Discussing the recent Norweigian study on birth order, scholars point out an interesting implication: middle children usually get the worst deal.
I posted on the Norwegian study a few days ago, highlighting its affirmation of the fact that firstborn children typically have the highest IQs. It's important to realize that the 2.3 point IQ difference between firstborns and second-borns is quite significant. Berkeley psychologist Frank Sulloway points out that it gives firstborns a 13 percent greater chance of getting into a good college. It's equivalent to an extra 45 points on the SAT test, which can make all the difference for an admissions committee.
While the Norwegian study focused on males, the sample size was extremely large. All 18 year-olds in Norway must register for the military and take IQ tests, providing researchers with really good data to evaluate the effects of birth order. Moreover, the study's conclusions support numerous other studies conducted on men and women in several other countries. Sulloway's book Born to Rebel summarizes this evidence.
Some critics have pointed out that other factors--such as the death of a parent, or the presence of grandparents in the home--can also affect the IQ distribution in the household. This is certainly true, but it only means that birth order is not the only factor. What everyone seems to agree on is that middle children get the least parental attention. Dalton Conley, author of The Pecking Order, says that while middle children don't necessarily have the lowest IQs, they are "25 percent less likely to be sent to a private school...and they're five times more likely to be held back a grade."
To the old adage, "Choose your parents carefully," I must add a corollary, "Choose your date of conception wisely."
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 3)
16. I grew up in a family of five children, myself being the youngest. Yes, I had a bit more than the others because I came along later, but my parents just did not have the time to dote on us all the time, they were too busy.
Today folks are having less kids - one or two in most families - and parents just dote on them and give in to their every whim. They also pour their own frustrated ambitions and hopes into the one or two they have - usually to be disappointed. I agree with the wrote above who said too much attention is not always a good thing.
David S. at 3:37PM on Jul 19th 2007
17. Oh, common, only a middle child would even write or conduct such a retarded study! Don't worry, tommorow we'll see a study(maybe even double blind) where children born last get the raw deal! But wait, what if you are the 9th of 18 kids? Oh man, now that's a raw deal!!
Mari at 3:39PM on Jul 19th 2007
18. I don't think that this is true at ALL! I have tons of middle children friends, and more than half go to private school. I think 3 or 4 have skipped a grade, and 1, 2 grades. I also am the younger child, and I have an IQ of 144. My older brother has an IQ of 137. A 7 point increase in the younger child. Hmm...doesn't really fit in with your theory, now does it? Along with that, I can say that 97% of my GT friends are the younger child in their family, and about 75% of those have non-GT older siblings. Indication that they are smarter in at least 1 subject then their sibling at that age. I think that this is an article that has taken superficial birth-order LEGEND and STEREOTYPING and tried to make it into a plausible argument. As I know that it is not true to ANY extent, I will tell you all you have fallen into this trap to DISREGARD THIS ARTICLE. PLEASE.
Sophie at 4:18PM on Jul 19th 2007
19. Does it really matter where you are in the family birth order?
SAT scores for college entry actually are less relevant now more than ever. They want community service, sports, they like you to have participated at a Varsity level in at least 2, physical appearance, believe it or not and to see if it was humanly possible to belong to every damn club and take every damn class, at the highest subject level available to you.
My oldest daughter, she'll be 30, IQ 152, in the mg program, although not PC to use mentally gifted now,
Master's in World Religions is now tending bar in Hollyweird because at the age of 25 she decided she wanted to act. I support her dream and she is an excellant screenwriter and director, she pays her own bills, helps every person or animal she is able to, very caring and loving so she might get a break somewhere, somehow, someday. I am as proud of her now as I have ever been.
My youngest daughter, ice hockey player for 10 years, prep varsity and Triple A, hates school. If she likes the instructor she gets high marks, if she dislikes them, oh well, you know what occurs then. Plays LaCrosse, soccer and field hockey, even though she gets pissed that in field hockey she can't use both sides of her stick.
Guess who was bombarded the most by colleges? Hockey gal. Scouts are coming out of the friggin' wordwork!
So, who am I, birth order, scmhirth order. Love 'em all, the best you can, support their dreams, teach them tolerance and service and let go until they need you, regardless of what they need you for.
Fernando, your comment's were really necessary and relevant. Definitely made me switch parties, LOL.....
BRING OUR TROOPS HOME NOW!!!!!!!!!!!
Peace
rhodalee at 4:26PM on Jul 19th 2007
20. OK, here's some support for my claim that a difference of 3 points in IQ test results (what the study shows is the average difference between 1st and 2nd born) is INSIGNIFICANT (from http://lists.asu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9411a&L=edpolyan&D=1&F=P&T=0&P=2825)
"In fact, the reliability of most comprehensive IQ tests is in the .95 -.98 range. This means that measurement error on such tests is relatively small (2 to 5 points)."
So the BEST iq tests have an expected error of 2 to 5 points! The study DD's talking about found an average difference in IQ between 1st and 2nd children that is smaller than the expected error! In other words, the difference is INSIGNIFICANT!
Of course DD's expert, Sulloway, wants to believe that the difference is significant. This is probably because he has dedicated his career to trying to prove that all kinds of things are determined by birth order. With no real success.
Joe Bob at 5:13PM on Jul 19th 2007
21. And Sulloway's statement (according to DD) that a difference of 45 points on an SAT test can "make all the difference" is meaningless. Ten point can make all the difference, but 200 points might not be enough; it depends on where you're starting from and what the requirement is...
Joe Bob at 5:21PM on Jul 19th 2007
22. there's no truth in the study, it's just a compilation of stats. i'm the middle sibling, a black sheep, while the first and third became muck-ups in life. black sheeps rule because we're different in all aspects. we don't need attention, we go about our own ways. we're thick headed.
me gorila at 5:45PM on Jul 19th 2007
23. In another recent Norwegian study, 4 out of 5 scientists pointed out that Dinesh D'Souza could not identify his ass from his elbow.
Patrick at 11:32AM on Jul 20th 2007
24. ahh good old DD, he tries, to start race wars, he tries to make us hate all Muslims, and since none of that worked now he is going to try sibling wars. way kewl.
Mackie at 6:54PM on Jul 19th 2007
25. I am the oldest in my family and I have an unusually low IQ for an American Elder Child. My IQ has remained the same sense I was 18, 82 is my IQ. I am Bi-polar, an alcoholic/Drug Addict, and am a felon.
Cheers
Mikierotten
MikieRotten at 8:09PM on Jul 19th 2007
26. "Of course DD's expert, Sulloway, wants to believe that the difference is significant. This is probably because he has dedicated his career to trying to prove that all kinds of things are determined by birth order. With no real success
Joe Bob"
The Euros have developd some sort of ebsession with birth order, it's not just this one guy. There's a ton of foreign language articles in Euro social science circles purporting to "prove" various things associated with birth order.
The conspiracy theorists I know are convinced that the Euros are trying to create a bias against large families for some nefarious political reason.
Darkmanwp at 1:01PM on Jul 20th 2007
27. A good score on IQ test doesn't necessarily mean that one is brilliant; it simply means that they are good at taking tests.
Tony Messinger at 4:01PM on Jul 20th 2007
28. Yack, you're right Mary. Although, we weren't formally tested, formerly, either. He he. But there are occasional mistakes, and then there are posts that make anyone who was ever educated in Kentucky cringe.
I like Darkmanwp's report on the conspiracy theory in Europe. There was an article I just read somewhere about how bad it is for the planet to have more than two kids. That came from some big study, too - bet it was European! It's probably coming from single Italian men still living with their mothers, trying to come up with good reasons why there aren't any grandchildren yet.
Granted, having previously admitted to being pregnant with my third, I have good reason to make blatant attempts at discrediting it all, just to make myself feel better. Nothing like a little "I'm screwing up the planet, and my children at the same time" guilt. Glad it seems that most posters here are refuting the birth order claims. Thanks, guys.
Sarah at 2:13AM on Jul 21st 2007
29. LMAO it was just my brother and me so no middle kid to feel sorry for.
I called my brother and ask him why he thought his IQ was so much higher than mine. (mine is nothing to sneeze at) What he told me is, I was so mean to him he had to develop IQ simply to survive.
Who knew, taking a little brothers inner-tube away from him in the middle of the lake would create a nuclear engineer? All I wanted was to teach him to swim.
Thanks for the laugh, and all the fun memories from childhood.
Mackie at 11:41AM on Jul 21st 2007
30. Once again, this research is meretricious at its best. It is specious. There are far too many acceptions to the rule for this to be taken seriously. The concept of the first born being better or more intelligent is an archaic idea that is found in ancinet mythological texts like the Bible and Qur'an. It has no place in the 21st century. I am the middle child in my family. Incidentally, I also happen to be the only child who is currently attending college and that has graduated High School.
According to this research, my older brother who is the firstborn should be the most intelligent. He however, has no appreciation for culture, literature, theatre, classical music or any of things I enjoy. He likes to watch an obscene amount of television and bombard his brain with rock and roll music played so loud it will undoubtedly cause him premature hearing loss. He is currently doing day labor. What have you to say to this Dinesh?
I am also the only atheist in my family. The rest believe in things for which there is not the slightest shred of evidence simply becuase they were told it was true as children. They fail to see how trivial it all is. One could have easily been born somewhere else and taught that some other non existent deity was God. So much for critical thinking. Your articles seem to become worse in succession. There have been countless brilliant individuals throughout history who were not the firtborn. Quit posting rubbish like this.
Bob at 4:14PM on Jul 21st 2007