SCHOOL OF PSYCHOLOGY
QUEEN’S UNIVERSITY BELFAST
NAME: RUTH CARVILLE
STUDENT NUMBER: 12542024
MODULE NUMBER:
MODULE TITLE: GROUP PROJECT 2
TITLE OF WORK: THE EFFECT OF BIRTH ORDER
ON PERSONALITY
DATE: 10/05/04
CONTENTS
Abstract……………………………………………page 3 Introduction………………………………………page 4 Method…………………………………………… page 9 Results.……………………………………………page 10 Discussion..………………………………………page 11 Conclusion………………………………………. page 14 References………………………………………….page15 Appendix A………………………………………….page 16 Appendix B………………………………………....page 18
ABSTRACT:
This study looked at the effect of birth order on personality. The personalities of first born, middle born, last-born and only children were measured using the Eysenck EPQ-R short scale. The hypotheses were that eldest and only children would score higher on neuroticism than the other groups, and that youngest children would score higher on psychoticism and extraversion than any other groups. Three one-way ANOVAs were carried out for each birth order position on extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism. The only significant difference found was in psychoticism (F(3,76)=2.831, p=0.044), and post hoc tests show that the difference was between eldest and only children. In conclusion, none of the hypotheses were supported, and the differences between eldest and only children on psychoticism deserve further investigation.
INTRODUCTION:
The aim of this study is to determine whether birth order has any effect on personality, using Eysenck’s EPQ-R questionnaire. The study is based on the theory of birth order proposed by Adler, and I will begin by outlining the main elements of his theory .Unlike others before, Adler’s theories concentrated on the social and cultural influences on personality, rather than the biological. He believed that a person’s family make-up, which is the first social situation we encounter, could have a profound effect on achievement, ambition, career choices and interpersonal skills. Indeed he found that the personalities of the oldest, middle and youngest child in the family were likely to be quite different (Hall and Lindzay, 1970). He proposed several traits typical of first-born, middle-born, last-born and only children and attempted to explain the reasons why these traits developed. He stated that first-born children are often subjected to pampering by their parents, which deprives the child of the opportunity to develop a sense of independence and initiative. As a result an inferiority complex arises (Derlega, Winstead and Jones, 1991). Another problem the first-born faces is the painful experience of dethronement by another sibling, which only adds to the feeling of inferiority. Adler found that these factors produced higher instances of maladjustment with peers, neurotic tendencies, even criminality and alcoholism (Adler, 1958). However, first-born children also tend to be more responsible, and are more likely to pursue careers in which a great deal of responsibility must be assumed, such as medicine.In the case of middle-born children, Adler believed them to be in a favourable position, because he or she is unlikely to be pampered (Derlega et al, 1991). As a consequence, they tend to be the most independent and most socially adept. Also, the presence of an older sibling may drive them to be high achievers, in order to compete with the older siblings. Adler found that in general, they were highly competitive, socially adept and able to assert themselves to overcome feelings of inferiority (Derlega et al, 1991). For youngest children, the observations are similar to that of the first-born. Although they never experience dethronement, they will be more likely to be pampered and spoiled, by both parents and older siblings. This can increase the risk of them developing an inferiority complex. However, like middle-born children the urge to compete with other siblings may lead them to strive for excellence. Only children have been likened to first-borns, as they both experience life without siblings, if only temporarily in the case of first-borns. The difference between them lies in the fact that the only child never experiences the trauma of dethronement and as a consequence, may overestimate their own importance and may have difficulties interacting with peers (Derlega et al, 1991).Although ideas about birth order effects have not changed significantly, most research conducted has looked at how birth order affects other factors in peoples social lives, such as choice of partner or friendship groups. A lot of research ahs also been conducted on the effect of birth order on intelligence. Some researchers have concentrated on looking at other factors which could produce the personality traits identified by Adler, such as socio-economic status, family size, gender etc. Much research has also been conducted into parenting techniques which could cause the appearance of the traits regardless of birth order.As previously stated, much research has been carried out to determine the effect of birth order on intelligence and achievement. Adams (1972) in his review of birth order research stated that one of the most common findings in the area of birth order was greater educational attainment, including college attendance, among first-borns (including only children). But what are the theories that explain this phenomenon? Adler’s theory puts this down to the fact that dethronement of the first-born leads them to strive for excellence in order to gain praise from the parents. This contradicts his theory that first-borns are likely to suffer from an inferiority complex. In fact, they are the most likely to be high achievers, and perform better, in general, on many standardised intelligence tests than their younger siblings. This could be explained however by the attitudes of parents to the successes and failures of the first-born. Hilton (1976) observed that mothers demanded more of their first-borns, were more likely to withhold affection if they did not succeed in tasks, and yet were extremely warm and affectionate toward them when they did perform well. However, some disagree and say that socio-economic status is more important than birth order. Bayer (1967) states that the oldest child reaches college age first and is thus free from intra-familial competition for scarce educational funds. However, as the older children grow up and leave home, the parents may become more financially stable and therefore be able to offer the education to the youngest child. Despite this, it is still widely recognised that higher education is mainly populated by first-borns.Other research has been conducted into external factors which may override the birth order effects proposed by Adler. This includes socio-economic factors, as I mentioned previously. Also, the number of children in the family and the age gaps between them may diminish birth order effects. For example, it was found that children born into households in which the next-oldest child is at least five years older may look more like first-born in terms of their abilities and achievements (Liebert and Liebert, 1998). This may be due to increased attention from their parents, which suggests a link between parental attention and achievement in children. Some studies have attempted to identify how sex differences can influence birth order effects, but there were not many significant findings in this area. One study conducted by Rohde (2003) found that there were sex differences on the choice of parent for emotional support, but that birth order had no effect.One of the main problems with birth order research is the complexity of the factors affecting second to last-born children. For example, as Derlega et al suggest perhaps the second born is also the first girl in the family, or the youngest child happens to be the youngest of twelve, rather than the youngest of three. This makes it difficult for a general model to be constructed, as there are so many different variables to take into account. Due to these problems, Ernst and Angst conducted a review of all the birth order research, which was published in 1983. Due to the sheer amount of variables to be controlled for, they found it difficult to find consensus within the huge body of research and found a lack of theoretical basis. However, research still continues which attempts to rectify this problem.
