Monday, June 25, 2007

Which birth order position is smartest?

Each birth order position has its own unique set of characteristics and attributes. For instance, achievement and ambition is a common first born trait, while persistence and creativity is common among last borns.

We all know exceptions to the above, however there is enough evidence to support these notions.

Last week new research was released that shows one birth order position is smarter than the others

When it comes to being bright, it pays to be a first born.

A study of 250,000 Norwegians found that those raised as a first born scored on average two percent higher on IQ tests than later born brothers and sisters.

The unique design of the study helped resolve the nature-versus-nurture aspect of the debate. It included young people whose older siblings had died as babies. These people, raised as first borns, scored similar scores as eldest borns.

The study maintains that first borns benefit from all that extra one-on-one parental attention and the fact that they have to explain a great deal to their younger siblings.

This supports my own findings, which I included in my book Why first Borns rule the world and last borns want to change it (available to http://www.parentingideas.com.au/)

One-on-one attention gives first borns an edge but there are other factors that give the eldest an advantage.

Parental expectations are generally huge for first borns both behaviourally and academically. We set the bar high for the first born and then lower it for each subsequent child.

First borns also benefit from being surrounded by a great deal of adult language in their early years, which impacts on their ability to read. The quality of language younger children are exposed to is diluted by increased exposure to the language of their siblings. Quite simply, they usually don’t receive the same type of adult-initiated stimulation that the eldest sibling received. This could account to some degree for the IQ discrepancy.

Quite frankly, I don’t think it matters.

Each position in a family has its own advantages and disadvantages, benefits and drawbacks. I wouldn’t trade the people smarts I picked up from being the youngest in my family and observing all the mistakes of my siblings for a few percentage points in IQ. No way!

I am glad I didn’t have the pressure to do well that my eldest sibling experienced. My parents were quite relaxed by the time I came along and allowed me some latitude to develop free from excessive pressure to perform or conform.

First borns may indeed be smarter but they tend to take themselves and life too seriously. And their perfectionist tendencies can be a drawback.

For these reasons, the key message for parents of first borns is to loosen up and don’t put too much pressure on them. Many place enough pressure on themselves to succeed, without parents adding another layer.

First borns also crave parental approval, which can straight-jacket them into only doing activities where success (and so parental approval) is assured. That’s why first borns need more encouragement (process-oriented feedback) than praise (result-oriented feedback). Encouragement releases the pressure on first borns to please adults.

Let’s face it, first borns maybe smarter than the rest, but they can be so darn complex too!

Get a free chores guide with top tips to get kids to help at http://www.parentingideas.com.au/

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Can I ask, what about first born twins?

Anonymous said...

Both of our sons are smart.
We talk to them and teach them lots of general but "useless" things. But they remeber them!
Our first born has a heart of gold and is very intelligent.
Our second born is also intelligent but naturally streetwise with much more cunning.
Bring on the good times!

Anonymous said...

Hi Michael

If the first born is smarter and the last born is more creative, where does it leave middle borns like me? I feel left out!

Rukshana

Anonymous said...

I often wonder how this affects my kids - I have three and although the last born seems to follow the pattern, I suspect he is probably the most intelligent if tested on IQ scoring while the first two have such mixed up dynamics. My first born has severe brain damage so my middle child is the one with the expectations and responsibility - he's the one who's testing each boundary and getting to each milestone first but he certainly hasn't had any of the extra one on one time with us. I like your comment about loosening up though, it is often something I try to remind myself of!

steven trevaskis (aka Travy) said...

my first born has Behavioural problems and learning difficulties. He is in year 7 and last year we had him sit a academic test that showed him to be up to 2 years behind. My last born taught himself the alphabet backwards and also taught himself to spell the word enormous . Your test is wrong Michael

Anonymous said...

I have two daughters who are both intelligent in their own way. The first born does well academically and the second is very street wise.
I also think it depends on the age gap between first, second, and subsequent siblings, if large they may both be equally intelligent.
I think everyone is intelligent in their own way and that street smarts are more important than IQ a lot of the time in the real world.

Anonymous said...

I think the issue of intelligence is a complex one. Given the variety of enviornments children are raised in these days (defacto, half siblings, adoption, gay/lesbian, city vs. country etc), intelligence is difficult to measure. Although a traditional IQ test will give you a measure, it does not account for the small yet important skills some children have, such music playing, sports, social skills etc. It is probably more accurate to say that generally speaking, the eldest child is more likely to achieve a greater IQ score than their younger siblings.