influence of peers is found in the imitation hypothesis which taps into a different theoretical model of peer influence, implying a more passive, implicit form of peer influence. Adolescents and young adults observe and imitate the smoking of others, without being urged to do so. There are two explanations of imitation that have found support in the literature.