This article was downloaded by: [Memorial University of Newfoundland]

On: 03 February 2015, At: 17:12

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954
Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,
UK

The Journal of Genetic

Psychology: Research and
Theory on Human Development
Publication details, including instructions for authors
and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgnt20

Comparison of Personality
Traits of Only and Sibling
School Children in Beijing
a a a
Chuanwen Wan , Cunren Fan , Guobin Lin &
a
Qicheng Jing
a
Institute of Psychology Chinese Academy of
Sciences , Beijing
Published online: 06 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: Chuanwen Wan , Cunren Fan , Guobin Lin & Qicheng Jing (1994)
Comparison of Personality Traits of Only and Sibling School Children in Beijing, The
Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 155:4,
377-388, DOI: 10.1080/00221325.1994.9914788

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1994.9914788

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the
information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.
However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,
or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views
expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the
Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with
primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any
losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,
and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
 indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the
Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.
Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,
sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is
expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015
 The Journal of Genetic PsychoIogy, 155(4),371-388

Comparison of Personality Traits of Only

and Sibling School Children in Beijing
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

CHUANWEN WAN
CUNREN FAN
GUOBIN LIN
QICHENG JING
Institute of Psychology
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing

ABSTRACT. The number of only children in China has increased rapidly since the
late 1970s, when the Chinese government advocated the “one-child-per-family” pol-
icy. This increase has caused much public concern about the healthy growth of the
young generation. In this study the behavioral traits of Chinese, urban, only children
were investigated. The participants were 444 children with siblings and 473 only chil-
dren from Grades l , 3, and 5 in Beijing primary schools. An inventory consisting of
27 items covering three behavioral traits was developed. The children were rated on
the inventory by the principal teacher of the class. Factor analysis revealed three main
factors: achievement motivation, interpersonal skills, and attitude toward manual la-
bor. The only children exceeded the sibling children on achievement motivation. No
differences were found between only children and sibling children on interpersonal
skills and attitude toward manual labor. Gender differences were evident; girls consis-
tently received higher ratings on achievement motivation and interpersonal skills. The
possible underlying reasons for these differences are discussed.

A NATIONAL FAMILY PLANNING PROGRAM was initiated in China

in 1971 because of the explosive growth of the Chinese population after 1949.
Although family planning has been proclaimed a fundamental state policy,
the latest census (held in 1990) revealed that the mainland population num-
bered 1,133 million, making it the most populated nation in the world. The
natural rate of acceleration of population growth remained high, fluctuating
around 1.4% in the 1980s, meaning that each year saw an increase of about
16 million people. Remarkably, the 1,133 million population figure was twice
the 540 million figure at the founding of People’s Republic of China in 1949.
To intensify population control, as early as 1979 the Chinese government
began launching a one-child family-planning program. This program has
been eminently successful in the cities, where only children constituted 97%

311
 378 The Journul of Generic Psychology

of the urban kindergartens and primary-school lower grades. In the rural

areas, however, where some 74% of the Chinese people reside, implementing
the one-child policy has been difficult, and families often have two or more
children. There are several reasons for the difficulties in implementing the
policy in the rural areas: (a) the parental demand for extra hands in agricul-
tural production, (b) Confucian ideology that more children bring more hap-
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

piness and fortune, and (c) the desire to have a male child to be the successor
of the patriarchal family line.
The one-child family-planning policy resulted in a rapid increase in the
number of only children in cities and raised concerns about the healthy
growth and development of the Chinese younger generation. There is wide-
spread belief that these children are being overprotected and may have unde-
sirable behavioral and personality traits. Chinese parents sometimes figu-
ratively name only children “little emperors” or describe them as having
acquired the so-called little emperor syndrome.
Research on only children in the West started at the beginning of this
century. A widely held view at that time was that only children were more
egocentric, less cooperative, less affiliative, and more maladjusted than chil-
dren with siblings. Some have reported that only children were more likely
to be diagnosed as psychologically disturbed than others (Belmont, Wittes, &
Stein, 1976). In a comprehensive meta-analysis of some 100 studies of only
children, Falbo and Polit (1986) concluded that single children, in general,
are not disadvantaged in their psychological development.
In the Western research, because of divorce, separation, or death of par-
ents, only children are more likely to come from broken homes. A higher
percentage of single children than those in any other birth order live with
their mother. From the General Social Science Survey conducted between
1972 and 1978 at the University of Chicago, Blake (1981) showed that just
66% of the only children surveyed ‘lived with both parents. This statistic is
remarkably unlike statistics regarding Chinese single children; almost all
come from intact families.
Chinese studies of only children are increasing in number. As in the case
of early Western studies, the results indicate that only children are superior

This stud)’ was supported 6.y Grant No. 88-1195-88from the William T Grunt Foun-
dation. We wish to express our grutitude 10 Howcird Gurdner, Jinghe Liu, Puul Mus-
sen, und Harold Stevenson. who served us udvisors to this researchproject. Appreciu-
tion is also extended to Hongsheng Che, Zhuguung Er. Erping Hbng. and Fuguo
Chen. who guve generous assistance in currying out this research. Apprecicition is
also extended to B. Rosenberg, who did the Jinul polishing work on this article.
Address correspondence to Chuunwen Wun. Institute of Psychology# The Chi-
nese Academy of Sciences. P: 0. Box 1603. Postcode 100012, Beijing, People> Re-
public of China.
 Wan, Fan, Lin, & Jing 379

to children with siblings in some characteristics and possess less positive as-
sessments in other characteristics. The Shanghai Preschool Education Study
Group (1980) compared a kindergarten, 4-year-old sample of 70 only chil-
dren with 30 children with siblings to see which group demonstrated more
desirable behavioral traits. Among the 70 only children, 21 were not coopera-
tive in group activity, compared with only 2 of the 30 children with siblings.
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

The three undesirable traits most often found in the only children were bad
eating habits, willfulness, and timidity. Because this work was one of the
earliest in China and was cited frequently, it was inevitable that it would
influence the public conception of Chinese only children.
In a study that compared personality characteristics of a sample of chil-
dren in six kindergartens (N = 265, 138 only children and 127 children with
siblings, age range 5 to 7 years), Wan, Fan, and Lin (1984) found no differ-
ences in dependency, helping others, or aggressive behavior. In another study,
by Jiao, Ji, and Jing (1986), 993 only and sibling children of different age
levels participated in peer ratings on eight sociobehavioral qualities. The
comparisons that resulted were quite clear: only children were more egocen-
tric; children with siblings were more persistent and cooperative, and they
had higher peer prestige. Chen (1985) studied affiliation or gregariousness of
only children in 14 kindergartens and 14 primary schools in both urban and
suburban areas of Beijing. The results showed that in urban areas there was
no significant difference in affiliation as determined by an inventory in which
teachers rated only children and children with siblings. A significant differ-
ence was found between only boys and boys with siblings in suburban areas:
Only boys received lower ratings on affiliation than boys with siblings. This
difference was not found for girls in suburban areas. Poston and Falbo (1990)
examined the personality traits of virtue and competence of only children
and children with siblings in a Chinese city and found no differences. These
results were consistent with Western results, in which only children did not
seem to differ from children with siblings on these two personality dimen-
sions. In another study, Falbo and Poston (1993) selected a total sample of
4,000 school children (1,000 from each of four provinces, including Beijing),
and they compared the outcomes of only children with those of first-born
and later-born children. The children’s ages ranged from 8 to 17 years; half
of the sample was in the third grade, and the other half was in the sixth grade.
The results indicated that the only children seemed superior to the children
with siblings in academic and physical status, but in terms of personality
evaluations, very few effects were found for only children.
In summary, we have no clear picture about the personality characteris-
tics of Chinese only children. As was mentioned earlier, there are occasion-
ally conflicting reports regarding whether only children are more disad-
vantaged in personality development than children with siblings. These
discrepanciesmay be caused by differences among the personality traits stud-
 380 The Journal of Genetic Psychology

ied, or by the measurement devices and techniques used for assessment. The
latter may be most significant as a differing factor between Chinese research-
ers and Western researchers who conduct studies in China.
In view of the special circumstances in studying personality traits of
Chinese only children, in the present investigation we undertook the follow-
ing: (a) constructing an inventory appropriate for measuring behavioral traits
of Chinese school children, (b) investigating behavioral traits of school chil-
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

dren (comparing only children and sibling children), and (c) determining the
role of gender differences in behavioral traits.

Method
Participants

The study was conducted in 1989; the participants were children in Beijing
in Grade 1 (born in 1982-1983, 7- to 8-year-olds), Grade 3 (born in 1979-
1980, 9- to 10-year-olds), and Grade 5 (born in 1977-1978, 1 1- to 12-year-
olds). The Grade 1 children were all born after the implementation of the
one-child-per-family policy, so there were rarely sibling children, and if there
were, they were mostly second-borns. Generally, in Grade 3 the number of
only children and children with siblings was almost equal, and in Grade 5
there were more sibling children than only children. Beijing, the capital of
China, is divided into 10 urban districts with 10 suburban counties affiliated
with it. Because the one-child-per-family policy was most effective in urban
areas, all urban districts were taken as sampling sites, and only one suburban
county was randomly chosen. On the basis of the Chinese census published
in 1984, 15 primary schools were randomly chosen from 10 urban areas, and
I was randomly chosen from 1 of the 10 suburban counties, for a total of 16
schools. This group was taken as a representative sample of I3eijing schools
and children.
Three classes were randomly chosen for each grade within each school.
We intended to choose 6 only children (3 boys and 3 girls) and 6 children
with siblings (3 boys and 3 girls) from each class. This was impossible in
Grade I , as mentioned earlier, because these children were born after 1979,
the year in which the one-child-per-family policy was initiated; thus, there
were very few children with siblings in the lower grades. It was necessary to
include all of the children with siblings in Grade 1 and thus, randomly, the
same number of only children of the same sex (see Table 1).

Procedure
The parents of the participants filled out a questionnaire about demographic
data such as economic status, profession, expectancy for children’s education,
 Wan, Fan, Lin, & Jing 381

TABLE 1
Birth Category and Sex of Participants

Onlv First-born Later-born

Grade n YO n % n YO
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Grade 1
Boys 57 54.8 14 13.5 33 31.7
Girls 62 53.5 20 17.2 34 29.3
Grade 3
Boys 96 50.5 10 5.3 84 44.2
Girls 98 52.1 11 5.9 79 42.0
Grade 5
Boys 78 50.0 14 9.0 64 41.0
Girls 82 50.3 19 11.7 62 38.0

and other family background information. Traditionally, in Chinese homes

the father seems more influential than the mother regarding the child’s behav-
ior. Ji, Zhang, and Wan (1990) studied the impact of family structure on
children’s behavioral traits. They found that children whose fathers had more
years of education obtained higher ratings on independent thinking, cooper-
ative behavior, sympathy, independence, persistence, and attitude toward
manual labor, whereas mothers seemed to have influence on cooperative be-
havior, sympathy, and independence. As a result, we took the father’s educa-
tional background to represent the educational level of the family. (See Table
2 for fathers’ educational level.)

The Inventory
We asked 29 experienced school teachers, including 3 school principals, to
list behavioral traits that they thought were important for students. A total
of 402 items were collected. Consultation with the teachers and discussions
within the investigative team yielded 30 behavioral traits mentioned most
frequently, and thus a behavioral trait inventory with 30 items was con-
structed. Each item was rated on a 5-point scale. School teachers were asked
to assess behavioral traits of children according to this inventory. The princi-
pal teacher (usually the teacher of Chinese) of the class rated each child on
the items. The teachers were not informed about the purpose of the ratings,
only that the investigators were making a general survey of the children. The
higher the child’s score on a given item, the more positive was the child con-
sidered on this item. For example, an item was worded “Wants to keep away
from his classroom duties.” If a child was rated 5 points on this item, it meant
that he or she did not behave that way.
 382 The Journal oJGetietic Psychology

TABLE 2
Educational Background of Fathers

Only First-born Later-born

Grade n % n ‘Kl n Yo
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Grade 1
Primary school 4 3.8 7 20.6 7 10.9
High school 83 78.3 20 58.8 43 67.2
College 19 17.9 7 20.6 14 21.9
Total 106 100 34 100 64 100
Grade 3
Primary school 8 4.4 2 9.5 11 6.9
High school 124 68.5 17 81.0 97 61.0
College 49 27.1 2 9.5 51 32.1
Total 181 100 21 100 I59 100
Grade 5
Primary school I1 7.4 3 9. I 18 13.8
High school 102 68.5 23 69.7 67 51.5
College 36 24.2 7 21.2 45 34.6
Total 149 100 33 100 130 100

A factor analysis was undertaken to determine the pattern of ratings

produced by the teachers. Items with absolute values that loaded on a given
factor above .48 were attributed to the factor and were used to define the
factor. We deleted 3 of the 30 items because their absolute loading values
were less than .48.Three factors were obtained. Factor 1 accounted for 42.7%
of the variance, Factor 2 explained 12.3%, and Factor 3 explained 8.1% of
the total variance. In accordance with the content of items that loaded on
Factor 1, this factor was named Achievement Motivation. Items that loaded
on Factor 2 were related to children’s self-centeredness, self-control, and rela-
tionship with peers; this cluster of items was named Interpersonal Skills. The
group of items that loaded on Factor 3 was described as Attitude Toward
Manual Labor. Loadings of items on the three factors are shown in Table 3.
After the factor score coefficients for each variable on the factors were
obtained, they were multiplied by the standardized value of the variable.
Each participant then had three factor scores, on which subsequent analysis
was conducted (processed by SPSS).

Validity. The factor analysis revealed that items within a factor were inter-
correlated with each other, and high intercorrelations among items loaded
on one factor may be interpreted as evidence of construct validity (Shaw &
Wright, 1967). There were no correlations between factors; a varimax rota-
tion showed that these factors were all independent.
 Wan, Fan, Lin, & Jing 383

TABLE 3
Item Loadings

FactorlItem Loading

Factor I : Achievement Motivation

Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

1. Wants to d o well in exams. .80

2. Is afraid of falling behind others. 30
3. Wants to be a good example to be imitated. .79
4. Wants to be a leader in class activities. .78
5. Likes to compete with others. .78
6. Can seize time to do hidher home work. .75
7. Can do hidher work without asking for help. .75
8. If hislher work is not finished, can refrain from going to play. .72
9. Can make plans to study well by himselfherself. .68

Factor 2: Interpersonal Skills

1. Bad tempered. .78
2. When wronged by someone's criticism does not get into bad .76
temper.
3. When hislher demands can't be met, the child does not get into .74
bad temper.
4. Shows tolerance for other persons' mistakes. .71
5. Wants others to listen to himselflherself with no consideration for .67
others.
6. Is on good and friendly terms with classmates. .65
7. When doing something collectively with others, the child attributes .65
success to himselflherself and blames others for failure.
8. When hisker work is done, the child tends to disturb others. .64
9. Is absent-minded and makes redundant movements in class. (This .58
item also loaded on Factor 1 with a loading of S4.)
10. When in conflict with another child, can solve the problem by .57
himselflherself without reporting easily to the teacher.
11. When having done something wrong to others, can make .55
apologies.
12. Thinks only of himselflherself with no consideration for others. .53
13. Can tear himselfherself away from what helshe is doing to comply .5 1
to collective activities.

Factor 3: Attitude Toward Manual Labor

1. Is not afraid of fatigue and dirtiness when having to do some .84
manual labor.
2. Chooses to do hard work in manual labor. .83
3. When the child is to do some manual labor, helshe is active and .79
can exert great efforts.
4. When finished what helshe ought to do in manual labor, the child .73
can go to help others.
5. Wants to keep away from his classroom duties. .52
 384 The Journal oj’ Genetic Psychology

Reliability. Of the total number of participants, 43 were rated by the same

teacher twice (test-retest) with an interval of 10 to 15 days. The test-retest
correlation for the three factor scores, that is, scores of Achievement Motiva-
tion, Interpersonal Skills, and Attitude Toward Manual Labor, were .88, .87,
and .67, respectively. A total of 68 participants (some overlapped with the
previous 43 participants) were rated simultaneously by the principal teacher
and the teacher who taught mathematics (tester-observer).
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

The tester-observer correlations for these three behavioral traits were

.71, .72, and .40, respectively. All figures showed significant correlation at the
.OOl level, indicating high reliability for the inventory. The reliability of the
inventory was also tested by Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The alpha values
of Achievement Motivation, Interpersonal Skills, and Attitude Toward Man-
ual Labor were .93, .92, and .86, respectively.

Results
Comparison of Only Children and Children With Siblings
The data were subjected to a multivariate analysis of variance, and we tested
the hypothesis that some of the scores for behavioral traits of only children
were more positive than those of children with siblings (and vice versa for
other traits). In this analysis the independent variables were birth category
(only, first born, and later born), grade (Grade 1,3, or 5), and sex. The depen-
dent variables were the three factor scores (see Table 4).
No interactions existed among the three independent variables. Subse-
quent univariate F tests for birth category revealed differences on achieve-
ment motivation scores between only children and children with siblings;
the only children obtained significantly higher ratings than the children with
siblings. Although the mean scores of the children with siblings for interper-
sonal skills and attitude toward manual labor were higher than those of the
only children, the differences did not achieve statistical significance.
In an analysis of the different grades, the univariate F test for birth cate-
gory revealed that the superiority of the only children on achievement moti-
vation existed only in Grade 1; although in the two higher grades the only
children received higher ratings on this behavioral trait than the children with
siblings, the difference was not statistically significant.

Sex DiHerence on Achievement Motivation and Interpersonal Skills

Univariate F tests for sex revealed significant differences between boys and
girls on achievement motivation and interpersonal skills: The girls received
higher ratings than the boys on both. These differences appeared in all three
grades (see Table 5).
 Wan, Fan, Lin, & Jmg 385

TABLE 4
Univariate F Tests in MANOVA for Birth Order in Different Grades

Mean
Item Only First-born Later-born F p
~ ~ ~~
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Total F(2, 822)

Achievement Motivation .13 -.22 -.03 5.21 .01**
Interpersonal Skills -.06 -.05 .10 2.41 .09
Attitude Toward Manual Labor -.07 .12 .06 1.96 .14
Grade 1, fl2,200)
Achievement Motivation .06 -.28 -.43 5.58 .w**
Interpersonal Skills -.21 -.11 -.04 .53 .59
Attitude Toward Manual Labor -.06 -.02 .16 1.09 .34
Grade 3, F(2, 336)
Achievement Motivation .27 -.06 .I5 1.35 .26
Interpersonal Skills -.20 -.39 -.02 1.84 .16
Attitude Toward Manual Labor -.09 .29 .I4 2.37 .10
Grade 5,42,279)
Achievement Motivation .01 -.26 - .04 .71 .49
Interpersonal Skills .23 .25 .32 .30 .74
Attitude Toward Manual Labor -.04 .I5 - .09 .69 S O

Note. Total sample, only children n = 416, first-born n = 79, later-born n = 330. Grade 1 only
children n = 108, first-born n = 33, later-born n = 62. Grade 3 only children n = 173, first-
born n = 18, later-born n = 148. Grade 5 only children n = 134, first-born n = 28, later-born
n = 120.
* p 5 .01.

Discussion
We sought to determine the causal base for the superiority of the only chil-
dren over the children with siblings on achievement motivation. It seemed
logical to assume that parental expectancy of children’s educational out-
comes might have a significant effect on the achievement motivation scores.
One of the questions in the demographic questionnaire for parents was,
“How many years of education do you want your child to have?” The paren-
tal aspirations were correlated with the children’s achievement motivation
ratings. Parents’ expectancies for their children’s schooling were divided into
three groups: (a) junior high school, (b) senior high school, and (c) college.
The ratings on achievement motivation for the three groups were significantly
different. The differences between Groups 1 and 2, Groups 1 and 3, and
Groups 2 and 3 all reached statistical significance.That is, the more years of
education the parents wanted for their children, the higher were their chil-
dren’s ratings on achievement motivation. A chi-square test was performed
for the scores of the only children and children with siblings with parents’
 386 The Journul of Geneiic Psychology

TABLE 5
Univariate F Tests in MANOVA for Sex in Different Grades

Mean
Item Boys Girls F P
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Total F( 1, 834)
Achievement Motivation -.23 .27 53.26 .ooo** *
Interpersonal Skills -.21 .2 I 38.02 .ooo***
Attitude Toward Manual
Labor -02 .o 1 .00 .95
Grade 1, F( 1,205)
Achievement Motivation -.33 - .02 5.44 .02 1 *
Interpersonal Skills -.34 .07 8.64 .004**
Attitude Toward Manual
Labor .oo .08 .3 I .58
Grade 3, F( 1, 342)
Achievement Motivation - .06 .45 26.17 .ooo***
Interpersonal Skills -.38 .09 19.74 .ooo***
Attitude Toward Manual
Labor .00 .09 .58 .45
Grade 5, F( 1, 282)
Achievement Motivation -.37 .26 25.63 .ooo***
Interpersonal Skills .08 .46 10.99 .002**
Attitude Toward Manual
Labor .06 -.I2 2.28 .I3

Nore. Total boys n = 405, girls n = 431. Grade I boys n = 97, girls n = 110. Grade 3 boys n =
170. girls n = 174. Grade 5 boys n = 138. girls n = 146.
*p < .05. **p < .Ol. ***p < .001.

educational expectancies as variables, and no significant differences were ob-

tained. Therefore. we concluded that the achievement motivation difference
between only children and children with siblings was not due to parental
expectancy of their children's future education.
We further analyzed the ages of the parents of the only children and of
the children with siblings. The fathers were divided into three age groups: 30
to 34 years, 35 to 42 years, and 43 to 56 years. The reason for this classifica-
tion was that the 35- to 42-year-old group was born between 1947 and 1955.
Therefore, during the time of the Cultural Revolution (1966 to 1976), this age
group was between the ages of 11 and 19 years old, and they were deprived
of any education. It should be noted that the distribution of this age group
of parents differed considerably for the birth category groups.
A total of 79% of the fathers of only children belonged to this age group,
whereas only 51% of the fathers of children with siblings belonged to this age
group. These parents were subjected to ordeals in which they were sent away
 Wan, Fan, Lin, & Jing 387

either to remote areas to do farm work or to work in factories or mines;

hence, they have not been very successful in later life careers. It is generally
known in China that these parents have very high expectations for their chil-
dren, to compensate for their own lost opportunities. They often compel their
children to study hard, and they are known to encourage them to strive to
be independent, competitive, and self-assertive at home. The higher achieve-
ment motivation of the only children over the sibling children may be due to
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

the high expectancy of this group of parents.

The difference we have cited on achievement motivation was found only
in Grade 1, not in the two higher grades. As was mentioned earlier, the chil-
dren in this age group were born after the implementation of the one-child-
per-family planning policy, and the parents were aware that their first child
would be their only child. As a result, it is highly likely that these children
received special treatment at home and in society. When the children in the
higher grades were born (before the implementation of the one-child-per-
family policy), their parents were expecting to have more children. Several
years transpired before these parents became aware that their first child was
actually to be their last child. Hence, in their early years, the only children in
the higher grades were not treated differently from children with siblings.
Thus, the superiority on achievement motivation of the only children in first
grade might be a cohort effect caused by the special circumstances of this
group of children. Later studies may well examine this group of children to
determine if this difference remains or will be diluted by the process of
schooling.
The results indicate that gender differences are influential; the girls re-
ceived higher ratings on achievement motivation and interpersonal skills
than the boys did. These differences appeared in all three grades. In the pro-
cess of socialization,children are much influenced by family members, espe-
cially by parents. This is especially true in China, where intrafamily depen-
dency is very strong. China has a long history of feudalism; parents treasure
boys much more than girls, because boys are viewed as the carriers of the
family line. This has always played a prominent part in shaping gender stereo-
types. In present-day China, boys still occupy a prominent place in the family
and receive more favorable treatment than girls. Boys are more privileged, in
general, and even more so when there is only one child in the family. The
gender differences we see occur, in part, because boys are overprotected and
thus become less competent in interpersonal skills and less achievement mo-
tivated than girls in primary schools.
As Kaur and Saraswathi (1992) pointed out, theoretical concepts origi-
nate from specific cultural backgrounds, and one must be cautious when
applying a theory to a different culture. Despite a number of studies of only
children in the West that have resulted in outcomes similar to those we found,
the conceptual framework and tools of measurement of those studies were
 388 The Journal of Genetic Psychol0g.v

adapted to Western cultures. In studying Chinese only children under China’s

unique historical and social environment, one has to consider more of Chi-
na’s indigenous characteristics.

REFERENCES
Downloaded by [Memorial University of Newfoundland] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Belmont, L., Wittes, J., & Stein, Z. A. (1976). The only child syndrome: Myth or
reality? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Life History Re-
search in Psychopathology, Forth Worth, TX.
Blake, J. (1981). The only child in America: Prejudice versus performance. Population
and Development Review, 7, 43-54.
Chen, K. (1985). A preliminary study on the affiliation of the only child. Acta Psy-
chologica Sinica. 17, 264-270.
Falbo, T., & Polit, D. F. (1986). Quantitative review of the only child literature: Re-
search evidence and theory development. Psychological Bulletin, 100, 176-1 89.
Falbo, T., & Poston. S. L., Jr. (1993). The academic, personality, and physical out-
comes of only children in China. Child Development, 64, 18-35.
Ji, G., Zhang, L., & Wan, C. (1990). Influence of family structure on behavioral char-
acteristics of primary school children. Sociological Studies, 3, 99-102.
Jiao, S., Ji, G., & Jing, Q. (1986). Comparative study of behavioral qualities of only
children and sibling children. Child Development, 57, 357-361.
Kaur, B., & Saraswathi. T. S. (1992). New directions in human development and fam-
ily studies: Research, policy and programme interface. International Journal of
PsychoIogy, 27, 333-349.
Poston, D. L., & Falbo, T. (1990). Academic performance and personality traits of
Chinese children: “Onlies” versus others. American Journal of Sociology, 96,
433-45 1.
Shanghai Preschool Education Study Group. (1980). Family education of only chil-
dren. Chinese Women, 9, 32-33.
Shaw, E. M., & Wright, M. J. (1967). Scales for the measurement of attitudes. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Wan, C., Fan, C., & Lin, G. (1984). A comparative study on certain differences in
individuality and sex-based differences between onlies and non-onlies. Acta Psy-
chologica Sinica, 16, 283-391.

Received May 11, I994