Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Handout 2 - Birth Position Debunked
Handout 2 - Birth Position Debunked
debunked
Posted Wed 19 Oct 2015
By Dani Cooper
However, the paper, published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, supported
10 earlier findings that the first child in a family was likely to be more intelligent. Co-author Julia Rohrer, from the
University of Leipzig, said the link between birth order and personality was first mooted in the early 1900s by
psychiatrist and philosopher Alfred Adler — the second of six children.
He claimed firstborns were privileged, but also burdened by feelings of excessive responsibility and a fear of
dethronement and were more likely to score high on neuroticism. However, the idea became firmly entrenched
in the modern era when United States academic, Professor Frank Sullaway, developed the Family Niche
Theory of birth-order effects in 1996. Based on Darwin's theories of evolution, he argued that siblings adapted
20 to certain roles within the family to reduce competition and enhanced the family unit's "fitness". According to
Professor Sulloway's theory, because firstborns were physically superior to their siblings at a young age, they
were more likely to show dominant behaviour and become less agreeable. Laterborns, searching for other
ways to assert themselves, tended to rely on social support and become more sociable and thus more
extroverted.
To test Professor Sullaway's theory, Ms Rohrer's team used data from three large national studies in Great
Britain, the US and Germany. The team undertook a range of analyses and looked for effects that were evident
35 within families and also more generally expressed across all families. "We tried our best, but we simply couldn't
find the majority of the expected effects in our data sets," she said. Their finding that birth order had no lasting
impact on later personality traits was consistent across all three national studies, across the different measures
of personality and across the participants' whole of life span, she said. The study could be the final nail in the
coffin of Professor Sullaway's theory. Ms Rohrer said there was now a large body of work that had been unable
40 to detect the birth-order effects as predicted by the Family Niche Theory. "Rationally, we might want to abandon
its main ideas or maybe modify its content in a way that it is more in line with empirical findings," she said.
Firstborn IQ effects 'rather humble'
Ms Rohrer said the study did confirm IQ is impacted by birth order and said it was likely this was due to social
effects rather than biological. "One theory is that later children 'dilute' the resources of the parents, including
45 attention," she said.
The effect does not imply that every firstborn is slightly more intelligent than his
or her younger siblings.
While the firstborn gets full parental attention for at least some time, laterborns would have to "share" from the
beginning. Another possible contributing factor was that a firstborn could "tutor" their younger siblings,
50 explaining to them how the world worked. "Teaching other people has high cognitive demands," Ms Rohrer
said. "The children need to recall their own knowledge, structure it and think of a good way to explain it to
youngsters, which could be a boost to intelligence for some firstborns."
However, she said the IQ effects were "rather humble" and not deterministic. "The effect does not imply that
every firstborn is slightly more intelligent than his or her younger siblings. It means that if you assess the
55 intelligence of a large number of sibships, you will find more sibships in which the firstborn is smarter than
sibships in which the laterborn is smarter," she said. "So as a thirdborn, you could very well be more intelligent
than your older siblings, and birth order is only one of multiple factors that can contribute to differences in
intelligence amongst siblings."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2015-10-20/birth-order-personality-theory-debunked/6866990