birth order essays

Birth Order and Its Influence on Personality Essay

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.

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.

Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, August 17). Birth Order and Its Influence on Personality. https://ivypanda.com/essays/birth-order-and-its-influence-on-personality/

"Birth Order and Its Influence on Personality." IvyPanda , 17 Aug. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/birth-order-and-its-influence-on-personality/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Birth Order and Its Influence on Personality'. 17 August.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Birth Order and Its Influence on Personality." August 17, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/birth-order-and-its-influence-on-personality/.

1. IvyPanda . "Birth Order and Its Influence on Personality." August 17, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/birth-order-and-its-influence-on-personality/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Birth Order and Its Influence on Personality." August 17, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/birth-order-and-its-influence-on-personality/.

How to Define Entrepreneurship?
The Development Psychology: Parents’ Probability of Having Another Children
Birth Order and Academic Performance
Birth Order, Its Effects With Step Siblings
Single Parent and Child Language Development
Letter to the Hebrews in the Biblical Aspect
Theology and Context of the Colossians Christ Hymn
Family Therapy Journal: The Case of Lincolns
Children Relationships With Their Siblings
The Common Sense Science
Early Childhood Memories Impact on Artists’ Journey
Psychology of Personality, Work and Organizations
Psychology of Work & Organisation and Personality
Personal Identity in "Dark Matter" by Blake Crouch
Adverse Childhood Events: Maria's Case

Bipolar Disorder
Therapy Center
When To See a Therapist
Types of Therapy
Best Online Therapy
Best Couples Therapy
Best Family Therapy
Managing Stress
Sleep and Dreaming
Understanding Emotions
Self-Improvement
Healthy Relationships
Student Resources
Personality Types
Guided Meditations
Verywell Mind Insights
2023 Verywell Mind 25
Mental Health in the Classroom
Editorial Process
Meet Our Review Board
Crisis Support

How Does Birth Order Shape Your Personality?

Beware the stereotypes

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Yolanda Renteria, LPC, is a licensed therapist, somatic practitioner, national certified counselor, adjunct faculty professor, speaker specializing in the treatment of trauma and intergenerational trauma.

Verywell Mind / Getty Images

What Is Adler’s Birth Order Theory?

First-born child, middle child.

Impact on Relationships

Debunking Myths and Limitations

Birth order refers to the order a child is born in relation to their siblings, such as whether they are first-born, middle-born, or last-born. You’ve probably heard people joke about how the eldest child is the bossy one, the middle child is the peace-maker, and the youngest child is the irresponsible rebel—but is there any truth to these stereotypes?

Psychologists often look at how birth order can affect development, behavior patterns, and personality characteristics, and there is some evidence that birth order might play a role in certain aspects of personality .

At a Glance

Researchers often explore how birth order, including the differences in parental expectations and sibling dynamics, can affect development and character. According to some researchers, firstborns, middle children, youngest-children, and only child-children often exhibit distinctive characteristics that are strongly influenced by how birth order shapes parental and sibling behaviors.

Early in the 20th century, the Austrian psychiatrist Alfred Adler introduced the idea that birth order could impact development and personality. Adler, the founder of individual psychology, was heavily influenced by psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud .

Key points of Adler's birth order theory were that firstborns were more likely to develop a strong sense of responsibility, middleborns a desire for attention, and lastborns a sense of adventure and rebellion.

Adler also notably introduced the concept of the " family constellation ." This idea emphasizes the dynamics that form between family members and how these interactions play a part in shaping individual development.

Adler's birth order theory suggests that firstborns get more attention and time from their parents. New parents are still learning about child-rearing, which means that they may be more rule-oriented, strict, cautious, and sometimes even neurotic .

They are often described as responsible leaders with Type A personalities , a phenomenon sometimes referred to as " oldest-child syndrome ."

"Older siblings, regardless of gender, often feel more deprived or envious since they have experienced having another child divert attention away from them at some point in their lives. They tend to be more success-oriented,” explains San Francisco therapist Dr. Avigail Lev.

Firstborn children are often described as:

High-achieving (or sometimes even over-achieving )
Structured and organized
Responsible

All this extra attention firstborns enjoy changes abruptly when younger siblings come along. When you become an older sibling, you suddenly have to share your parent's attention. You may feel that your parents have higher expectations for you and look to you to set an example for your younger siblings.

Consider the experiences of the oldest siblings, who are frequently tasked with caring for younger siblings. Because they are often expected to help fill the role of caregivers, they may be more nurturing, responsible, and motivated to excel.

Such traits are affected not only by birth order but also by how your position in the family affects your parent's expectations and your relationship with your younger siblings.

Research has found that firstborn kids tend to have more advanced cognitive development , which may also confer advantages when it comes to school readiness skills. However, it's important to remember that being the oldest child can also come with challenges, including carrying the weight of expectations and the burden of taking a caregiver role within the family.

Adler suggested that middle children tend to become the family’s peacemaker since they often have to mediate conflicts between older and younger siblings. Because they tend to be overshadowed by their eldest siblings, middle children may seek social attention outside of the family.

In families with three children, the youngest male sibling is likely to be more passive or easy-going.

Middleborns are often described as:

Independent
Peacemakers
People pleasers
Attention-seeking
Competitive

While they tend to be adaptable and independent, they can also have a rebellious streak that tends to emerge when they want to stand apart from their siblings.

" Middle child syndrome " is a term often used to describe the negative effects of being a middle child. Because middle kids are sometimes overlooked, they may engage in people-pleasing behaviors as adults as a way to garner attention and favor in their lives.

While research is limited, some studies have shown that middle kids are less likely to feel close to their mothers and are more likely to have problems with delinquency.

Some research suggests that middle children may be more sensitive to rejection . As a middle child, you may feel like you didn't get as much attention and were constantly in competition with your siblings. You may struggle with feelings of insecurity, fear of rejection, and poor self-confidence .

Lastborns, often referred to as the "babies" of the family, are often seen as spoiled and pampered compared to their older siblings. Because parents are more experienced at this point (and much busier), they often take a more laissez-faire approach to parenting .

Last-born children are sometimes described as:

Free-spirited
Manipulative
Self-centered
Risk-taking

Adler's theory suggests that the youngest children tend to be outgoing, sociable, and charming. While they often have more freedom to explore, they also often feel overshadowed by their elder siblings, referred to as " youngest child syndrome ."

Because parents are sometimes less strict and disciplined with last-borns, these kids may have fewer self-regulation skills.

"If the youngest of many children is female, she tends to be more coddled or cared for, leading to a greater reliance on others compared to her older siblings, especially in larger families," Lev suggests.

Only children are unique in that they never have to share their parents' attention and resources with a sibling. It can be very much like being a firstborn in many ways. These kids may be doted on by their caregivers, but never have younger siblings to interact with, which may have an impact on development.

Only children are often described as:

Perfectionistic
High-achieving
Imaginative
Self-reliant

Because they interact with adults so much, only children often seem very mature for their age. If you're an only child, you may feel more comfortable being alone and enjoy spending time in solitude pursuing you own creative ideas. You may like having control and, because of your parents' high expectations, have strong perfectionist tendencies .

How Birth Order Influences Relationships

Birth order may affect relationships in a wide variety of ways. For example, it may impact how you form connections with other people. It can also affect how you behave within these relationships.

Dr. Lev suggests that the effects of birth order can differ depending on gender.

"For instance, in a family with two female siblings, the younger one often appears more confident and empowered, while the older one is more achievement-focused and insecure," she explains.

She also suggests that there is often a notable rivalry between same-sex siblings versus that of mixed-gender siblings. Again, this effect can vary depending on gender. Where an older sister might be less secure and the younger sister more secure, the opposite is often true when it comes to older and younger brothers.

"This could be because older sisters often assume a motherly role, while older brothers might take on more of a bully role. As a result, younger brothers are generally more insecure, whereas younger sisters tend to be more confident than their older siblings," she explains.

Some other potential effects include:

Communication

Birth order can affect how you communicate with others, which can have a powerful impact on relationship dynamics.

Firstborns and only children are often seen as more direct, which others can sometimes interpret as bossy or controlling.
Middle children may be less confrontational and more likely to look for solutions that will accommodate everyone.
Lastborns, on the other hand, may rely more on their sense of humor and charm to guide their social interactions.

Relationship Roles

Birth order may also influence the roles that you take on in a relationship.

Firstborns, for example, may be more likely to take on a caregiver role. This can be nurturing and supportive, but it can sometimes make partners feel like they are being "parented."
Middle children are more likely to be flexible and take a more easygoing approach.
Lastborns may be more carefree and less rigid.

Expectations

What we expect from relationships can sometimes also be influenced by birth order.

Firstborns often have high expectations of themselves and others, sometimes leading to criticism when people fall short.
Middle children are more prone to seek balance in relationships and want to make sure that everyone is treated fairly and contributing equally.
Lastborns may place the burden of responsibility on their partner's shoulders while they take a more laissez-faire approach.

"Generally, older siblings are more likely to be in the scapegoat role, while the youngest siblings often have a more idealized view of the family," Lev explains.

Other Factors Play a Role

How birth order influences interpersonal relationships can also be influenced by other factors. Some of these include personality differences, parenting styles , the parents' relationship with one another, and even the birth order of the parents themselves.

While birth order theory holds a popular position in culture, much of the available evidence suggests that it likely only has a minimal impact on developmental outcomes. In other words, birth order is only one of many factors that affect how we grow and learn.

While some research suggests that there are some small personality differences between the oldest and youngest siblings, researchers have concluded that there are no significant differences in personality or cognitive abilities based on birth order.

Birth order doesn't exist in a vacuum. Genetics, socioeconomic status, family resources, health factors, parenting styles, and other environmental variables influence child development. Other family factors, such as age spacing between siblings, sibling gender, and the number of kids in a family, can also moderate the effects of birth order.

Adler’s birth order theory suggests that the order in which you are born into your family can have a lasting impact on your behavior, emotions, and relationships with other people. While there is some support indicating that birth order can affect people in small ways, keep in mind that it is just one part of the developmental puzzle.

Family dynamics are complex, which means that your relationships with both your parents and siblings are influenced by factors like genetics, environment, child temperament, and socioeconomic status.

In other words, there may be some truth to the idea that firstborns get more attention (and responsibility), that middleborns get less attention (and more independence), and that lastborns get more freedom (and less discipline). But the specific dynamics in your family might hinge more on things like resources and parenting styles than on whether you arrived first, middle, or last.

Individual aspects of your own personality are shaped by many things, but you may find it helpful to reflect on your own experiences in your family and consider the influence that birth order might have had.

Damian RI, Roberts BW. Settling the debate on birth order and personality . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences . 2015;112(46):14119-14120. doi:10.1073/pnas.1519064112

Luo R, Song L, Chiu I. A closer look at the birth order effect on early cognitive and school readiness development in diverse contexts . Frontiers in Psychology . 2022;13. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.871837

Salmon CA, Daly M. Birth order and familial sentiment . Evolution and Human Behavior . 1998;19(5):299-312. doi:10.1016/S1090-5138(98)00022-1

Cundiff PR. Ordered delinquency: the "effects" of birth order on delinquency . Pers Soc Psychol Bull . 2013;39(8):1017-1029. doi:10.1177/0146167213488215

Çabuker ND, Batık HESBÇMV. Does psychological birth order predict identity perceptions of individuals in emerging adulthood? International Online Journal of Educational Sciences. 2020;12(5):164–176.

Damian RI, Roberts BW. The associations of birth order with personality and intelligence in a representative sample of U.S. high school students . Journal of Research in Personality . 2015;58:96-105. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2015.05.005

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

The Birth Order: Shaping Personalities and Family Dynamics

This essay about the influence of birth order on individual development and family dynamics explores how a person’s position among siblings can affect their leadership qualities, sense of responsibility, competitiveness, and identity formation. It discusses the distinct characteristics typically associated with firstborns, middle children, youngest siblings, and only children, highlighting how each position comes with its own set of expectations and challenges. Firstborns often emerge as responsible leaders, middle children develop diplomatic and competitive traits, youngest siblings enjoy freedom that fosters independence and creativity, and only children blend qualities of maturity with individualism. The essay underscores the complex interplay between birth order and personal development, illustrating how these factors contribute to the diverse roles within a family. Through examining the unique dynamics and personality traits shaped by sibling order, the essay sheds light on the intricate dance of personalities within familial relationships. Additionally, PapersOwl presents more free essays samples linked to Sibling.

How it works

The influence of birth sequence on an individual’s character and family dynamics has captivated scholars and enthusiasts alike for generations. This discourse delves into the intricate ways in which one’s placement among siblings can shape various facets of personal growth, including leadership inclinations, accountability, competitive spirit, and the formation of self-identity. The nuanced interplay of these elements not only sculpts the individual but also orchestrates a distinctive symphony of interactions and anticipations within the familial milieu.

The eldest offspring often assume a natural mantle of leadership within the familial enclave.

Endowed with undivided parental attention and expectations, they may cultivate a profound sense of duty from an early juncture. This focalization on the primogeniture could foster achievers par excellence, yet concurrently impose a ponderous yoke of maternal and paternal aspirations. The inaugural sibling’s role as the familial vanguard frequently translates into adept leadership skills and a steadfast adherence to familial mores and anticipations, epitomizing a paradigm for subsequent siblings to emulate or defy.

Betwixt the pioneering senior and the emancipated junior lies the realm of middle children, who often carve out a distinct niche within the family hierarchy. Their ordinal positioning engenders a diplomatic adaptability, as they oscillate between leading and following. This circumstance may foment a competitive spirit as they vie for a unique niche in the familial pecking order, fostering a robust sense of individualism. The middle child’s odyssey is painted by a perpetual balancing act, as they navigate their identity amidst the overshadowing presence of the elder and the oft-indulged younger, potentially cultivating adept social acumen and conciliatory tendencies.

The youngest progeny typically relish a more unshackled upbringing, as parents may adopt a more lenient or hands-off approach. Liberated from the intense scrutiny and expectations bestowed upon their elder counterparts, the youngest frequently cultivate a potent sense of autonomy and ingenuity. Nonetheless, this position can sow the seeds of competitiveness, as they endeavor to match or surpass the achievements of their siblings, occasionally laboring under a looming shadow that propels them toward forging distinct accomplishments and identities.

Sole heirs, devoid of sibling companionship, embark on a distinctive developmental odyssey. The solitary focus of parental attention renders only children akin to their elder counterparts in maturity and accountability, albeit with an augmented sense of individualism and self-reliance. The absence of sibling rivalry begets a tranquil milieu for personal evolution, albeit at the potential cost of reduced opportunities for familial interaction and conflict resolution.

Each birth order confers a distinct array of expectations, privileges, and hurdles that mold personality development and familial dynamics. Leadership, accountability, and competitiveness manifest divergently across the sibling spectrum, contributing to the diverse roles and personas that emerge within the familial framework. The eldest may bear the burden of expectation, the middle child the impetus for differentiation, the youngest the latitude for innovation, and the only child the liberty for introspection.

In summation, the sway of birth sequence on individual evolution and familial dynamics is a labyrinthine tapestry interwoven with interdependent elements. Leadership, accountability, competitiveness, and identity formation are all inflected by the nuanced roles siblings occupy within their kinship structures. These roles not only delineate paths of personal maturation but also the singular ethos each family espouses. Unraveling the influence of birth order yields valuable insights into individual comportment and familial rapport, unveiling the intricate choreography of personalities that defines the essence of kinship bonds.

Cite this page

The Birth Order: Shaping Personalities and Family Dynamics. (2024, Mar 01). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-birth-order-shaping-personalities-and-family-dynamics/

"The Birth Order: Shaping Personalities and Family Dynamics." PapersOwl.com , 1 Mar 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-birth-order-shaping-personalities-and-family-dynamics/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Birth Order: Shaping Personalities and Family Dynamics . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-birth-order-shaping-personalities-and-family-dynamics/ [Accessed: 17 Apr. 2024]

"The Birth Order: Shaping Personalities and Family Dynamics." PapersOwl.com, Mar 01, 2024. Accessed April 17, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-birth-order-shaping-personalities-and-family-dynamics/

"The Birth Order: Shaping Personalities and Family Dynamics," PapersOwl.com , 01-Mar-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-birth-order-shaping-personalities-and-family-dynamics/. [Accessed: 17-Apr-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

The Reporter

New Evidence on the Impacts of Birth Order

What determines a child's success? We know that family matters — children from higher socioeconomic status families do better in school, get more education, and earn more.

However, even beyond that, there is substantial variation in success across children within families. This has led researchers to study factors that relate to within-family differences in children's outcomes. One that has attracted much interest is the role played by birth order, which varies systematically within families and is exogenously determined.

While economists have been interested in understanding human capital development for many decades, compelling economic research on birth order is more recent and has largely resulted from improved availability of data. Early work on birth order was hindered by the stringent data requirements necessary to convincingly identify the effects of birth order. Most importantly, one needs information on both family size and birth order. As there is only a third-born child in a family with at least three children, comparing third-borns to firstborns across families of different sizes will conflate the birth order effect with a family size effect, so one needs to be able to control for family size. Additionally, it is beneficial to have information on multiple children from the same family so that birth order effects can be estimated from within-family differences in child outcomes; otherwise, birth order effects will be conflated with other effects that vary systematically with birth order, such as cohort effects. Large Scandinavian register datasets that became available to researchers beginning in the late 1990s have enabled birth order research, as they contain population data on both family structure and a variety of child outcomes. Here, I describe my research with a number of coauthors, using these data to explore the effects of birth order on outcomes including human capital accumulation, earnings, development of cognitive and non-cognitive skills, and health.

Birth Order and Economic Success

Almost a half-century ago, economists including Gary Becker, H. Gregg Lewis, and Nigel Tomes created models of quality-quantity trade-offs in child-rearing and used these models to explore the role of family in children's success. They sought to explain an observed negative correlation between family income and family size: if child quality is a normal good, as income rises the family demands higher-quality children at the cost of lower family size. 1

However, this was a difficult model to test, as characteristics other than family income and child quality vary with family size. The introduction of natural experiments, combined with newly available large administrative datasets from Scandinavia, made testing such a model possible.

In my earliest work on the topic, Paul Devereux, Kjell Salvanes, and I took advantage of the Norwegian administrative dataset and set out to better understand this theoretical quantity-quality tradeoff. 2 It became clear that child "quality" was not a constant within a family — children within families were quite different, despite the model assumptions to the contrary. Indeed, we found that birth order could explain a large fraction of the family size differential in children's educational outcomes. Average educational attainment was lower in larger families largely because later-born children had lower average education, rather than because firstborns had lower education in large families than in small families. We found that firstborns had higher educational attainment than second-borns who in turn did better than third-borns, and so on. These results were robust to a variety of specifications; most importantly, we could compare outcomes of children within the same families.

To give a sense of the magnitude of these effects: The difference in educational attainment between the first child and the fifth child in a five-child family is roughly equal to the difference between the educational attainment of blacks and whites calculated from the 2000 Census. We augmented the education results by examining earnings, whether full-time employed, and whether one had a child as a teenager as additional outcome variables, and found strong evidence for birth order effects, particularly for women. Later-born women have lower earnings (whether employed full-time or not), are less likely to work full-time, and are more likely to have their first child as teenagers. In contrast, while later-born men have lower full-time earnings, they are not less likely to work full-time [Figure 1].

Birth Order and Cognitive Skills

One possible explanation for these differences is that cognitive ability varies systematically by birth order. In subsequent work, Devereux, Salvanes, and I examined the effect of birth order on IQ scores. 3

The psychology literature has long debated the role of birth order in determining children's IQs; this debate was seemingly resolved when, in 2000, J. L. Rodgers et al. published a paper in American Psychologist entitled "Resolving the Debate Over Birth Order, Family Size, and Intelligence" that referred to the apparent relationship between birth order and IQ as a "methodological illusion." 4 However, this work was limited due to the absence of large representative datasets necessary to identify these effects. We again used population register data from Norway to estimate this relationship.

To measure IQ, we used the outcomes of standardized cognitive tests administered to Norwegian men between the age of 18 and 20 when they enlist in the military. Consistent with our earlier findings on educational attainment but in contrast to the previous work in the literature, we found strong birth order effects on IQ that are present when we look within families. Later-born children have lower IQs, on average, and these differences are quite large. For example, the difference between firstborn and second-born average IQ is on the order of one-fifth of a standard deviation, or about three IQ points. This translates into approximately a 2 percent difference in annual earnings in adulthood.

The Effect of Birth Order on Non-Cognitive Skills

Personality is another factor that is posited to vary by birth order, a proposition that has been particularly difficult to assess in a compelling way due to the paucity of large datasets containing information on individual personality. In recent work on the topic, Erik Gronqvist, Bjorn Ockert, and I use Swedish administrative datasets to examine this issue. 5

In the economics literature, personality traits are often referred to as non-cognitive abilities and denote traits that can be distinguished from intelligence. 6 To measure "personality" (or non-cognitive skills), we use the outcome of a standardized psychological evaluation, conducted by a certified psychologist, that is performed on all Swedish men between the ages of 18 and 20 when they enlist in the military, and which is strongly related to success in the labor market. An individual is given a higher score if he is considered to be emotionally stable, persistent, socially outgoing, willing to assume responsibility, and able to take initiative. Similar to the results for cognitive skills, we find evidence of consistently lower scores in this measure for later-born children. Third-born children have non-cognitive abilities that are 0.2 standard deviations below firstborn children. Interestingly, boys with older brothers suffer almost twice as much in terms of these personality characteristics as boys with older sisters.

Importantly, we also demonstrate that these personality differences translate into differences in occupation choice by birth order. Firstborn children are significantly more likely to be employed and to work as top managers, while later-born children are more likely to be self-employed. More generally, firstborn children are more likely to be in occupations requiring sociability, leadership ability, conscientiousness, agreeableness, emotional stability, extraversion, and openness.

The Effect of Birth Order on Health

Finally, how do these differences translate into later health? In more recent work, Devereux, Salvanes, and I analyze the effect of birth order on health. 7 There is a sizable body of literature about the relationship between birth order and adult health; individual studies have typically examined only one or a small number of health outcomes and, in many cases, have used relatively small samples. Again, we use large nationally representative data from Norway to identify the relationship between birth order and health when individuals are in their 40s, where health is measured along a number of dimensions, including medical indicators, health behaviors, and overall life satisfaction.

The effects of birth order on health are less straightforward than other outcomes we have examined, as firstborns do better on some dimensions and worse on others. We find that the probability of having high blood pressure declines with birth order, and the largest gap is between first- and second-borns. Second-borns are about 3 percent less likely to have high blood pressure than firstborns; fifth-borns are about 7 percent less likely to have high blood pressure than firstborns. Given that 24 percent of this population has high blood pressure, this is quite a large difference. Firstborns are also more likely to be overweight and obese. Compared with second-borns, firstborns are 4 percent more likely to be overweight and 2 percent more likely to be obese. The equivalent differences between fifth-borns and firstborns are 10 percent and 5 percent. For context, 47 percent of the population is overweight and 10 percent is obese. Once again, the magnitudes are quite large.

However, later-borns are less likely to consider themselves to be in good health, and measures of mental health generally decline with birth order. Later-born children also exhibit worse health behaviors. The number of cigarettes smoked daily increases monotonically with birth order, suggesting that the higher prevalence of smoking by later-borns found among U.S. adolescents by Laura M. Argys et al. 8 may persist throughout adulthood and, hence, have important effects on health outcomes.

Possible Mechanisms

Why are adult outcomes likely to be affected by birth order? A host of potential explanations has been proposed across several academic disciplines.

A number of biological factors may explain birth order effects. These relate to changes in the womb environment or maternal immune system that occur over successive births. Beyond biology, parents could have other influences. Childhood inputs, especially in the first years of life, are considered crucial for skill formation. 9 Firstborn children have the full attention of parents, but as families grow the family environment is diluted and parental resources become scarcer. 10 In contrast, parents are more experienced and tend to have higher incomes when raising later-born children. In addition, for a given amount of resources, parents may treat firstborn children differently than second- or later-born children. Parents may use more strict parenting practices toward the firstborn, so as to gain a reputation for "toughness" necessary to induce good behavior among later-borns. 11

There are also theories that suggest that interactions among siblings can shape birth order effects. For example, based on evolutionary psychology, Frank J. Sulloway suggests that firstborns have an advantage in following the status quo, while later-borns — by having incentives to engage in investments aimed at differentiating themselves — become more sociable and unconventional in order to attract parental resources. 12

In each of these papers, we attempted to identify potential mechanisms for the patterns we observed. However, it is here we see the limitations of these large administrative datasets, as for the most part, we lack necessary detailed information on biological factors and on household dynamics when the children are young. However, we do have some evidence on the role of biological factors. Later-born children tend to have better birth outcomes as measured by factors such as birth weight. In our Swedish data, we took advantage of the fact that some children's biological birth order is different from their environmental birth order, due to the death of an older sibling or because their parent gave up a child for adoption. When we examine this subsample, we find that the birth order effect on occupational choice is entirely driven by the environmental birth order, again suggesting that biological factors may not be central.

Also in our Swedish study, we found that firstborn teenagers are more likely to read books, spend more time on homework, and spend less time watching TV or playing video games. Parents spend less time discussing school work with later-born children, suggesting there may be differences in parental time investments. Using Norwegian data, we found that smoking early in pregnancy is more prevalent for first pregnancies than for later ones. However, women are more likely to quit smoking during their first pregnancy than during later ones, and firstborns are more likely to be breastfed. These findings suggest that early investments may systematically benefit firstborns and help explain their generally better outcomes.

In the past two decades, with the increased accessibility of administrative datasets on large swaths of the population, economists and other researchers have been better able to identify the role of birth order in the outcomes of children. There is strong evidence of substantial differences by birth order across a range of outcomes. While I have described several of my own papers on the topic, a number of other researchers have also taken advantage of newly available datasets in Florida and Denmark to examine the role of birth order on other important outcomes, specifically juvenile delinquency and later criminal behavior. 13 Consistent with the work discussed here, later-born children experience higher rates of delinquency and criminal behavior; this is at least partly attributable to time investments of parents.

Researchers

A Closer Look at the Birth Order Effect on Early Cognitive and School Readiness Development in Diverse Contexts

1 Department of Psychology, Rutgers University–Camden, Camden, NJ, United States

2 Department of Early Childhood Education/Art Education, Brooklyn College, The City University of New York, New York, NY, United States

I-Ming Chiu

3 Department of Economics, Rutgers University–Camden, Camden, NJ, United States

Associated Data

The data analyzed in this study was obtained from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort study. Access to the restricted-use datasets can be requested at: https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birthdatainformation.asp .

Using the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort data, we examined the effect of birth order (firstborn vs. later-born) on children's cognitive skills at 24 months and school readiness (i.e., math and literacy) skills at age 4 years. Previous research in the U.S. using predominantly English-speaking, low-risk samples suggests that firstborns tend to show better early cognitive and school readiness skills than later-born children. However, results of the current study showed that although there was a firstborn advantage in low-risk or English-speaking families, in high-risk or language minority families, later-born children showed equivalent or even better skills than firstborn children. Our moderated mediation models revealed that children's engagement in home learning activities mediated the relation between birth order and developmental outcomes, and families' cumulative risks and language minority status moderated the mediation pathways. These findings underscore the complex associations between birth order and early development in diverse ecological contexts.

Introduction

The effect of birth order on early childhood development has attracted extensive research interests in the past decades. While the classic birth order theories (Blake, 1981 ; Zajonc, 1983 ) recognize the limitation of family resources and propose a firstborn advantage, the social learning theories highlight the supportive role of older siblings through positive sibling relationships and interactions (Bandura, 1977 ; Whiteman et al., 2011 ). Furthermore, family dynamics are subject to contextual influences (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ), calling for a consideration of the diverse family contexts when examining the birth order effect.

In the current study, we used a US, nationally representative dataset, the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), to examine the effect of birth order on children's cognitive skills during toddlerhood and school readiness (i.e., literacy and math) skills at preschool. These early skills set the foundation for children's long-term academic success (Duncan et al., 2007 ; Ricciardi et al., 2021 ). Specifically, we asked whether the effect of birth order was mediated by home learning environment, and whether the birth order effect and the mediation pathways were moderated by two contextual factors, children's exposure to cumulative risks and language minority experiences.

Classic Birth Order Theories

Classic birth order theories, including the resource dilution theory and the confluence theory, primarily focus on the distribution of family resources. The resource dilution theory posits that a family's human capital (e.g., parental attention, quality time with parents), physical (e.g., books, toys), and financial resources are distributed among siblings (Blake, 1981 ). Firstborn children have exclusive access to family resources early on, thereby receiving more resources than later-born children. The confluence theory states that the number of children curtail the amount and quality of intellectual resources at home (Zajonc, 1983 ). Firstborn children tend to experience higher-quality home environment than their later-born siblings, and consequently achieve more advanced developmental outcomes.

Evidence of the Firstborn Advantage

In line with these theoretical hypotheses, previous studies have revealed a firstborn advantage in early cognitive development. Studies using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 (NLSY79) have found that firstborn children outperformed later-born children in cognitive assessments at ages 0–3 years, after controlling for characteristics of the child and family (Heiland, 2009 ; Lehmann et al., 2018 ). Similarly, firstborn children have been found to show an advantage in general cognitive development at age 4, measured by combined assessments of early verbal, perceptual-performance, and quantitative skills (Barreto et al., 2017 ).

Few studies have directly examined the association between birth order and early literacy skills. There is some evidence that firstborn preschoolers showed better reading skills (Lehmann et al., 2018 ), non-word and sentence repetition, and word reasoning skills (Barreto et al., 2017 ) than later-born children. Other studies have suggested a firstborn advantage in important precursors of literacy development, including children's vocabulary and grammatical skills (Hoff-Ginsberg, 1998 ; Berglund et al., 2005 ; Hoff, 2006 ) and vocabulary growth rate (Zambrana et al., 2012 ) during toddlerhood. However, some researchers have argued that the firstborn advantage in vocabulary was observed in maternal report but not in child speech or standardized tests (Bornstein et al., 2004 ).

In terms of math skills, some studies have documented a firstborn advantage in children's math skills during preschool years (Barreto et al., 2017 ; Lehmann et al., 2018 ). Yet, there is evidence that the effect of birth order might be weaker for math and non-verbal skills than for verbal cognitive and literacy skills (Pavan, 2016 ; Peyre et al., 2016 ; Lehmann et al., 2018 ). Researchers have argued that some mathematical skills are more likely to be learned at school rather than at home, which might make math skills less susceptible to the influences of birth order (Lehmann et al., 2018 ). Together, these findings suggest a nuanced relation between birth order and early development, highlighting the importance of understanding the mechanisms behind the birth order effect.

The Mediating Role of Home Learning Environment

According to the birth order theories, one potential mechanism through which birth order is associated with early childhood development is the home learning environment, which is often measured as children's engagement in learning activities at home (e.g., book-reading, storytelling, etc. Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2019 ). Firstborn and later-born children may experience different learning environment at home, which may in turn result in disparities in their developmental outcomes.

Some previous studies have shown that being firstborn is positively associated with the quantity and quality of child-directed speech from parents (Hoff, 2006 ), cognitive stimulation (Peyre et al., 2016 ), the frequency of shared reading (Raikes et al., 2006 ), and the amount of quality time spent with parents (Price, 2008 ). Similarly, using the ECLS-B dataset, Workman ( 2017 ) found that the addition of a new sibling was negatively associated with changes in the frequency of learning activities (e.g., storytelling) from 9 to 24 months. There is some, albeit limited, evidence of the mediating effect of home learning environment. In one study, parental use of cognitive and linguistic stimulations and the quality of parent-child interactions when children were 2 years old partially mediated the effect of birth order on children's cognitive skills at age 4 years (Barreto et al., 2017 ). Another study suggested that, parents spent less time teaching and reading to their later-born children, engaged in learning activities less frequently with their later-born children, and provided fewer age-appropriate toys at home for later-borns (Lehmann et al., 2018 ). These differences in home learning environment fully explained the firstborn advantage on cognitive skills at ages 0–3 years (Lehmann et al., 2018 ).

Challenges to the Classic Birth Order Theories and Firstborn Advantage

Unlike the classic birth order theories, which view siblings as competitors for family resources, the social learning theories consider siblings as socializers and role models who enrich children's learning experiences via positive sibling relationships and sibling interactions such as play and teaching (Bandura, 1977 ; Whiteman et al., 2011 ). Siblings learn from one another through observing, imitating, and responding to others' behaviors, attitudes, and beliefs (Whiteman et al., 2011 ). Particularly, when older siblings elicit unique learning experiences that are not typically offered by parents, later-born children may show an advantage in the specific developmental domain. For example, later-born children have been found to acquire personal pronouns at an earlier age (Oshima-Takane et al., 1996 ) and have better conversational skills (Hoff-Ginsberg, 1998 ) than firstborns, probably because they have more opportunities to engage in triadic interactions with their mother and older sibling. Research has also suggested a later-born advantage in developmental domains such as social cognition, emotion regulation, and behavioral adjustment (Hou et al., 2020 ; Hjern et al., 2021 ). Sibling interactions may present unique social challenges and learning opportunities (e.g., conflicts solving, sharing, perspective taking), compared to parent-child interactions.

Additionally, the bioecological model suggests that families constantly adapt to the socioecological context they live in and respond to the changing needs and development of each family members (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ). Accordingly, the behaviors and responsibilities of older siblings may vary across families of diverse contexts. For instance, in families of low socioeconomic or immigration backgrounds where parents experience financial hardship or language barriers, older siblings may take more responsibilities in teaching later-born children the host language, engaging them in learning activities, and bridging the home and school cultures (Hurtado-Ortiz and Gauvain, 2007 ; Obied, 2009 ; Farver et al., 2013 ). As a result, instead of suffering from reduced human capital resources, later-born children in these families may benefit from having older siblings who help to enrich their learning experiences in ways their parents cannot.

Together, these theories suggest that having older siblings may be more beneficial in certain contexts than in others, challenging the generalizability of the firstborn advantage. Indeed, a growing body of research in developing, non-Western countries have found evidence of non-significant birth order effects or later-born advantages [e.g., Ejrnæs and Pörtner, 2004 ; Tenikue and Verheyden, 2010 ; Seid and Gurmu, 2015 ; Botzet et al., 2021 ]. Yet, work in this area has largely focused on intelligence or educational outcomes in adolescence and adulthood. It remains unclear whether the birth order effect on early cognitive and school readiness skills varies across diverse contexts, and even less is known about which contextual factors moderate the effect of birth order and how.

The Moderating Role of Cumulative Risks and Language Minority Experiences

Here we focused on two contextual factors as potential moderators of the birth order effect on early cognitive and school readiness development. The first one, cumulative risks, referring to the co-occurrence of family risk factors such as poverty, low parental education, single parenthood, and maternal depression, has been found to negatively predict early cognitive and school readiness skills (Burchinal et al., 2000 ; Stanton-Chapman et al., 2004 ; Pratt et al., 2016 ). The second factor is language minority experiences, which may include the use of a minority language at home and parental limited English proficiency and foreign-born status. On the one hand, early exposure to a minority language presents children with the opportunity to become proficient bilinguals and reap the cognitive and social benefits of bilingualism (Bialystok, 2009 ). On the other hand, language minority families in the U.S. often possess some of the family risk factors such as poverty and low parental education. Therefore, as a group, preschool children from language minority families tend to fall behind their monolingual peers in the host language and school readiness skills (see Hoff, 2018 ). Although the two contextual factors may have similar effects on early cognitive and school readiness skills, they each capture distinct characteristics of diverse family contexts.

Contextual Factors Moderating the Birth Order Effect on Home Learning Environment

Beyond their direct effects on child development, these contextual factors may moderate the effect of birth order on children's home learning environment. Compared to their peers, children from high-risk or language minority families tend to have fewer opportunities to engage in high-quality learning activities, due to financial hardship, limited human capital, and/or language barriers (Raikes et al., 2006 ; Rodriguez and Tamis-LeMonda, 2011 ). In these families, where there is likely a disconnection between the home and school environments, the presence of older siblings may enhance, rather than undermine, children' home learning experiences (Hurtado-Ortiz and Gauvain, 2007 ; Obied, 2009 ). For instance, low-income mothers reported that their older children's school experiences allowed them to be more aware of the importance of early literacy development (Sawyer et al., 2018 ), which may lead them to engage the younger siblings in literacy activities more frequently than they did with the firstborn children. In language minority families in the United States, the presence of school-age older siblings positively predicted younger toddler siblings' English skills (Bridges and Hoff, 2014 ; Hoff et al., 2014 ), partially because mothers increased their English use at home after their firstborn entered school.

Older siblings in high-risk or language minority families may also take more responsibilities scaffolding their younger siblings' learning than their counterparts would have in other families (Gregory, 2001 ; see Zentella, 2005 ). In a qualitative study with Latino immigrant families where parents had limited English skills, Kibler et al. ( 2016 ) documented how older siblings supported their younger siblings' bilingual and school readiness skills, by sharing word knowledge and engaging their younger siblings in shared narratives, reading, and writing activities. The contributions of older siblings can be especially valuable when parents offer insufficient language and literacy support due to their language barriers, lack of resources, or other risk factors (Kibler et al., 2016 ). A study of low-income, ethnic minority families suggested that children with parents who had lower education levels engaged in language and literacy activities more frequently with other family members such as older siblings, than those children with parents who had higher education levels (Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2019 ).

Contextual Factors Moderating the Birth Order Effect on Developmental Outcomes

Given that cumulative risks and language minority experiences may reduce or even reverse the firstborn advantage in children's home learning experiences, these contextual factors may also moderate the effect of birth order on early development. For example, Kim et al. ( 2018 ) found that the effect of birth older on Korean children's expressive vocabulary growth from ages 3 to 7 years was moderated by family income, such that there was a firstborn advantage in high-income families but a later-born advantage in low-income families. Likewise, another study with Norwegian toddlers suggested a moderating effect of maternal education on the association between birth order and children's language skills (Zambrana et al., 2012 ). However, these studies did not consider other risk factors such as maternal depression or single parenthood. Although no study to our knowledge has examined the moderating role of language minority experiences, the firstborn advantage has been found to be small or non-significant in ethnic minority families. Lehmann et al. ( 2018 ) found that the firstborn advantages on home learning environment and early cognitive outcomes were only observed in White families but not in ethnic minority families.

The Current Study

Previous studies have demonstrated an association between birth order and early developmental outcomes. Yet, the underlying mechanisms of the birth order effect still need to be explored. More importantly, little is known about whether the birth order effect generalizes across diverse contexts and if not, which contextual factors moderate the direction or magnitude of the effect. Answers to these questions will provide a more accurate picture of the role of birth order in early childhood development and reveal the complex interrelationships among birth order, home environment, and broader ecological context. Findings will also shed light on the unique learning opportunities for children from diverse backgrounds. Specifically, we asked two sets of research questions.

(1a) Does birth order (i.e., firstborn vs. later-born) predict children's cognitive skills at 24 months and school readiness (i.e., literacy and math) skills at preschool (48 months)?

Across the entire sample of diverse families, we expected firstborn children to show more advanced developmental outcomes than later-born children.

(1b) Is the effect of birth order moderated by children's exposure to cumulative risks and language minority experiences at home (see Figure 1A )?

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is fpsyg-13-871837-g0001.jpg

Theoretical frameworks for research questions. (a) presents the proposed moderation model for Research Question 1b, in which birth order served as the key predictor, and cumulative risks and language minority risks served as the moderators in separate models. Children's cognitive skills at 24 months and school readiness skills at preschool were the dependent variables in separate models. (b) presents the proposed mediation models for Research Question 2a, in which birth order served as the key predictor. Children's engagement in home learning activities was the mediator. Children's cognitive skills at 24 months and school readiness skills at preschool were the dependent variables in separate models. (c) presents the proposed moderated mediation models for Research Question 2b, in which cumulative risks or language minority index served as the moderators in separate models. The models tested whether these two variables moderated the pathways from birth order to children's engagement in learning activities and cognitive and school readiness outcomes.

We expected to observe a smaller firstborn advantage or even a later-born advantage in high-risk or language minority families than in low-risk or English-speaking families.

(2a) Does children's home learning environment, as measured by their engagement in learning activities with family members, mediate the association between birth order and child outcomes (see Figure 1B )?

Across the entire sample, we expected being later-born to be negatively related to children's engagement in home learning activities, which in turn is positively related to child outcomes.

(2b) Does the mediation pathway via children's engagement in home learning activities vary by children's exposure to cumulative risks and language minority experiences at home (see Figure 1C )?

We expected both the direct effect of being later-born (i.e., path c') and the indirect effect via home learning activities (i.e., path a) to be less negative or even positive in high-risk or language minority families than in low-risk or English-speaking families.

Participants

Data were drawn from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study–Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), which involved a nationally representative sample of ~10,700 children born in the United States in 2001. The sample was selected from over 14,000 registered births from the National Center for Health Statistics' vital statistics system (see Bethel et al., 2005 ). Children who died or were adopted before 9 months or born to mothers <15 years of age were excluded from the sample. ECLS-B oversampled children from certain racial/ethnic backgrounds (e.g., Asian and Pacific-Islander, Indian and Alaska Native), twins, and children with low or very low birth weight. At baseline (9 months), 51% of children were male, and 83.6% were singletons. In terms of children's race, 41.5% were non-Hispanic White, 15.9% were non-Hispanic African American, 20.6% were Hispanic, 11.3% were Asian, 2.8% were American Indian/Alaska Native, 0.45% were Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander, and the rest were non-Hispanic multiple races. Most children (73.7%) had normal birth weight, and 15.5 and 10.9% of them had moderately low or very low birth weight. Mothers were on average 27.5 years of age ( SD = 6.36, range = 15–50) at the birth of the target child, and 50.2% of them were working at baseline. Table 1 presented demographic information on the families' socioeconomic and linguistic backgrounds. For more information about the study sample, please visit: https://nces.ed.gov/ecls/birth.asp .

Descriptive statistics for key predictors, mediators, moderators, and outcome variables.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), 24 month and preschool data .

The longitudinal data collection took place when children were on average 9-month-old ( N = 10,700), 24-month-old ( N = 9,850), 48-month-old (i.e., preschool wave; N = 8,950), and when children first enrolled in kindergarten ( N = 7,000 in 2006, N = 1,900 in 2007). The current study focused on the 24-month and preschool waves, because children were more likely to spend a significant amount of time at home and interacting with their siblings during toddlerhood and preschool years. Each wave of data collection was conducted via a home visit, which included an extensive interview with the child's primary caregiver, typically the mother, observations of parent-child interactions, and direct child assessments.

Measurements

Birth order.

At each wave, parents were interviewed about individuals living in the household. A variable indicating the child's birth order (0-firstborn, 1-later-born) was generated at each wave. We compared children with and without older sibling(s), rather than firstborn and later-born children within the same household. The sample consists of one child per family and children can be either firstborn or later-born. Twin or higher-order multiple births siblings were not counted as older siblings, given the minimal age difference between them and the target child.

Cognitive Skills at 24 Months

Children's cognitive skills at 24 months were assessed by a trained administrator using the mental scale of Bayley Short Form–Research Edition (BSF-R), adapted from the Bayley Scales of Infant Development: Second Edition (BSID-II; Bayley, 1993 ). The mental scale consisted of 33 items designed to assess 2-year-olds' early cognitive and language skills, including memory, expressive and receptive vocabulary, reasoning and problem solving, and concept attainment (Andreassen and Fletcher, 2007 ). For families where English was not the primary language, the assessment was conducted in the home language either by a bilingual interviewer or via the assistance of an interpreter. In the ECLS-B dataset, scale scores were calculated using the Item Response Theory (IRT) methods. All children received a set of routing items. Based on their performance, children were then routed to a set of supplementary items with low-, middle-, or high-difficulty level. This approach allows an accurate assessment of children's abilities at various levels and minimizes the floor and ceiling effects. The IRT scale scores were generated to estimate the number of items children would have answered correctly if they had received the full set of BSID-II mental scale items (possible range of 0–178). The reliability of the IRT-based scores was 0.94 (Andreassen and Fletcher, 2007 ).

School Readiness (Literacy and Math) Skills at Preschool

Children's school readiness skills, including their early literacy and math skills, were assessed when children were 4 years of age. The literacy assessment consisted of 37 items assessing children's phonological awareness, letter sound knowledge, letter recognition, print conventions, and word recognition skills (Snow et al., 2007 ). The math assessment included 44 items focusing on number sense, counting, operations, geometry, pattern understanding, and measurement (Snow et al., 2007 ). Prior to these assessments, children's understanding of English was examined via an English fluency screening test and the parent interview. Children who did not pass the English screening were either routed to the Spanish version of the literacy and math assessments or did not receive these assessments if they spoke a language other than Spanish and English. Given the small proportion of children (1.37%) who received the assessments in Spanish, only data from the English-assessed children were analyzed. The IRT scores (possible range, 0–37 for literacy and 0–44 for math) were generated for children's early literacy and math skills, with reliabilities of 0.81 and 0.88, respectively.

Home Learning Environment at 24 Months and Preschool

At the 24-month and preschool waves, children's home learning environment was measured by children's engagement in learning activities. Mothers were interviewed about how often they or other family members engaged in book-reading, storytelling, and singing with the target child in a typical week (1-not at all, 2-once or twice, 3-three to six times, 4-every day). A total score was calculated, ranging between 3 and 12.

Cumulative Risks

At the 24-month and preschool waves, the accumulation of multiple risk factors was measured via parent interview. The families received 1 point for the presence of each of the following four risk factors: (1) Poverty , indicated by whether or not the annual income of the family was below the federal poverty line in the year of data collection (0-no/no risk, 1-yes/at risk); (2) Single-mother household , indicated by whether the father was living in the household (0-yes/no risk, 1-no/at risk); (3) Low maternal education , indicated by whether mothers had high school or lower level of education (0-higher than high school/no risk, 1- high school or lower/at risk); and (4) Maternal depression . At the 24-month wave, mothers reported on whether they were taking anti-depression medicine (0-no medicine/no risk, 1-taking medicine/at risk). At the preschool wave, a 12-item, abbreviated Center for Epidemiologic Study Depression Scale (CES-D, Radloff, 1977 ) was used to measure mothers' feeling of depression. A CES-D score of 15 or higher indicated severe depression (0-no severe depression/no risk, 1-severe depression/at risk).

A sum score was calculated to indicate the total number of risk factors the family experienced, with higher scores indicating greater levels of cumulative risks. Because only a small percentage (0.03% at 24 months and 1.27% at preschool) of families had all 4 risk factors, we combined those families with 3 or 4 risk factors into one category. Therefore, the cumulative risks variable ranged from 0 (no risk factor) to 3 (3 or more risk factors).

Language Minority Index

At the 24-month and preschool waves, a language minority index was generated based on parent interview to indicate the language minority environment at home. The families received either a 1 or a 0 depending on whether they met the criterion of language minority for each of the following three factors. (1) Home primary language . At each wave, a family received 0 if the mother reported English as the primary language used at home. A family received 1 if English was not the primary home language. (2) Mothers' English proficiency , measured at baseline (i.e., 9-month wave) by 4 self-reported items about how well the mother was able to understand, speak, read, and write in English (1-not well at all, 4-very well). A family received 1 if the sum score of these 4 items was 8 or below (i.e., relatively low English proficiency) and received 0 if the sum was 9 or above. (3) Mothers' foreign-born status was measured at baseline (i.e., 9-month wave). A family received 1 if the mother was born outside of the United States and received 0 if the mother was native born. The language minority index was the sum score of the three factors, ranging from 0 to 3, calculated at each wave; the higher the index, the more likely a minority language was used at home.

An extensive group of demographic variables were included as covariates in the analyses, including children's sex, age of assessment at each wave, birth weight (i.e., normal, moderately low, very low), multiple birth status (i.e., singleton, twin, higher order), race (non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black or African American, Hispanic, non-Hispanic Asian, Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, non-Hispanic multiple races), mothers' age at child birth, number of siblings at each wave, total number of household members at each wave, mothers' working status (1-yes, 0-no) at each wave, region of residence (i.e., Northeast, Midwest, South, West) at each wave, degree of urbanicity (i.e., urban, suburban, rural) at each wave, the number of hours per week children spent in non-parent childcare arrangement, and mothers' self-reported health (“In general, would you say your health is?” 1-poor, 2-fair, 3-good, 4-very good, 5-excellent). All covariates were associated with at least one of the key variables (i.e., child outcomes and the mediator).

Analytic Plan

Analyses were performed in Stata 16.1. Wave-specific sampling weights were used in analyses to account for oversampling and attrition and generalize findings to American children born in 2001.The full information maximum likelihood (FIML) estimation method, which allows the use of all available data, was used to handle missing data. As shown in Table 1 , the missing rates of key variables were fairly small, ranging from 0 to 9.3%. Compared to parental interviews, there were relatively more missing values in child assessments at age 2, probably due to the challenges of directly assessing children at a young age.

To examine Research Question 1a, a set of multiple regression models were conducted to test the associations between birth order and children's cognitive and school readiness outcomes. We used birth order as the key predictor and children's concurrent developmental outcomes (i.e., cognitive skills at 24 months or literacy and math skills at preschool) as the dependent variables, respectively. The cumulative risk variable, language minority index, and demographic covariates were controlled in these models.

To answer Research Question 1b, whether the effect of birth order on child outcomes varied by cumulative risks and language minority index (see Figure 1A ), we tested the moderation effect of cumulative risks in a set of models with the interaction term of birth order × cumulative risks. Significant results of the interaction term would indicate a moderation effect of cumulative risks. We further used Stata's postestimation command, nlcom, to estimate the conditional effects of birth order, when cumulative risks was set at 0 (low level; hereafter referred to as low-risk families ) or 3 (high level; hereafter referred to as high-risk families ). We used Chi-square tests to examine whether the conditional effects of birth order significantly differed between low-risk and high-risk families. To reduce multicollinearity, the second moderator, language minority index, was tested in a set of similar, yet separate models. We estimated the conditional effects, by setting language minority index at 0 (low level; hereafter referred to as English-speaking families ) or 3 (high level; hereafter referred to as language minority families ). Demographic variables, cumulative risks, and language minority index were controlled in both sets of moderation models.

To examine Research Question 2a, we asked whether children's engagement in home learning activities mediated the associations between birth order and cognitive and school readiness outcomes (see Figure 1B ). We used Stata's postestimation command, nlcom, to estimate the indirect and direct effects of birth order. Control variables were the same as in the analyses for the first set of research questions.

To examine Research Question 2b, we evaluated the moderated mediation models to understand the extent to which the direct and indirect effects of birth order on child outcomes varied by cumulative risks and language minority index. As shown in Figure 1C , we examined whether cumulative risks or language minority index moderated two potential pathways: (1) birth order → engagement in home learning activities (path a), and (2) the direct effect of birth order on cognitive or school readiness outcomes after controlling for home learning activities (path c'). To examine the moderation of cumulative risks, the interaction term of birth order × cumulative risks was added to the mediation models described above. The second moderator, language minority index, was tested in separate models. Where there were significant interactions, conditional direct and indirect effects were estimated for low-risk and high-risk families, and for English-speaking and language minority families.

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics for key predictors, mediators, moderators, and outcome variables.

Research Questions 1a and 1b: The Total Effects of Birth Order Moderated by Cumulative Risks and Language Minority Index

We first examined the overall effect of birth order on children's developmental outcomes. In the whole sample, firstborn and later-born children did not differ in their cognitive skills at 24 months [ b ( SE ) = −0.62 (0.39), 95% CI = (−1.40, 0.14), p = 0.112; see Table 2 ]. Standardizing the coefficient yielded a 0.06 SD difference in cognitive skills between firstborn and later-born children.

Unconditional and conditional total, indirect, and direct effects of birth order on children's cognitive and school readiness skills.

All models controlled for cumulative risks, language minority index, children's sex, age of assessment, birth weight, multiple birth status, race, mothers' age at child birth, number of siblings, total number of household members, mothers' working status, region of residence, degree of urbanicity, the number of hours per week children spent in non-parent childcare arrangement, and mothers' self-reported health .

However, the total effect of birth order was marginally moderated by cumulative risks [ b ( SE ) = 0.53 (0.28), 95% CI = (−0.02, 1.08), p = 0.061; see Model 1a, Table 3 ] and significantly moderated by language minority index [ b ( SE ) = 1.23 (0.29), 95% CI = (0.67, 1.80), p < 0.001; see Model 2a, Table 3 ]. In low-risk or English-speaking families, firstborns showed a 0.10 SD advantage in cognitive skills over later-born children (see Table 2 ). In contrast, there was no group difference in high-risk families, and a later-born advantage (0.23 SD) in language minority families.

Cumulative risk and language minority index moderated the effects of birth order on developmental outcomes via home learning activities.

At preschool (48 months), there was a firstborn advantage in children's literacy [ b ( SE ) = −1.34 (0.35), 95% CI = (−2.03, −0.65), p < 0.001] and math [ b ( SE ) = −0.66 (0.32), 95% CI = (−1.29, −0.03), p = 0.040; see Table 2 ] skills in the whole sample. Firstborn children scored 0.13 SD and 0.07 SD higher in literacy and math assessments than later-born children.

Notably, the total effect of birth order on literacy skills was moderated by both cumulative risks [ b ( SE ) = 0.80 (0.26), 95% CI = (0.30, 1.31), p = 0.002; see Model 1b, Table 3 ] and language minority index [ b ( SE ) = 1.02 (0.30), 95% CI = (0.43, 1.61), p = 0.001; see Model 2b, Table 3 ]. Likewise, the total effect of birth order on math skills was marginally moderated by cumulative risks [ b ( SE ) = 0.43 (0.25), 95% CI = (−0.06, 0.92), p = 0.085; see Model 1c, Table 3 ] and significantly moderated by language minority index [ b ( SE ) = 0.61 (0.31), 95% CI = (0.01, 1.21), p = 0.046; see Model 2c, Table 3 ]. In low-risk or English-speaking families, firstborns showed a 0.16–0.19 SD advantage in literacy skills and a 0.09–0.10 SD advantage in math skills. However, in high-risk families or language minority families, later-born children showed equivalent or marginally ( p = 0.082) better skills compared to firstborns (see Table 2 ).

Research Questions 2a and 2b: The Mediating Role of Home Learning Environment and the Moderated Mediation Models

We next examined whether children's engagement in home learning activities mediated the effect of birth order on child outcomes (see Figure 1B ). These mediation analyses were followed by moderated mediation models, in which we tested whether cumulative risks and language minority index moderated the direct and indirect effects of birth order (see Figure 1C ).

Indirect Effects via Home Learning Activities

As shown in Table 2 , children's engagement in home learning activities mediated the effect of birth order on children's cognitive skills at 24 months in the whole sample [Unconditional indirect effect: b ( SE ) = −0.32 (0.07), 95% CI = (−0.46, −0.18), p < 0.001]. Compared to later-born children, firstborn children engaged in home learning activities more frequently, which in turn related to higher levels of cognitive skills.

Notably, the association between birth order and children's engagement in home learning activities at 24 months was moderated by both cumulative risks [ b ( SE ) = 0.17 (0.06), 95% CI = (0.05, 0.28), p = 0.005; see Model 5a, Table 3 ] and language minority index [ b ( SE ) = 0.20 (0.06), 95% CI = (0.08, 0.33), p = 0.001; see Model 6a, Table 3 ]. Specifically, the conditional indirect effect favored firstborns for children from low-risk or English-speaking families but was non-significant for children from high-risk or language minority families (see Table 2 ).

At preschool, the unconditional indirect effect via learning activities was significant for both literacy skills [ b ( SE ) = −0.27 (0.05), 95% CI = (−0.38, −0.17), p < 0.001] and math skills [ b ( SE ) = −0.19 (0.04), 95% CI = (−0.28, −0.11), p < 0.001; see Table 2 ]. Compared to later-born children, firstborn children engaged in home learning activities more frequently, which in turn predicted higher levels of literacy and math skills.

Cumulative risks [ b ( SE ) = 0.04 (0.06), 95% CI = (−0.08, 0.15), p = 0.552; see Model 5c, Table 3 ] did not significantly moderated this indirect effect. Although language minority index marginally moderated the indirect effect [ b ( SE ) = 0.11 (0.07), 95% CI = (−0.02, 0.25), p = 0.098; see Model 6c, Table 3 ], the differences in the magnitude of indirect effect between English-speaking and language minority families did not reach the level of significance (see Chi 2 tests in Table 2 ).

Direct Effects of Birth Order

At 24 months, the unconditional direct effect of birth order on cognitive skills was non-significant [ b ( SE ) = −0.30 (0.39), 95% CI = (−1.06, 0.45), p = 0.432; see Table 2 ]. The direct effect did not vary by cumulative risks [ b ( SE ) = 0.39 (0.28), 95% CI = (−0.15, 0.94), p = 0.158; see Model 3a, Table 3 ], but varied by language minority index [ b ( SE ) = 1.06 (0.29), 95% CI = (0.49, 1.63), p < 0.001; see Model 3a, Table 3 ]. The conditional direct effect indicated a marginal, firstborn advantage ( p = 0.064) in English-speaking families, but a later-born advantage in language minority families (see Table 2 ).

At preschool, birth order had a significant, unconditional direct effect on literacy skills [ b ( SE ) = −1.07 (0.35), 95% CI = (−1.76, −0.38), p = 0.002], but a non-significant effect on math skills [ b ( SE ) = −0.47 (0.32), 95% CI = (−1.10, 0.17), p = 0.148; see Table 2 ]. These direct effects were also moderated or marginally moderated by cumulative risks [Literacy: b ( SE ) = 0.79 (0.26), 95% CI = (0.29, 1.30), p = 0.002; see Model 3b, Table 3 ; Math: b ( SE ) = 0.42 (0.25), 95% CI = (−0.06, 0.91), p = 0.086; see Model 3c, Table 3 ] and language minority index [Literacy: b ( SE ) = 0.99 (0.30), 95% CI = (0.40, 1.58), p = 0.001; see Model 4b, Table 3 ; Math: b ( SE ) = 0.59 (0.30), 95% CI = (0.00, 1.18), p = 0.052; see Model 4c, Table 3 ]. As shown in Table 2 , the conditional direct effects on literacy and math skills favored firstborns for children from low-risk or English-speaking families but were non-significant or marginally favoring later-born children ( p = 0.063 on literacy skills in language minority families) for those from high-risk or language minority families.

Existing theories on the role of birth order in child development have revealed the complicated influences of family resources distribution, family dynamics, and socioecological context. Although prior work has documented a firstborn advantage in children's development of early cognitive and school readiness skills (e.g., Barreto et al., 2017 ; Lehmann et al., 2018 ), how and in which context(s) birth order plays a role are not yet fully understood. The current study examined the extent to which the effect of birth order was mediated by home learning environment and moderated by children's exposure to cumulative risks and language minority experiences.

Three key findings have emerged. First, the firstborn advantage in early cognitive and school readiness outcomes was primarily observed in children from low-risk or English-speaking families. However, in high-risk or language minority families, later-born children showed similar or even higher levels of skills than firstborns. Second, children's engagement in home learning activities mediated the effect of birth order. However, the direction and magnitude of the indirect effects varied by cumulative risks and language minority index. Finally, in low-risk or English-speaking families, birth order had a direct effect favoring firstborns on child outcomes, above and beyond children's engagement in home learning activities. However, the direct effect favored later-borns or was non-significant in high-risk or language minority families. Together, these findings highlight the context-specificity of the effect of birth order and reveal the complex interactions among a family's sibling structure, resource distributions, and ecological context.

The Overall Effects of Birth Order Varied by Cumulative Risks and Language Minority Index

In line with the bioecological model, which emphasizes the contextual influences on family dynamics (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ), our findings suggested that the firstborn advantage was more evident in low-risk or English-speaking families than in high-risk or language minority families. The magnitude of the firstborn advantage on child outcomes, especially children's literacy skills at preschool, became smaller as cumulative risks increased and diminished to non-significant for children exposed to three or more of the following risk factors: poverty, single-mother household, low maternal education, and maternal depression. Consistent with previous studies that showed a smaller or non-significant firstborn advantage in language and school outcomes for children from lower-SES families (Zambrana et al., 2012 ; Cheng et al., 2013 ; Kim et al., 2018 ), these findings offered new evidence to the limited work on the birth order effect in families experiencing multiple risk factors, and challenged the universality of the classic birth order theories (Blake, 1981 ; Zajonc, 1983 ).

Additionally, the current study was the first one showing that the effect of birth order varied by children's home language environment. While there was a firstborn advantage in English-speaking families, in language minority families, being later-born positively predicted children's cognitive skills at 24 months and marginally predicted literacy skills at preschool. Previous work has shown a smaller or non-significant firstborn advantage for children from ethnic minority (Lehmann et al., 2018 ) and certain immigrant groups (Isungset et al., 2020 ). Consistent with the social learning theories (Bandura, 1977 ), our findings further highlighted the contributions of older siblings to their younger siblings' early cognitive and language development in language minority families (Hurtado-Ortiz and Gauvain, 2007 ; Obied, 2009 ; Kibler et al., 2016 ).

The Mediating Role of Home Learning Activities Varied by Cumulative Risks and Language Minority Index

According to the resource dilution and confluence theories, the effect of birth order on child development can be explained by firstborn children's greater access to family resources and high-quality learning environment at home (Blake, 1981 ; Zajonc, 1983 ). In line with these theoretical hypotheses, in low-risk or English-speaking families, children's engagement in home learning activities mediated the effect of birth order on children's cognitive skills at 24 months and literacy and math skills at preschool. Compared to firstborn children, later-born children engaged in learning activities less frequently, which in turn predicted less advanced cognitive and school readiness. Consistent with previous literature (Raikes et al., 2006 ; Peyre et al., 2016 ), these findings confirmed a dilution of parents' interpersonal investments for later-born children in low-risk or English-speaking families.

However, the mediation pathway via home learning activities did not apply to children from high-risk or language minority families at 24 months. For these children, birth order was not associated with their engagement in learning activities. When parents have limited ability to engage their children in learning activities due to challenges such as low educational level, language barriers, or maternal depression, there may not be obvious advantages of being firstborn (Downey, 2001 ; Cheng et al., 2013 ). Moreover, older siblings in these families might step into their parents' shoes and engage their younger siblings in learning activities, which compensates the lack of parental support (Gregory, 2001 ; Zentella, 2005 ; Kibler et al., 2016 ; Luo and Tamis-LeMonda, 2019 ). Furthermore, parents from high-risk or language minority families tend to be less familiar with the school system and have less knowledge of child development than their counterparts in more affluent or English-speaking families (Keels, 2009 ; Rowe et al., 2016 ; Suskind et al., 2018 ). Older siblings' school experiences might help these parents recognize the importance of early literacy development (Sawyer et al., 2018 ) and motivate parents to facilitate more learning activities early on. These positive impacts of older siblings in high-risk or language minority families might be especially strong during toddlerhood when children spend most of their time at home.

The Direct Effect of Birth Order Beyond Home Learning Environment

In low-risk or English-speaking families, firstborn children showed better literacy and math skills at preschool than later-born children, after controlling for children's engagement in home learning activities. These findings suggested that birth order might affect child development in ways beyond home learning activities. Perhaps later-born children experienced dilution in other aspects of their home learning environment, such as quality time with parents (Price, 2008 ) and parental language input (Hoff, 2006 ). Alternatively, there is evidence that parents tend to have lower academic expectations for their later-born children (Kim, 2020 ) and use less strict disciplinary strategies with their later-born children (Hotz and Pantano, 2015 ), both of which may have been related to lower developmental outcomes of the later-born children.

In high-risk or language minority families, however, being later-born had a non-significant or even positive direct effect on child outcomes. The social learning theories (Bandura, 1977 ) propose various mechanisms through which older siblings facilitate children's learning experiences, including intimate sibling relationships, socialization processes, and positive sibling exchanges (Whiteman et al., 2011 ; Howe et al., 2014 ). Indeed, children might engage in informal learning activities with their older siblings that were not captured in the current study, such as free play, daily conversations, and drawing (Kibler et al., 2016 ). The supportive role of older siblings may be more salient in high-risk or language minority families where parents face financial, cultural, or language obstacles to offering rich home learning environment for their children. In language minority families, older siblings can be more acculturated and have better English skills than their parents and may therefore provide quality support to their younger siblings' language and literacy skills in English (Farver et al., 2013 ).

Limitations and Future Directions

The current study has several limitations. We only considered children's firstborn vs. later-born status, without examining the total number of older/younger siblings, their gender, and the age difference between them and the target child, all of which might influence the direction and magnitude of the birth order effect. For example, siblings with small or large age gaps may interact with and learn from each other in different ways. Additionally, we did not have any data on language minority children's school readiness skills in their home language, and those children (1.37%) with insufficient English fluency at preschool were excluded from the analyses. Future research should explore whether birth order shows differential effects on children's school readiness skills in English and in the home language. Moreover, we only examined children's engagement in book-reading, storytelling, and singing activities. There are many more aspects of home learning environment, such as other learning activities (e.g., toy play and drawing), the availability of literacy materials, and language use by family members, which may further elucidate the effect of birth order on children's developmental outcomes (Bridges and Hoff, 2014 ). Finally, the (moderated) mediation models were based on cross-sectional data, which preclude any conclusion on causality. The relations between home learning environment and child developmental outcomes are likely bidirectional, such that children with more advanced cognitive and school readiness skills might actively engage in more learning activities with their family members (Tamis-LeMonda et al., 2019 ). Longitudinal work is needed to understand the directionality of these associations.

Conclusions

Findings of this study reveal the complex associations among sibship structure, home learning environment, and early childhood development. The effect of birth order showed strong context-specificity. Unlike low-risk or English-speaking families, where there was a firstborn advantage in child outcomes, there was no difference between firstborn and later-born or even a later-born advantage in high-risk or language minority families. The direct effect of birth order on child outcomes and its indirect effects via home learning activities varied by cumulative risks and language minority index. These findings underscore the need for integrating classic birth order theories, social learning theories, and ecological systems approach to interpret differential birth order effects in diverse contexts. Practically, early preventions and interventions may support children from high-risk or language minority families by encouraging sibling interactions to amplify the positive role older siblings play in child development.

Data Availability Statement

Ethics statement.

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent to participate in this study was provided by the participants' legal guardian/next of kin.

Author Contributions

RL and LS contributed to conceptualization. RL and I-MC contributed in data analysis. RL involved manuscript writing. LS and I-MC reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Andreassen C., Fletcher P. (2007). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B): Psychometric Report for the 2-Year Data Collection. Methodology Report. NCES 2007-084. National Center for Education Statistics . Available online at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED497762
Bandura A. (1977). Social Learning Theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
Barreto F. B., de Miguel M. S., Ibarluzea J., Andiarena A., Arranz E. (2017). Family context and cognitive development in early childhood: a longitudinal study . Intelligence 65 , 11–22. 10.1016/j.intell.2017.09.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bayley N. (1993). Bayley Scales of Infant Development . 2nd Edn. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation [ Google Scholar ]
Berglund E. V. A., Eriksson M., Westerlund M. (2005). Communicative skills in relation to gender, birth order, childcare and socioeconomic status in 18-month-old children . Scand. J. Psychol. 46 , 485–491. 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2005.00480.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bethel J., Green J. L., Nord C., Kalton G., West J. (2005). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B): Methodology Report for the 9-Month Data Collection (2001-02) . Volume 2: Sampling. NCES 2005-147. National Center for Education Statistics. Available online at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED485636
Bialystok E. (2009). Bilingualism: the good, the bad, and the indifferent . Bilingualism Lang. Cogn. 12 , 3–11. 10.1017/S1366728908003477 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Blake J. (1981). Family size and the quality of children . Demography 18 , 421–442. 10.2307/2060941 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bornstein M. H., Leach D. B., Haynes O. M. (2004). Vocabulary competence in first-and second born siblings of the same chronological age . J. Child Lang. 31 , 855–873. 10.1017/S0305000904006518 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Botzet L. J., Rohrer J. M., Arslan R. C. (2021). Analysing effects of birth order on intelligence, educational attainment, big five and risk aversion in an Indonesian sample . Eur. J. Person. 35 , 234–248. 10.1002/per.2285 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bridges K., Hoff E. (2014). Older sibling influences on the language environment and language development of toddlers in bilingual homes . Appl. Psycholing. 35 , 225–241. 10.1017/S0142716412000379 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Bronfenbrenner U., Morris P. A. (2006). “The bioecological model of human development,” in Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical Models of Human Development , eds W. Damon and R. M. Lerner. 6th Edn. (New York, NY: Wiley; ), 793–828. [ Google Scholar ]
Burchinal M. R., Roberts J. E., Hooper S., Zeisel S. A. (2000). Cumulative risk and early cognitive development: a comparison of statistical risk models . Dev. Psychol. 36 , 793–807. 10.1037/0012-1649.36.6.793 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Cheng C. C., Wang W. L., Sung Y. T., Wang Y. C., Su S. Y., Li C. Y. (2013). Effect modification by parental education on the associations of birth order and gender with learning achievement in adolescents . Child Care Health Dev. 39 , 894–902. 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2012.01427.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Downey D. B. (2001). Number of siblings and intellectual development: the resource dilution explanation . Am. Psychol. 56 , 497–504. 10.1037/0003-066X.56.6-7.497 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Duncan G. J., Dowsett C. J., Claessens A., Magnuson K., Huston A. C., Klebanov P., et al.. (2007). School readiness and later achievement . Dev. Psychol. 43 , 1428–1446. 10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ejrnæs M., Pörtner C. C. (2004). Birth order and the intrahousehold allocation of time and education . Rev. Econ. Stat. 86 , 1008–1019. 10.1162/0034653043125176 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Farver J. A. M., Xu Y., Lonigan C. J., Eppe S. (2013). The home literacy environment and Latino Head Start children's emergent literacy skills . Dev. Psychol. 49 , 775–791. 10.1037/a0028766 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Gregory E. (2001). Sisters and brothers as language and literacy teachers: synergy between siblings playing and working together . J. Early Childhood Literacy 1 , 301–322. 10.1177/14687984010013004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Heiland F. (2009). Does the birth order affect the cognitive development of a child? Appl. Econ. 41 , 1799–1818. 10.1080/00036840601083220 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hjern A., Bergström M., Fransson E., Lindfors A., Bergqvist K. (2021). Birth order and socioeconomic disadvantage predict behavioural and emotional problems at age 3 years . Acta Paediatrica 110 , 3294–3301. 10.1111/apa.16094 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hoff E. (2006). How social contexts support and shape language development . Dev. Rev. 26 , 55–88. 10.1016/j.dr.2005.11.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hoff E. (2018). Bilingual development in children of immigrant families . Child Dev. Perspect. 12 , 80–86. 10.1111/cdep.12262 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hoff E., Welsh S., Place S., Ribot K., Grüter T., Paradis J. (2014). “Properties of dual language input that shape bilingual development and properties of environments that shape dual language input,” in Input and Experience in Bilingual Development , eds T. Grüter and J. Paradis (Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company; ), 119–140. [ Google Scholar ]
Hoff-Ginsberg E. (1998).The relation of birth order and socioeconomic status to children's language experience and language development. Appl. Psycholing. 19 , 603–629. 10.1017/S0142716400010389 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hotz V. J., Pantano J. (2015). Strategic parenting, birth order, and school performance . J. Populat. Econ. 28 , 911–936. 10.1007/s00148-015-0542-3 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Hou X. H., Gong Z. Q., Wang L. J., Zhou Y., Su Y. (2020). A reciprocal and dynamic development model for the effects of siblings on children's theory of mind . Front. Psychol. 11 , 2667. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.554023 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Howe N., Ross H. S., Recchia H. (2014). “Sibling relations in early and middle childhood,” in The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Social Development , eds P. K. Smith and C. H. Hart (Oxford: Wiley Blackwell; ), 356–372. [ Google Scholar ]
Hurtado-Ortiz M. T., Gauvain M. (2007). Postsecondary education among Mexican American youth: contributions of parents, siblings, acculturation, and generational status . Hispanic J. Behav. Sci. 29 , 181–191. 10.1177/0739986307299584 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Isungset M. A., Lillehagen M., Ugreninov E. (2020). One order fits all? Birth order and education in immigrant families . Eur. Sociol. Rev. 36 , 16–31. 10.1093/esr/jcz040 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Keels M. (2009). Ethnic group differences in early head start parents' parenting beliefs and practices and links to children's early cognitive development . Early Childhood Res. Q. 24 , 381–397. 10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.08.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kibler A. K., Palacios N., Simpson-Baird A., Bergey R., Yoder M. (2016). Bilingual Latin@ children's exposure to language and literacy practices through older siblings in immigrant families . Ling. Educ. 35 , 63–77. 10.1016/j.linged.2016.06.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kim J., Kim S. J., Do N. H. (2018). Determining the relationship of children's socioeconomic background with vocabulary development: a longitudinal study of Korean children at 3 and 7 years of age . Commun. Sci. Disord. 23 , 327–336. 10.12963/csd.18484 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Kim Y. J. (2020). Born to be more educated? Birth order and schooling . Rev. Econ. Household 18 , 165–180. 10.1007/s11150-019-09462-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Lehmann J. Y. K., Nuevo-Chiquero A., Vidal-Fernandez M. (2018). The early origins of birth order differences in children's outcomes and parental behavior . J. Hum. Resources 53 , 123–156. 10.3368/jhr.53.1.0816-8177 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Luo R., Tamis-LeMonda C. S. (2019). Preschool book-sharing and oral storytelling experiences in ethnically diverse, low-income families . Early Child Dev. Care 189 , 1602–1619. 10.1080/03004430.2017.1400542 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Obied V. M. (2009). How do siblings shape the language environment in bilingual families? Int. J. Bilingual Educ. Bilingualism 12 , 705–720. 10.1080/13670050802699485 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Oshima-Takane Y., Goodz E., Derevensky J. L. (1996). Birth order effects on early language development: do secondborn children learn from overheard speech? Child Dev. 67 , 621–634. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1996.tb01755.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Pavan R. (2016). On the production of skills and the birth-order effect . J. Hum. Resources 51 , 699–726. 10.3368/jhr.51.3.0913-5920R [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Peyre H., Bernard J. Y., Hoertel N., Forhan A., Charles M.-A., De Agostini M., et al.. (2016). Differential effects of factors influencing cognitive development at the age of 5-to-6 years . Cogn. Dev. 40 , 152–162. 10.1016/j.cogdev.2016.10.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Pratt M. E., McClelland M. M., Swanson J., Lipscomb S. T. (2016). Family risk profiles and school readiness: a person-centered approach . Early Childhood Res. Q. 36 , 462–474. 10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.01.017 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Price J. (2008). Parent-child quality time: does birth order matter? J. Hum. Resources 43 , 240–265. 10.1353/jhr.2008.0023 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Radloff L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population . Appl. Psychol. Measure. 1 , 385–401. 10.1177/014662167700100306 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Raikes H., Pan B. A., Luze G., Tamis-LeMonda C. S., Brooks-Gunn J., Constantine J., et al.. (2006). Mother-child bookreading in low-income families: correlates and outcomes during the first three years of life . Child Dev. 77 , 924–953. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00911.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Ricciardi C., Manfra L., Hartman S., Bleiker C., Dineheart L., Winsler A. (2021). School readiness skills at age four predict academic achievement through 5th grade . Early Childhood Res. Q. 57 , 110–120. 10.1016/j.ecresq.2021.05.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rodriguez E. T., Tamis-LeMonda C. S. (2011). Trajectories of the home learning environment across the first 5 years: associations with children's vocabulary and literacy skills at prekindergarten . Child Dev. 82 , 1058–1075. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01614.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Rowe M. L., Denmark N., Harden B. J., Stapleton L. M. (2016). The role of parent education and parenting knowledge in children's language and literacy skills among White, Black, and Latino families . Infant Child Dev. 25 , 198–220. 10.1002/icd.1924 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Sawyer B. E., Cycyk L. M., Sandilos L. E., Hammer C. S. (2018). ‘So many books they don't even all fit on the bookshelf': an examination of low-income mothers' home literacy practices, beliefs and influencing factors . J. Early Childhood Literacy 18 , 338–372. 10.1177/1468798416667542 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Seid Y., Gurmu S. (2015). The role of birth order in child labour and schooling . Appl. Econ. 47 , 5262–5281. 10.1080/00036846.2015.1047086 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Snow K., Thalji L., Derecho A., Wheeless S., Lennon J., Kinsey S., et al.. (2007). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), Preschool Year Data File User's Manual (2005–06) (NCES 2008-024) . Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. [ Google Scholar ]
Stanton-Chapman T. L., Chapman D. A., Kaiser A. P., Hancock T. B. (2004). Cumulative risk and low-income children's language development . Top. Early Childhood Special Educ. 24 , 227–237. 10.1177/02711214040240040401 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Suskind D. L., Leung C. Y., Webber R. J., Hundertmark A. C., Leffel K. R., Suskind E., et al.. (2018). Development of the survey of parent/provider expectations and knowledge (SPEAK) . First Lang. 38 , 312–331. 10.1177/0142723717737691 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Tamis-LeMonda C. S., Luo R., McFadden K. E., Bandel E. T., Vallotton C. (2019). Early home learning environment predicts children?s 5th grade academic skills . Appl. Dev. Sci. 23 , 153–169. 10.1080/10888691.2017.1345634 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Tenikue M., Verheyden B. (2010). Birth order and schooling: theory and evidence from twelve sub-saharan countries . J. Afr. Econ. 19 , 459–495. 10.1093/jae/ejq013 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Whiteman S. D., McHale S. M., Soli A. (2011). Theoretical perspectives on sibling relationships . J. Family Theory Rev. 3 , 124–139. 10.1111/j.1756-2589.2011.00087.x [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Workman J. (2017). Sibling additions, resource dilution, and cognitive development during early childhood . J. Marriage Family 79 , 462–474. 10.1111/jomf.12350 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zajonc R. B. (1983). Validating the confluence model . Psychol. Bull. 93 , 457–480. 10.1037/0033-2909.93.3.457 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zambrana I. M., Ystrom E., Pons F. (2012). Impact of gender, maternal education, and birth order on the development of language comprehension: a longitudinal study from 18 to 36 months of age . J. Dev. Behav. Pediatr. 33 , 146–155. 10.1097/DBP.0b013e31823d4f83 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
Zentella A. C. (2005). Building on Strength: Language and Literacy in Latino Families and Communities . New York, NY: Teachers College Press. [ Google Scholar ]

Home — Essay Samples — Psychology — Birth Order — The Role of Birth Order in the Relationships Between Siblings

The Role of Birth Order in The Relationships Between Siblings

Categories: Birth Order Sibling

About this sample

Words: 1164 |

Published: Mar 14, 2019

Words: 1164 | Pages: 3 | 6 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

Expert in: Psychology Life

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 435 words

3 pages / 1184 words

3 pages / 1673 words

2 pages / 834 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Birth Order

Birth order, the sequence in which children are born within a family, has long been a subject of fascination and study in psychology and sociology. The concept suggests that the order in which a child is born can influence their [...]

Being the middle child in a family holds a unique position that comes with its own set of dynamics and challenges. The experiences and traits associated with being the middle child have long intrigued psychologists, researchers, [...]

The transition to college is a pivotal moment in a young person's life, marked by newfound independence, academic pursuits, and personal growth. For a middle child, this transition can hold particular significance, often [...]

This study aims to investigate whether birth order has any influence on level of self-esteem. A Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale questionnaire was given to each potential participant (n=30) who consent to give their information for [...]

Birth order alludes to the order in which children are born into a family. In spite of the fact that a child may be positioned as indicated by their order of appearance, four areas typically are perceived: first, middle, [...]

Life begins the minute one egg and one sperm unite at conception. Over the past century technological advancements in science have allowed humanity to take a closer look into our younger selves; specifically, the process of our [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Entertainment
Environment
Information Science and Technology
Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Psychology

Essay Samples on Birth Order

Birth order as one of the main influence of the child's personality.

Personality comes from many different things, but a main influencer is from birth order. Children who are first borns and children who are later-borns contrast in how they act majorly because of when they came into this world. It can determine certain aspects of mental...

Birth Order
Child Development
Child Psychology

Literature Review on the Effects of Birth order on a Person’s Personality and Achievements

Character is a one of a kind result of the blend of different attributes and characteristics that have created with assistance of ecological, genetical and social components. The person tends to act, think and feel in a certain way influenced by these factors. Personality of...

Personality

Effect of Birth Order on Criminality

Introduction Behind every crime large or small question remains the same: why did the criminal do it? To figure out the motivation behind crime, criminal behavior professionals used a variety of resources and techniques to answer this difficult question. They examine the history of crime,...

Association of Various Measures of Empathy and Pro-Social Behaviour with Birth Order

Abstract A survey was conducted to find the effect of birth order and its association with the behaviour of kids. It was carried out among university students to determine if the order of birth had any effect of them being sympathetic to other strangers or...

Prosocial Behavior

The Influence of Birth Order On Self-Esteem

Abstract This study aims to investigate whether birth order has any influence on level of self-esteem. A Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale questionnaire was given to each potential participant (n=30) who consent to give their information for research purposes with ensured anonymity in which their identity is...

Self Esteem

Stressed out with your paper?

Consider using writing assistance:

100% unique papers
3 hrs deadline option

Best topics on Birth Order

1. Birth Order As One Of The Main Influence Of The Child’s Personality

2. Literature Review on the Effects of Birth order on a Person’s Personality and Achievements

3. Effect of Birth Order on Criminality

4. Association of Various Measures of Empathy and Pro-Social Behaviour with Birth Order

5. The Influence of Birth Order On Self-Esteem

Confirmation Bias
Critical Reflection
Lev Vygotsky Theory
Milgram Experiment
Obedience to Authority
Teaching Philosophy

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.