Birth order is defined as a person’s rank by the sequence of birth among his or her siblings. Birth order is commonly believed to have a profound and lasting effect on psychological development.
Sulloway (1995, 1996), states that first-born siblings are expected to be rated higher on the characteristic trait of dominance whereas siblings who are younger or born later can be rated higher on the sociability aspect.
The concept of ‘birth-order’ considerably influencing the personality of a being is not a novel phenomenon. Way back in 1874, Sir Francis Galton (Galton, 1874) proposed that renowned male scientists had a greater possibility to be ‘first-borns’ in their family units rather than ‘later-born’ (Forer, 1969). Investigation and study have revealed that individuals who are born first are found in larger numbers in political office (Hudson, 1990). Zajonc, (2001) reveals that there are likely to be birth-order variation in the levels of intellect along with the ‘Big Five’ facets of character including extraversion, anxiety, meticulousness, amicability, and naivety to experience (Paulhus, Sulloway 1996, Trapnell & Chen 1999).
Sulloway (1996, 2001) has suggested a representation of family unit dynamics relating to the results of birth-order in the character and conduct, which has varied ‘‘causal mechanisms’’. In support of this, Sulloway proposes that whilst parental income is inadequate, the parents tend to focus the available resources more profoundly on a single child, usually the one who is born first. Furthermore, Sulloway infers that first-borns are better built and tougher than those born subsequently and thereby employ these competitive physical features tremendously to their benefit.
Further ‘causal mechanisms’ incorporate ‘de-identification’, where children seek to discriminate themselves from each other another with respect to significance, societal approach, individuality, and role demarcation when sometimes, brothers and sisters implement special characteristics in the families for example, “the rebel of the family”, or “the lamb of the family”, so as to lessen rivalry (Sulloway, 1996, 2001).
Then experimental verification to sustain this model of family dynamics has primarily originated from Sulloway’s (1996) ‘meta-analysis’ of one hundred and ninety six studies involving birth-order. Maintaining the hypothesis, first-born position affirmatively allied to meticulousness, anxiety, and assertiveness, whereas the category of later-born absolutely connected with amicability and ingenuousness to experience.
Sulloway further elucidated these results by proposing that first-borns have a greater propensity to accepted by parents and have great enthusiasm to fulfill parental hopes. Moreover, he states that, first-borns tend to be additionally forceful and envious so as to safeguard cherished parental assets. Sulloway further reveals that later-born children, in contrast, have a greater probability to be pleasant to facilitate the decrease of any potential hostile conflicts with their elder siblings.
Jefferson et al., (1998) too found outcomes corresponding to Sulloway’s calculations in a study conducted by him, permitting the friends, neighbors or co-workers to rate the participants instead of the participants evaluating themselves. Keeping in line with the earlier results, later-borns were recognized by their peers as displaying characteristics which were more friendly, pioneering and reliant than their first-born siblings.
Alfred Adler (1870-1937) who was an Austrian psychiatrist was among the foremost theorists proposing that birth order impacts the individuality of a person. He debated that the order in which a child is born has the potential to significantly alter the lifestyle of a person which involves several facets of the personality such as companionship, love, occupation and many other aspects of life. Adler proposes that when a second child is born, the firstborns are ‘dethroned’, thereby having the potential of influencing them permanently as younger siblings and single children are sometimes pampered.
Michael E. Lamb and Brian Sutton-Smith, elucidate the fact that relationships between siblings habitually remain for an entire life span in their book ‘Sibling Relationships: Their Nature and Significance across the Lifespan’. They highlight the ‘lifespan’ term proposing that progress within relationships is an incessant process and birth-order affects the lifelong process of development of the personality of an individual (Jefferson et al.1998) and as such research has indicated that unification of persons with dissimilar birth orders tend to be steadier than those of persons of the same birth order (Leman 1998, Toman 1976).
A Greek study affirmed that among individuals at the low birth order there is an increased risk for divorce, and debated that this consequence was predominantly apparent among single children (Skalkidou 2000).
The reason why partners’ birth order is likely to impact matrimonial strength is due to the effect of birth position of either spouse which consequently affects the personality and its development process, thereby producing specific traits in individuals bringing variations in their compatibility to others.
First-borns are likely to be dominating individuals and the subsequent unification of two individuals of the same dominating order, presents a greater likelihood of a divide. The same rule would apply to the union of two last born individuals who are likely to have comparatively unsteady relationships (Leman 1998, Toman 1976).
The reasons why birth order of individuals has the potential of affecting divorce rates is primarily due to the fact that individuals may have specific traits in their personalities such as a poorer levels of risk avoidance which may perhaps influence marriage termination pace. Personalities are known to be affected by birth order because the relations of parents with children is diverse and is to a great extent impacted by the birth order of the siblings (Ernst and Angst 1983), as a result of which dissimilar birth orders can stimulate parents to socialize in dissimilar ways with their children.
Influence of birth order in understanding of the different scientists
According to Eisenman (1992), first-borns are extra apprehensive, superior accomplishers and more innovative, resulting their lives to be extremely dissimilar merely because of them being born as a first child in the family. This may attribute to the fact that a majority of parents tend to be excessively concerned for their first children, and also may possibly be more restraining with him or her than with children born later. It is this theory that elucidates the higher risk of divorce among marriages between first-borns, because restriction is certainly interrelated with an annulment threat (Jockin et al. 1996).
Moore et al. (1997), who researched thirty nine mothers and their first and second born children of two months of age, found that mothers tend to positively influence their second-born children as compared to the first-borns, consequently resulting in the second rank children to develop a more positive personality than the first born rank.
Obviously, this behavioral difference can affect the risk of divorce given the fact that positivism and negativity in emotions are directly correlated to potential divorce risks (Jockin et al. 1996).
We can thus safely conclude that birth-order does have effects on the individual personality development and the primary aspects of extraversion, friendliness and domination, vary in relation to birth-order (Jefferson et al.,1998).
Beer and Horn (2000), implemented an innovative approach by researching a sample of adopted children, and found a similarity in proved results emphasizing that first-reared children do have an elevated intensity of meticulousness. Behavioral patterns in individuals are firmly fashioned in childhood with the profound influence of parents and siblings and therefore are likely to affect marriage stability in the life of individuals. Children who are born first along with single children have a greater likelihood of developing particular characteristic qualities, including anxiety and aspiration, resulting a child who is a first born to develop a steadier relationship with a potential later-born having dominating aspects in the persona.
However, in the case of both the marital partners being first-borns, potentially implies a higher level of conflict given that both may reflect qualities of being stubborn or less compromising behaviors. For instance, if either partner is a first-born individual, and the other is a later-born, the resultant relationship is likely to be steadier in view of the “leader-follower” kind of union, where one partner is less dominating than the other, thereby reducing the chances of disagreement between them. In the dissimilar case of both the marital partners being later-born individuals, there may be an absence of a leader in the relationship, resulting in an unsatisfying relationship between the two.
Thus we see how there is an effect of birth order on divorce risk. It is evident that single children run a lower risk of dissolving their marriages. Marriages between two first-borns are the most unstable relationships, whereas marriages between two only children are the most stable.
Ever since the 1970s, the ‘confluence model’ of Robert Zajonc has been significant in elucidating one of the most important hypothesis to explicate why firstborn children or individuals habitually achieve better scores for their intellect and accomplishment tests than other children. According to the model, firstborn children early on in their lives, primarily have greater adult authority surrounding them and as a result, they spend their preliminary childhood years intermingling in a scholarly environment. This theory also proposes that firstborn children tend to be more intelligent than ‘only children’, because ‘single children’ cannot benefit from the ‘tutor effect’ of elder siblings teaching the younger ones.
According to recent researchers conducted and reported in the journal Science (June 2007), “the eldest children in families tend to develop slightly higher IQs than their younger siblings” (Harris, Judith Rich, 2006). These results could possibly be an outcome of the valuable quality time that parents tend to spend with their children who are born first rather than those who are born later. (Price, Joseph, 2008)
The discussion as to whether birth-order affects the personality development of an individual is in no way over and expectantly new researchers will explore fresh perspectives and means in the birth-order research.
References
Adler, A. (1964). Problems of neurosis. New York: Harper and Row.
E. Beck et al. / Personality and Individual Differences.
Eisenman, R. 1992. Birth order, development and personality. Acta Paedopsychiatr. 1992;55(1):25-7.
Jockin V, M. McGue and D. Lykken (1996): Personality and divorce: a genetic analysis.
Ernst, C., & Angst, J. 1983. Birth order: Its influence on personality. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Forer, L. K. (1969). Birth-order and life roles. Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.
Galton, F. (1874). English men of science: Their nature and nurture. London: Macmillan.
Harris, Judith Rich (2006), No Two Alike: Human Nature and Human Individuality (pp. 107-112)
Hudson, V. M. (1990). Birth-order of world leaders: an exploratory analysis of effects on personality and behaviour. Political Psychology, 11, 583–601.
Jefferson, T. J., Herbst, J. H., & McCrae, R. R. (1998). Associations of birth-order and personality traits: evidence from self-reports and observer ratings. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, 498–509.
Lamb, M. E., Sutton-Smith, B. (1982). Sibling Relationships: Their Nature and Significance of the Lifespan. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Leman, K. 1998. The New Birth Order Book: Why You Are the Way You Are”.
Moore, G.A., Cohn, J.F., & Campbell, S.B. 1997. Mothers’ affective behavior with infant siblings: Stability and change. Developmental Psychology.
Paulhus, D. L., Trapnell, P. D., & Chen, D. (1999). Birth-order effects on personality and achievement within families. Psychological Science.
Price, Joseph (2008). “Parent-Child Quality Time: Does Birth Order Matter?”
Skalkidou, A. 2000. “Parental Family Variables and Likelihood of Divorce”.
Sulloway, F. J. (1995). Birth-order and evolutionary psychology: a meta-analytic overview. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 75–80.
Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to rebel: Birth-order, family dynamics, and creative lives. New York: Pantheon Books.
Sulloway, F. J. (2001). Birth-order, sibling competition, and human behavior. In H. R. Holcomb, III (Ed.), Conceptual challenges in evolutionary psychology: Innovative research strategies. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Toman, W. Family Constellation 1976, New York: Springer.
Zajonc, R. B. (2001). The family dynamics of intellectual development. American Psychologist, 56, 490–496.