Advertisement

Birth Order, Sibling Competition, and Human Behavior

Chapter
Part of the Studies in Cognitive Systems book series (COGS, volume 27)

Abstract

Sibling competition is widespread among bird and animal species and sometimes leads to siblicide. By influencing the strategies that siblings employ in their struggles for dominance, birth order affects the outcomes of such contests. In our own species, birth order is a proxy for disparities in age, physical size, and status, all of which contribute to personality. In addition, birth order is related to the roles and niches available to offspring within the family system. On average, firstborns—who tend to act as surrogate parents—are more conscientious than laterborns, whereas laterborns are more agreeable, extraverted, and nonconforming. As strategies for dealing with rivals in a dominance hierarchy, as well as for optimizing parental investment, these sibling differences are consistent with a Darwinian perspective on family life. So are other links between personality and family dynamics, particularly those associated with parental investment and parent-offspring conflict. In adulthood, human behavior continues to reflect these formative influences, although such behavioral dispositions generally need to be catalyzed by appropriate situations in order to be fully expressed.

Keywords

Social Class Partial Correlation Birth Order Middle Child Young Sibling 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adler, Alfred. 1927. Understanding Human Nature. New York: Greenberg.Google Scholar
  2. Adler, Alfred. 1928. “Characteristics of the First, Second, and Third Child”, Children, 3, 14–52.Google Scholar
  3. Beer, Jeremy M. & Horn, Joseph M. 2000. “The Influence of Reading Order on Personality Development within Two Adoption Cohorts”, Journal of Personality, 68, 789–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchard, Ray. 1997. “Birth Order and Sibling Sex Ratio in Homosexual versus Heterosexual Males and Females”, Annual Review of Sex Research, 8, 27–67.Google Scholar
  5. Block, Jack. 1995. “A Contrarian View of the Five-Factor Approach to Personality Description”, Psychological Bulletin, 117, 187–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bragg, Arthur N. 1954. “Further Study of Predation and Cannibalism in Spadefoot Tadpoles”, Herpetologica, 20, 17–24.Google Scholar
  7. Costa, Paul T. Jr & McCrae, Robert R. 1992. NEOPI-R Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  8. Daly, Martin & Wilson, Margo. 1988. Homicide. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  9. Daly, Martin & Wilson, Margo. 1990. “Is Parent-offspring Conflict Sex-linked? Freudian and Darwinian Models”, Journal of Personality, 58, 163–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Darwin, Charles R. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  11. Darwin, Charles R. 1887. The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, 3 vols. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  12. Downey, Douglas B. 2001. “Number of Siblings and Intellectual Development”, American Psychologist, 56, 497–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Drummond, Hugh & García-Chavelas, C. 1989. “Food Shortage Influences Sibling Aggression in the Blue-Footed Booby”, Animal Behavior, 37, 806–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Drummond, Hugh & Osorno, Jose Luis. 1992. “Training Siblings to Be Submissive Losers: Dominance between Booby Nestlings”, Animal Behavior, 44, 881–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eaves, L.J., Eysenck, H.J., & Martin, N.G. 1989. Genes, Culture and Personality. London and San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  16. Eaves, L.J., Eysenck, H.J., & Martin, N.G. 1989. Genes, Culture and Personality. London and San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  17. Frank, Laurence G., Glickman, Stephen E., & Licht, Paul. 1991. “Fatal Sibling Aggression, Precocial Development, and Androgens in Neonatal Spotted Hyenas”, Science, 252, 702–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freese, Jeremy, Powell, Brian, & Steelman, Lala Carr. 1999. “Rebel Without a Cause or Effect: Birth Order and Social Attitudes”, American Sociological Review, 64, 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Galton, Francis. 1874. English Men of Science. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1977. Ontogeny and Phytogeny. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Haig, David. 1993. “Genetic Conflicts in Human Pregnancy”, Quarterly Review of Biology, 68, 495–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hamilton, William D. 1964. “The Genetical Evolution of Social Behavior”, I and II, Journal of Theoretical Biology, 7, 1–16; 17–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamilton, William D. 1967. “Extraordinary Sex Ratios”, Science, 156, 477–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Harris, Judith Rich. 1995. “Where Is the Child’s Environment? A Group Socialization Theory of Development”, Psychological Review, 102, 458–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harris, Judith Rich. 1998. The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hertwig, Ralph, Davis, Jennifer, & Sulloway, Frank J. 2001. “Parental Investment: How an Equality Motive Can Produce Inequality”, manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  27. Hrdy, Sarah Blaffer & Judge, Debra. 1992. “Darwin and the Puzzle of Primogeniture”, Human Nature, 4, 1–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hunter, John E. & Schmidt, Frank L. 1990. Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Jefferson, Tyrone Jr., Herbst, Jeffrey H., & McCrae, Robert R. 1998. “Associations between Birth Order and Personality Traits: Evidence from Self-reports and Observer Ratings”, Journal of Research on Personality, 32, 498–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. John, Oliver P. 1990. “The ‘Big Five’ Factor Taxonomy: Dimensions of Personality in the Natural Language and in Questionnaires”, in Pervin, L.A., ed., Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. New York: Guilford, pp. 66–100.Google Scholar
  31. Jones, M.B. & Blanchard, Ray. 1998. “Birth Order and Male Homosexuality: Extension of Slater’s Index”, Human Biology, 70, 775–787.Google Scholar
  32. Koch, Helen. 1956. “Attitudes of Young Children Toward Their Peers as Related to Certain Characteristics of Their Siblings”, Psychological Monographs, 70, 1–41.Google Scholar
  33. Krebs, John R. & Davies, Nicholas B. 1997. Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach, 4th ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  34. Krishnamurthy, K.S., Shaanker, R. Uma, & Ganeshaiah, K.N. 1997. “Seed Abortion in an Animal Dispersed Species, Syzygium cuminii (L.) Skeels (Myrtaceae): The Chemical Basis”, Current Science, 73, 869–73.Google Scholar
  35. Lewis, David L. 1970. King: A Critical Biography. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  36. Loehlin, John C. 1992. Genes and Environment in Personality Development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  37. Mayr, Ernst. 1961. “Cause and Effect in Biology”, Science, 134, 1501–1506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McCrae, Robert R. 1994. “Openness to Experience: Expanding the Boundaries of Factor V”, European Journal of Personality, 8, 251–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McCrae, Robert R. & Costa, Paul T., Jr. 1987. “Validation of the Five-Factor Model of Personality across Instruments and Observers”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McCrae, Robert R. & John, Oliver P. 1992. “An Introduction to the Five-Factor Model and Its Applications”, Journal of Personality, 60: 175–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mock, Douglas W. & Parker, G.A. 1998. The Evolution of Sibling Rivalry. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Mock, Douglas W., Drummond, Hugh, & Stinson, Christopher H. 1990. “Avian Siblicide”, American Scientist, 78, 438–49.Google Scholar
  43. Modell, John. 1996. “Family Niche and Intellectual Bent”, review of Born to Rebel, by Frank J. Sulloway, Science, 275, 624.Google Scholar
  44. Nicholson, Nigel. 2001. “Personality and Birth Order—Is There a Relationship? An Evolutionary Analysis”, unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  45. Numbers, Ronald. L. 1998. Darwinism Comes to America. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Nyman, Lawrence. 1995. “The Identification of Birth Order Personality Attributes”, Journal of Psychology, 129, 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ozer, Daniel J. 1985. “Correlation and the Coefficient of Determination”, Psychological Bulletin, 97, 307–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Parker, Wayne D. 1998. “Birth Order Effects in the Academically Talented”, Gifted Child Quarterly, 42, 29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Paulhus, Delroy L., Chen, David, & Trapnell, Paul D. 1999. “Birth Order and Personality within Families”, Psychological Science, 10, 482–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Phillips, Suzanne M. 1998. “Birth Order and Personality—Not Again!”, paper presented at the 69th Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, February 1998, Boston.Google Scholar
  51. Plomin, Robert & Daniels, Denise. 1987. “Why Are Children in the Same Family So Different from One Another”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Retherford, Robert A. & Sewell, William H. 1991. “Birth Order and Intelligence: Further Tests of the Confluence Model”, American Sociological Review, 56, 141–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rogers, Joseph Lee. 2001. “What Causes Birth Order-Intelligence Patterns? The Admixture Hypothesis, Revisited”, American Psychologist, 56, 505–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rodgers, Joseph Lee, Cleveland, Hobart H., van den Oord, Edwin, & Rowe, David C. 2000. “Resolving the Debate Over Birth Order, Family Size, and Intelligence”, American Psychologist, 55, 599–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rosenthal, Robert. 1987. Judgment Studies: Design, Analysis, and Meta-analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rosenthal, Robert & Rubin, Donald B. 1982. “A Simple, General Purpose Display of Magnitude in Experimenter Effect”, Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 166–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Salmon, Catherine A. 1998. “The Evocative Nature of Kin Terminology in Political Rhetoric”, Politics and the Life Sciences, 17, 51–57.Google Scholar
  58. Salmon, Catherine A. 1999. “On the Impact of Sex and Birth Order on Contact with Kin”, Human Nature, 10, 183–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Salmon, Catherine A. & Daly, Martin. 1998. “Birth Order and Familial Sentiment: Middleborns are Different”, Human Behavior and Evolution, 19, 299–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Saudino, Kimberly J. 1997. “Moving beyond the Heritability Question: New Directions in Behavioral Genetic Studies of Personality”, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 6, 86–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schachter, Frances Fuchs, Gilutz, Gabi, Shore, Ellen, & Adler, Michelle. 1978. “Sibling Deidentification Judged by Mothers: Cross-validation and Developmental Studies”, Child Development, 49, 543–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schachter, Frances Fuchs. 1982. “Sibling Deidentification and Split-parent Identifications: A Family Tetrad”, in Lamb, M.E. & Sutton-Smith, B., eds., Sibling Relationships: Their Nature and Significance Across the Lifespan. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 123–52.Google Scholar
  63. Schafer, Joseph L. 1991. “Algorithms for Multiple Imputation and Posterior Simulation from Incomplete Multivariate Data with Ignorable Nonresponse”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Statistics, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  64. Schwabl, Hubert. 1996. “Environment Modifies the Testosterone Levels of a Female Bird and Its Eggs”, Journal of Experimental Zoology, 276, 157–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Schwabl, Hubert, Mock, Douglas W., & Gieg, Jennifer A. 1997. “A Hormonal Mechanism for Parental Favouritism”, Nature, 386, 231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Skinner, William G. 1992. “Seek a Loyal Subject in a Filial Son: Family Roots of Political Orientation in Chinese Society”, in Family Process and Political Process in Modern Chinese History. Taipei, Republic of China: Chiang Ching-kuo Foundation for International Scholarly Exchange, pp. 943–93.Google Scholar
  67. Somit, Albert, Arwine, Alan, & Peterson, Steven A. 1996. Birth Order and Political Behavior. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  68. Sulloway, Frank J. 1979. Freud, Biologist of the Mind: Beyond the Psychoanalytic Legend. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  69. Sulloway, Frank J. 1982. “Freud and Biology: The Hidden Legacy”, in Wood-ward, W.R. & Ash, M.G., eds., The Problematic Science: Psychology in Nineteenth-Century Thought. New York: Praeger Publishers, pp. 198–227.Google Scholar
  70. Sulloway, Frank J. 1995. “Birth Order and Evolutionary Psychology: A Meta-analytic Overview”, Psychological Inquiry, 6, 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sulloway, Frank J. 1996. Born to Rebel: Birth Order, Family Dynamics, and Creative Lives. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  72. Sulloway, Frank J. 1997. Born to Rebel: Birth Order, Family Dynamics, and Creative Lives, revised ed. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  73. Sulloway, Frank J. 1999. “Birth Order”, in Runco, M. A. & Pritzker, S.R., eds., Encyclopedia of Creativity, 1: 189–202.Google Scholar
  74. Sulloway, Frank J. (in press-a). “Born to Rebel and Its Critics”, Politics and the Life Sciences.Google Scholar
  75. Sulloway, Frank J. (in press-b). “Sibling-Order Effects”, International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences.Google Scholar
  76. Townsend, F. (in press). “Birth Order and Rebelliousness: Reconstructing the Research in Born to Rebel, Politics and the Life Sciences.Google Scholar
  77. Trivers, Robert L. 1974. “Parent-offspring Conflict”, American Zoologist, 14, 249–64.Google Scholar
  78. Trivers, Robert L. 1985. Social Evolution. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
  79. Voland, Ekart. 1988. “Differential Infant and Child Mortality in Evolutionary Perspective: Data from the late 17th to 19th Century Ostfriesland (Germany)”, in Betzig, Laura, Mulder, Monique Borgerhoff, & Türke, Paul, eds., Human Reproduction Behaviour: A Darwinian Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 253–62.Google Scholar
  80. Voland, Ekart. 1990. “Differential Reproductive Success within the Krummhorn Population (Germany, 18th and 19th Centuries)”, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 26, 54–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wilkinson, Leland & Hill, MaryAnn. 1994. SYSTAT forDOS, 2 vols. Evanston, Illinois: SYSTAT, Inc.Google Scholar
  82. Williams, Terrance J., Pepitone, Michelle E., Christensen, Scott E., Cooke, Bradley M., Huberman, Andrew D., Breedlove, Nicholas J., Breedlove, Tessa J., Jordan, Cynthia L., & Breedlove, S. Marc. 2000. “Finger Length Ratios and Sexual Orientation”, Nature, 404, 455–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zajonc, Robert B. 1976. “Family Configuration and Intelligence”, Science, 192, 227–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zajonc, Robert B. 2001. “The Family Dynamics of Intellectual Development”, American Psychologist, 56, 490–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Zajonc, Robert B. & Mullally, Patricia R. 1997. “Birth Order: Reconciling Conflicting Effects”, American Psychologist, 52, 685–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Zweigenhaft, Richard L. & Von Ammon, Jessica. 2000. “Birth Order and Civil Disobedience: A Test of Sulloway’s ‘Born to Rebel’ Hypothesis”, Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 624–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations