2008 Woodie Awards
Scientists still debating over birth order theories
Andrew Cross
Issue date: 11/8/07 Section: News
Of the first 23 American astronauts, 21 were firstborn children.
A coincidence?
Kevin Leman, author of The Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are, does not think so.
Leman points out that firstborns are also well represented among university professors and Rhodes scholars.
The recent release of results from a Norwegian study has given some merit to the theory of birth order.
Scientists found that eldest children had an average IQ of 103, followed by second children with 101 and third-borns at 100.
The difference is minimal and the evidence inconclusive. Each of the 241,310 subjects in the study was male. Still, many experts believe birth order affects children by shaping interests and personalities.
According to birth order specialists, firstborns are natural leaders and problem solvers. They are said to have strong reasoning and organizational skills.
Middle children supposedly tend to love socializing, and are predisposed to become great negotiators and peacemakers. After living in the shadow of an older child, they may be more likely to move far away from home to seek a clear identity.
According to Leman, last born children are the least likely to be disciplined. The Norwegian study also demonstrated that the differing IQ scores may be the result of how the children were raised.
Instead of a varying genetic makeup, the scientists believe parents may treat children differently depending upon the order of their birth.
Many researchers remain skeptical about the importance of birth order. "There is a reliable but relatively small birth order effect on social conservatism," Joseph Rodgers, professor of psychology at Oklahoma University, said.
"Later borns are usually a bit more rebellious and less oriented toward tradition than earlier borns," Rodgers added. "The effect is small and hardly worth building theories around." According to Rodgers, most studies done on birth order use flawed methodology.
Rodgers explained that the cross-sectional data used in many studies are filled with potential bias.
By comparing different sized families from different backgrounds in various parts of the country, one variable (birth order) cannot be isolated.
William Boyle is an adjunct professor of physical sciences at Prince George's Community College in Maryland.
Boyle points out that although birth order theories may act "as predictors of results from very large samples…they can tell you nothing about any particular individual instance."
A coincidence?
Kevin Leman, author of The Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are, does not think so.
Leman points out that firstborns are also well represented among university professors and Rhodes scholars.
The recent release of results from a Norwegian study has given some merit to the theory of birth order.
Scientists found that eldest children had an average IQ of 103, followed by second children with 101 and third-borns at 100.
The difference is minimal and the evidence inconclusive. Each of the 241,310 subjects in the study was male. Still, many experts believe birth order affects children by shaping interests and personalities.
According to birth order specialists, firstborns are natural leaders and problem solvers. They are said to have strong reasoning and organizational skills.
Middle children supposedly tend to love socializing, and are predisposed to become great negotiators and peacemakers. After living in the shadow of an older child, they may be more likely to move far away from home to seek a clear identity.
According to Leman, last born children are the least likely to be disciplined. The Norwegian study also demonstrated that the differing IQ scores may be the result of how the children were raised.
Instead of a varying genetic makeup, the scientists believe parents may treat children differently depending upon the order of their birth.
Many researchers remain skeptical about the importance of birth order. "There is a reliable but relatively small birth order effect on social conservatism," Joseph Rodgers, professor of psychology at Oklahoma University, said.
"Later borns are usually a bit more rebellious and less oriented toward tradition than earlier borns," Rodgers added. "The effect is small and hardly worth building theories around." According to Rodgers, most studies done on birth order use flawed methodology.
Rodgers explained that the cross-sectional data used in many studies are filled with potential bias.
By comparing different sized families from different backgrounds in various parts of the country, one variable (birth order) cannot be isolated.
William Boyle is an adjunct professor of physical sciences at Prince George's Community College in Maryland.
Boyle points out that although birth order theories may act "as predictors of results from very large samples…they can tell you nothing about any particular individual instance."
Be the first to comment on this story