Final 2. The Affect of Birth Order Personality on Social Preferences
This topic submitted by Betsy Auman, Alyssa Moll ( mollam@muohio.edu ) on 4/22/05. [ Human Nature Team: Betsy Auman, Alyssa Moll-Section: Cummins/Wolfe]
The Affects of Birth Order
Personality on Social PreferencesThe Lasting Impact of Sibling Relations
Researched by:
Betsy Auman and Alyssa Moll
"The Nature of Human Nature"
Abstract:
Birth order personalities are different for each position: Oldest, middle, youngest, and only children. These personality traits have bearing on who we can be most compatible with as friends, lovers, and spouses later in life. This research seeks out any correlation between the specific birth orders and social relationships. Analyzing the relationships of college students and their parents, correlational trends and statistically significant results were uncovered with individuals choosing social relations of the same birth order as themselves.
Introduction:
This study analyzes personality development through daily childhood interactions; utilizing Matt RidleyÕs concept of Nature via Nurture, where experiences shape our genes. In this project we expand on previous studies performed on birth order and personalities. Where some have researched connections between birth order and personality, our research project will focus on the links between birth order personality and social relationships. "Researchers have begun to realize that siblings have a major impact on one anotherÕs behavior and development through mutual socialization, helping behaviors, cooperative tasks and activities, and simple companionship, as well as through aggressive and various other negative behaviors" (Cicirelli, 1995). Because social relationships build from personality traits, we wish to address the concept that people who have the same birth position will have closer relationships than people at differing parts of birth order. The types of social relationships we plan to study are friends, dating relationships, and long term spouses. For this we are not just relying on college students and their relationships, we plan to look for similarities through their parents whose marital relationship has generally lasted longer than most college students, and therefore has more relevance.
One aspect of human nature is the continuing "nature vs. nurture" debate. For ages it has been argued whether or not our personality, and therefore behaviors, are shaped by predetermined genetics, or unexpected experiences throughout life. Certain personality traits can be detected as prevalent within a family, but the question lingers about whether the children developed these characteristics by observing their parents and other family members or through inherited traits. "Quantitative genetic research has built a strong case for the importance of genetic factors in many complex behavioral disorders and dimensions in the domains of psychopathology, personality, and cognitive abilities." (Plomin, 1994).
Genetics can only explain so much about a person. The developmental stages of childhood are very influential to personality. "Most features of personality are moderately heritable. The fact that many behaviors are under partial genetic control does not mean that they are predetermined. Within the normal range of potential variations in physical and psychological characteristics, the environment affects how observed traits express themselves" (Sulloway, 1996). The events experienced and the impressions they leave behind are going to stay with a person for the rest of their lives, whether it is a single occurrence or a repeated action. The experiences that occur within the family are more than likely to be recurring over the course of many years and therefore leave a more lasting impression. These actions range from an only child being abused by a parent, or the continual neglect a middle child feels in a large family. Both instances will affect the child and hinder his or her psychological development.
Personality development occurs in the early years of oneÕs life. "Much of this basic learning takes place during out nursery years and while we are in a close relationship with our parents" (Forer, 1969). Experiences in these early stages are said to have permanent affects on oneÕs brain development, and their personality affects will show later in life. The family unit is the first way for infants to gain these experiences, usually from the affection of parents (Bosma & Jackson, 1990). If their family is lacking in affection, the child will grow up differently than if he or she was in a very warm and loving home. Each aspect of oneÕs existence is said to be a determining part of their lives; traumatic experiences are the most prominently noticed because they can instigate negative, and more heavily studied, results. The personality of a person plays a role in their daily life, and the lives of the people they come into contact with. It is important to understand how a person has become who they are. Many researchers try to figure out what experiences, and if they are family oriented, trigger negative responses.
The specific birth orders have different experiences with their siblings; there are always two sides to every story. For example, in a family of two, how the older child reacts to and interacts with the younger child will have an effect on the younger child who, depending on the type of interaction, can have positive or negative repercussions on their personality and how they will later interact with other individuals. "ÉFirst born children and adultsÉ seemed relatively more angry and irritable than their younger siblings. Often their approach to the outside world seemed more hostile and critical than that of the other children in their families" (Forer, 1969). Oldest children usually feel dethroned by their younger siblings, and will often harbor resentment towards them. This resentment can lead to the oldest being irritated more often by the younger, and will transfer those feelings to people outside the family.
Social relationships are an important component in our lives, as humans are social creatures. The way each individual handles their relationships can be predicted at least partially by their birth order personality. People are inclined to see their friends in the same way they can see siblings if they both have similar characteristics. Oldests are inclined to view all people the same way because of minor irritations that are brought upon by their younger siblings and they quickly learn to shut people out. While middle children crave extra attention from their friends to make up for a lack of attention at home, youngests can want more attention from their friends because they are accustomed to receiving large amounts of it at home (Forer, 1969). Finding the right combination of birth orders in a group of friends so that everyone gets along would be almost impossible given the stereotypical characteristics. But each person finds their niche with their social relationships, and those healthy relationships lead to healthier personalities later in life.
Most people have different criteria for romantic interests than they do for regular friends. Birth order personalities play a role in committed relationships that can determine the compatibility of the couple. For example, certain youngest children will have better relationships with people who can give them more attention and affection because that is what they are used to (Forer, 1969). If there is a direct correlation between the birth orders of married couples, then it can be concluded that birth order personalities are influential because of the specific personality traits of each birth order. Relationships are a combination or capatability and complimentary traits.
Before embarking upon a research topic, the general knowledge about the topic provides a framework to start off of and to build from. For the topic of birth order and its affect on personality development there is a large amount of information readily available. "In real estate there are only three factors worth considering - position, position and position. Location is also important in human development. Keen observers of human behaviour realize the importance of birth order and its affects on a child's behaviour, personality and performance" (Grose, 2005). This is at least partially because humans are obsessed with how we work and augment our genes through experiences to become unique individuals. Therefore, simply searching the internet provided a summary of birth order personality traits along with online tests, and intellectual reactions to the discoveries. "This article will help you to identify some possible strengths and weaknesses of your personality" (Real Families Inc, 2003). As a clear analysis, the varying predominate traits are shown in both positive and negative light. The strengths and weaknesses of each family role are explained, rather than just mentioning the stereotypical role. This mindset is a plus, given that we are looking at choices made by the individuals, which are hopefully the best for their own personality needs. Many research studies have been performed on topics closely related to ours.
There is plenty of research proving many factors besides sibling relationships play a role in personality development such as friends, environment (urban and rural), genetic predispositions, and school settings. Many studies have been done on separate social interactions and situations called the nonshared environment with siblings. "The demonstration of nonshared friend influence is difficult. This requires that we show a statistical association between quantity and frequency of mutual friends and outcome traits" (Hetherington, 1994). The various aspects affect an individualÕs personality cause each person to want different characteristics in friends and a romantic interest with whom to share their life. Since birth sequence has been proven to affect many peopleÕs character development, and personality is a deciding factor in major decisions we are attempting to make a connection between the two. To show that individuals have certain qualities they look for in a friend and mate can help explain why these assumed family roles remain active through the individualÕs entire lifespan.
A family of nine adult siblings, along with their spouses, and parents underwent a study of inter-sibling relations through their lifespan which showed that their birth order played a role in many personal facets of each memberÕs life. "Here, we examined how each of the nine spouses viewed the siblings. An underlying assumption was that if a spouse regarded a certain sibling negatively, the relationship between the sibling and the spouseÕs mate might be weakened" (Cicirelli, 1995). This study looks at the opposite effects than those we are researching. Instead of how a marriage changes the relationship between siblings, we are looking to see if there is a parallel between personality growth due to sibling succession and mate selection. Although the study didnÕt look at the impact of siblings in the same way as we are, the affects of relationships obviously play a role in an individualÕs development, and the choices they make for the important aspect of their lives, particularly with whom they decide to spend their life.
Another study that looked at leadership roles in families utilized an interactive interview, to allow the true dynamics of the family to be more salient that just asking them to answer questions honestly. "An approach to understanding families is to study the family in action. Rather than only talking about how they typically behave É the family being studied is encouraged to interact with each other around a specific family task" (Hoopes, 1982). This type of study shows how much of family interaction is unconscious. It allows us to be aware that even if our subjects are filling out the questionnaire as precisely as they can, it might not be an accurate representation of the true family dynamics. Although the surveys will have a personal bias in the responses, it is one of the only ways to complete a general study such as ours. It is helpful to look at the strengths and weaknesses of a particular study method to gather a more significant selection of data.
A third study that helps to put our research into perspective analyzes the effect of sibling relationships on a global scale. Many "cultures make use of, exaggerate, or ignore sibling parity and genetic relatedness in different ways, of course Š but rarely are they irrelevant in shaping interaction or cultural beliefs" (Zukow, 1989). Each culture focuses on different aspects of sibling and family relationships as the most influential in a childÕs development. A specific study was performed in Vermont on the spacing between children and the general influence it had upon the amount of interaction they had with their mother and father (Zukow, 1989). This study on the effect of the spacing between siblings is more specialized than ours, and shows one factor of sibling interaction that can account for the personality differences we note in our test subjects.
When taking specific birth orders into consideration, there are certain stereotypical characteristics for each one. Oldests have a continuous need for achievement and will perform better in school than their younger siblings. Oldest children are often thought of as responsible, or at least pressure is put on them to be responsible and follow the rules of the family and society. They often feel uncomfortable with peers of the same age, and usually feel the most comfortable with people considerably younger or older than themselves. Oldest children can find it difficult to maintain close friendships because they preserve their negative feelings they take towards their younger siblings (Forer, 1969). The constant urge to be in charge or be the leader, even if the urge is unconscious, can often hurt relationships between oldests. Oldest children have a hard time accepting peers as peers, and not their younger siblings. In long term relationships, the oldest child may take on more responsibility than they can adequately handle (Forer, 1969).
The Ōmiddle child syndromeÕ is a common term used to describe middle children who feel like they are ignored or pushed aside on a daily basis. Middle children often find other places to be and other people to be with instead of with their family. They see a need to seek out other opportunities to get attention and to not feel ignored. Middle children have a difficult time devoting themselves seriously to one thing, or even to people. There might be many things that a middle child enjoys, but they will not concentrate on just one thing. With friends, they tend to have many they would consider acquaintances, but few who they would really call close friends. (Wilson, 1981). Middles tend to be Ōthick skinnedÕ, but in reality are very sensitive; their feelings are hurt easily and take longer than normal to heal. This sensitivity, which can come directly from the family interactions or lack thereof, is brought out with everybody, not just family, and can make the person a more private person who shields themselves from getting hurt. Middle children will often not readily express information about themselves, even to parents. "ŌWhere did you go?Õ somebody might ask. ŌOutÕ is [the middle childÕs] reply" (Wilson, 1981).
The common folk theory is that the last born children are spoiled, rebellious, and will not grow up to be an independent adult. The professional psychological theory is that youngest children are very two sided. Wilson (1981) states "If you are a typical last-born, you have a fair share of both the charmer and the rebel in your make-up, and other people are often caught off guard by the fact that you can be endearing one minute, and hard to deal with the next." Youngest children will be more at ease with accepting others in leadership and authoritative roles because they have become accustomed to getting what they want without coming into direct conflict with authority. However, Forer (1969) warns that "If in childhood, they were required to defend themselves a great deal or were placed in the position of controlling other oneÕs because they were youngest, they may be quite imperious and demanding in adulthood." The relationships youngest children have early in life with friends and other siblings will have affects on their personality later in life. Youngest children try to retain the attitude that they are still the "babies" so they can receive closer attention in their relationships.
Only children are the most closely related to the oldest child in a family. They both know what is like to have a parents attention focused solely on them. However, once there is a second child in the picture the only child becomes the oldest, and begins to veer off the same track as only children. On the other hand, they relate to the youngest child in that there is no one under them to take care of; they get used to having everyone do things for them. Parental interaction is very influential to only children since all the focus of the parents is only on one child. If the parents are overprotective the child can become fearful and timid later in life because they were very sheltered. Only children are accustomed to an undivided amount of affection from their parents, and can grow up to want that same amount of attention from friends and partners (Cutts, 1954). This can lead to some egocentricity which can come of as insensitivity towards other people, yet only children can be more self critical than other birth orders. Only children have the need to feel accepted as part of a group. If they do not feel like they are accepted they will feel left out as they did growing up not being able to participate in adult activities with their parents.
Family size affects middle children more than it affects youngests and oldests. A middle child in a family of three is viewed differently than in a family of seven. The small family only contains one middle child, and they will usually follow most characteristics of the stereotypical middle child. A family with multiple middle children will often have fewer stereotypical characteristics because middle children will tend to take on characteristics of youngests and oldests. The second born child in a family of seven is considered another oldest child by the parents, and is expected to act like an oldest to help with the younger siblings. "In a large family it is not only the oldest child but also the other older children who are given the burden of minding the younger ones; protecting them, and fighting their battles for them" (Wilson, 1981). While the sixth born child takes on more characteristics of the youngest sibling, and they are often seen as another "baby" of the family.
Larger families nowadays, tend to lack a sense of organization. Unless the family is very wealthy and can afford servants and nannies to care for the children, the parents are outnumbered and can have problems keeping all the children happy. "Under more financially strained circumstances, however, birth order effects tend to be exaggeratedÉjealously and envy can build up an explosive head of steam, and childhood antagonisms based on who got the biggest piece of pie can last a lifetime"(Wilson, 1981). Disorganization of the family, sadly, can lead to one child getting lost in the crowd. With parents who are too busy to look after each one individually, the child who receives the least attention can grow up needing to seek attention.
Today, the composition of families is different than it was fifty years ago. Families are getting smaller, and it is more common to have both parents out of the home everyday working. Today there are also fewer families that include extended family members in their everyday lives. Typical family size has steadily dwindled over the years which mean that people generally have fewer siblings and other family members to interact with on a daily basis which affects their personality development (Bank & Kahn, 1982). "In an extended family, the adolescent has (1) daily models for adult behaviors, manners, and roles, and (2) models for adult intergenerational interactions, for example, parents interacting with grandparents. These models mat facilitate learning social skills and promoting intergenerational understanding" (Dusek, 1987). Today children have even less examples of adult behavior with both parents working and out of the house for most of the day; the occurrence of single parent homes has increased as well to leave a child without a parent role model.
The number of parents in the household, the socioeconomic conditions of the family, and where the family is located geographically, are all different aspects which can have a bearing on the shaping of a personÕs mind. Obviously, children from a large family which lives on a farm in the middle of Idaho will have different perspectives on life than a person with only one sibling living in Los Angeles. The parentÕs role in raising the children has a documented impact as well. A growing trend in our society is that there are more homes that only have one parent, who is working many hours to support the family, in the home. The responsibility of raising the younger children is placed on the oldest sibling, in most cases the oldest girl (Dusek, 1987). The presence of parents, therefore, affects the development of all the children, especially the oldest who is in a position to be forced to accept more responsibility than he/she is ready for.
With all the relationships within the family itself that can have an affect on personality, we hypothesize that there will be a strong correlation between what birth order a person is and the birth order of their closest friends and/or significant other. We predict that there will be the strongest correlation between oldests, meaning oldests will be friends or lovers with other oldests more often than with any other birth order. The youngest children will have the least amount of correlation due to a more tolerant personality. The middle children will differ between whether it is a large family or a small family. In the large families we predict the older middles will be friends with more oldests and other older middles. The same follows for the younger middles; they will be more likely to have stronger relationships with youngests and other younger middles. We predict that in small families, there will not be as much correlation as middle children can relate certain aspects to both oldests and youngests. We expect that the parents will have a stronger correlation with their birth orders since most will be in a long term, committed relationship.
Materials and Methods:
This was a correlational study which focused on whether an association between birth order personalities and social relationships exists, and touched upon some of the overlying themes of how these factors are interrelated. One of the main concepts of the study was to look for similarities between an individual test subjectÕs personality and who they are more compatible with both for friends and in intimate relationships. To do this we surveyed Miami University college students in four residence halls (Mary Lyon Hall, McKee Hall, Peabody Hall, and Scott Hall). We went to the dormitories in the evening, and passed out the survey to any willing participant in their room with the instructions to place the survey in the hall when it was completed. After finishing a hallway, we returned to the beginning and pick up the completed surveys. We kept a tally of which rooms had been given a questionnaire and which had returned them to us. Typically, we spent 2 Š 3 hours in each dorm handing the surveys out and then collecting them and placing them directly in a sealable clipboard to ensure anonymity. The questionnaires, an example of which is located at the end of this paper, that were distributed have four distinct components. The first was a small white sheet for them to keep which said:
This is a study we are conducting for our WCP 262 class on Human Nature. We would appreciate it if you would fill out the following survey. It is purely optional and totally confidential. We will be performing a few in-depth interviews, if you would be willing to possibly participate in one of these please fill out the contact section. Filling out that section will not alter the confidentiality of your responses. We are grateful for your participation in this study. If you have any questions or comments please contact: Alyssa, Betsy, or Professor Chris Wolfe.
On the top of the first side we determined the gender and age of our subjects as a point of reference. Next we requested their information so if they were willing to volunteer, we could contact them should to delve more deeply into their experiences with the in-depth interviews. Third, the rest of the front side of our questionnaire contained fifteen statements that helped comprise a general personality survey based on the stereotypical personality traits of each particular birth position, as established by previous research studies. Each birth position had at least three specific traits that the survey looked for. Statements one, three, eight, and thirteen were for oldest children, while statements three, six, and seven were specifically for only children. The statements pertaining to middle children were two, nine, ten, and fourteen; whereas those for the youngest children were four, five, eleven, twelve, and fifteen. These statements were scattered randomly through the fifteen statements so that the subject would not be able to ascertain a pattern and unintentionally or purposely skew the results. The subject responded to each statement on a five point scale ranging from strongly agree (one) to strongly disagree (five) with a neutral option (three).
Finally, the second side of the survey was strictly factual queries pertaining to the subject. This addressed the exact birth position not only of the subject, but also his/her parents, most recent or current significant other, two close friends, and the friend he/she has known the longest. In addition, it had two questions regarding which personality traits the subject looked for in people that he/she would be in a relationship with. The first of these questions was picking which members of a school group would be most desirable, a follower of directions, a leader, or a negotiator. For the qualities which would be the most desirable in a significant other, the subject was asked to rank self confident, good willed, high achiever, and open minded. These questions helped us to determine whether our hypothesis about people with similar birth orderÕs becoming and remaining friends, and provided a reference to what the subject looked for in their relationships. After analyzing the surveys, we performed several in-depth interviews on individuals from each birth order; see the questions asked and handout at the end of the paper.
The answers from the fifteen statements were analyzed and data was calculated from the numbered scale in order to determine if the subjects fit with their predetermined stereotypical personality traits. The data from part two was analyzed using JMP to see if there was a statistically significant trend in relationships and ordinal positions, and then compared to see if the subjectÕs personality corresponded with their social preferences. When analyzing the information we were able to separate the data into categories through a Microsoft Excel spread sheet. Once the data was inserted into JMP, we were quickly able to determine any statistical significance in our findings.
We were well aware at the beginning of our study that some surveys would have omitted responses. However, with most of these surveys we were able to utilize the information provided. If basic information, such as the subjectÕs birth order, was missing then that survey was put aside, and the data was lost. The other major question of methodology was what to do when an individual circled more than one number on the front 15 statements. We decided that if two numbers were circled, we would pick either the agree or disagree response whichever was corresponding with the two numbers chosen. Because we didnÕt want to lose the way they were leaning, or put to much emphasis on a semi-strong feeling.
We also conducted in depth interviews with volunteers whose completed survey looked like it would be interesting to know more about their specific experiences. There was one only child, two oldest children, two middle children, and two youngest children that we interviewed. These interviews gave us more information on a wider range of personality topics, and how birth order played a role in the subjectÕs development. Moreover, they provided a broader context in which to view our data.
Results:
The total number of surveys we received was 183, of which 91 were male, 79 were female, and 13 did not respond to the question. The total number of subjects who are oldest children was 67; 30 male, 29 female, and 8 that did not respond. Middle children totaled 29, 18 male, 11 female, and 0 that did not respond. Youngest children had 69 subjects, 36 males, 29 females, and 4 who did not respond. Only children had 18 subjects, 8 males, 9 females, and one that did not respond. Table 1 shows this distribution.
Table 1. Sample Distribution
Oldest Middle Youngest Only Total
Male 30 18 36 8 91
Female 29 11 29 9 79
No Response 8 0 4 1 13
Total 67 29 69 18 183
The data was broken down into the categories of friends and romantic interests, i.e. best friend, boy/girlfriend. Using ANOVA the birth order of the subject was compared to the birth order of all the friends in each category. Certain birth orders showed trends toward similarities with who they were friends with. The results, including graphs, are shown below. The most statistically significant result we found was a strong correlation between the subjects that were oldest children and their best friend also being the oldest child.
In the personality comparison, the only children showed the most significant data towards having the stereotypical personality of only children. While most questions showed non-significant trends in the predicted direction, there was one question, number 3 - I relate better to adults than my peers - which showed significant correlation.
Figures 1 and 2 show the mean of oldests, middles, youngests and only children respectively. These show the correlation of each birth orderÕs stereotypical personality by looking at the answer to the specific questions to their birth order. Only children showed the most significant correlation of all four birth orders. Figure 1 shows the analysis of the mean scale for oldest children. For this P=0.2094. Figure 2 depicts the significance of the only child scale mean. P=0.0047. This means the correlation between the responses of the only children to their appropriate questions is high.
The next set of figures are the results of comparing each subject to their current or most recent boyfriend or girlfriend, their best friend, another good friend, and the friend they have known the longest. The different colors of the graph represent the correlation between each birth order. Note: Because of the similar personality traits of oldest children and only children, both were grouped into one category for more precise results. Figure 3 exhibits the significance in the correlation of best friends. The oldest children were found to be more likely to have other oldest children as their best friend than the other birth orders. P=0.0060. Figure 4 shows there is little correlation in the birth orders and the friend they have known the longest. P=0.1285. Figure 5 depicts a non significant trend in the predicted direction with the correlation of longer relationships. There is the most correlation between the oldest birth order. P=0.0989
The next set contains the figures pertaining to the preference ranking the subjects filled out on the questionnaire. The first two (figures 6 and 7) concern the preference of a working group member. Each of the characteristics: follows directions, leads group, and negotiates differences, relate to the youngest child, oldest/only child, and middle child respectively. Of these three characteristics, only two, follows directions and leads the group showed any non significant trends in the predicted direction.
Figure 6 illustrates the low significance in birth orders choosing a person who follows directions. P=0.0840. Figure 7 shows that there is a non significant trend in the predicted direction. P=0.0897. Figures 6 and 7 combined show there is a trend for only children to prefer to have people in the group that will follow directions, as there also is a trend for only children to no want someone else in the group to be the leader.
The following two figures (8 and 9) pertain to features one would find admirable in a significant other. The characteristics correspond to birth order as followed: self confident Š oldest child, good willed Š youngest, high achiever Š only child, open minded Š middle child. Once again only two of the characteristics, good willed and open minded, showed any statistical relevance.
Figure 8 illustrates the non-significant trend in the predicted direction for youngests preferring good willed less than middles and only/oldest children. P=0.0822. Figure 9 shows a trend in preferring an open minded partner is higher for youngest children than the other birth orders. P=0.0879. This is interesting because an open minded person should be desired more by a middle child, and a good willed person corresponds with the youngest child. Perhaps because the youngest child is characterized as being more good willed, and is more of a show off, they do not want anyone else to steal the spotlight from them.
Table 2 shows the P value for each of the personality questions asked the subjects on the front side of the questionnaire. Question 3 (Figure 10) is the only result that has any significance. This question was aimed at only children - I relate better to adults than my peers - and it shows that the only children do respond affirmatively to it. The only other result that had a non-significant trend in the predicted direction was question 13 (Figure 11) - I prefer to be in a leadership role.
Table 2. Statistical Values for Personality Questions
P- Value DF F-ratio
Question 1 0.4545 3 0.8762
Question 2 0.2873 3 1.2668
Question 3* 0.0101 3 3.8883
Question 4 0.7785 3 0.3649
Question 5 0.9291 3 0.1508
Question 6 0.2225 3 1.4765
Question 7 0.5722 3 0.6688
Question 8 0.7459 3 0.4102
Question 9 0.1898 3 1.6053
Question 10 0.2498 3 1.3824
Question 11 0.7642 3 0.3847
Question 12 0.3928 3 1.0030
Question 13* 0.0540 3 2.5960
Question 14 0.4601 3 0.8656
Question 15 0.5234 3 0.7505
The interviews provided a breadth of knowledge and understanding of the individualÕs experiences that could never be displayed through a survey. The most beneficial part was to ask them to walk us through their thought process as they chose the most desirable characteristics for a group project or a romantic interest. Interestingly their selection of traits altered slightly as they vocalized their reasoning and logic.
Asking the intervieweeÕs to pick the personality set that best described them didnÕt go as we intended. Most of the individuals chose the same personality set. We believe this is because it is fairly neutral, and has no negative characteristics in addition to the positive ones. Therefore, we began to ask the subjects to underline all the characteristics that could be applicable. Although section B would have most or all of the traits underlined, typically there was a trend towards one section over the others. It eluminates the fact that no one wants to put themselves in a bad light, and our research is based on self-perception.
When we completed the interview with an oldest child, test subject #24 provided a few ideas about how individuals might feel towards leading a group. An oldest person might take the responsibility to keep it away from a less capable individual. This oldest, who was friends with all oldest children, still needed things to be done accurately, but it was not imperative for him/her to be a leader. "I donÕt necessarily like to be the person in charge, but if there is not a person that I consider, and to appear self-centered, not a person I think should be in charge, I would rather be the one in charge. Basically, I want to be sure that things get done right" (Test Subject #24). If a class project needed direction, this individual would feel that it was up to them, as an oldest, to determine who was capable of leading the group to the most successful end.
The middle child we interviewed offered the story which her mother believes is the reason they donÕt have as good a relationship. While we were looking for the test subjects to get along better with the parent more closely related to their birth order, this provides an entirely different view of the socialization of babies.
"My mom has a theory, she says itÕs because she had Nicki (the younger sister) and I to close together, ummm, and she had to stop nursing me, well she nursed all of us, but she had to stop nursing me, she always blames herself for our lack of relationship, and even like after she had Nicki, she always had to carry the baby-baby and my dad would carry me. My older sister, Sheri, was typically off by herself, which might be why she doesnÕt have a good relationship with either of our parents" (Test Subject #103).
This concept would be almost impossible to test; however, it is comforting to know that other factors besides this are at play in the strengthening of relationships. It provides insights into the multifaceted influences on the development of personality and relationships.
Although we generally were looking for individuals to prefer relationships with members of the same birth order as themselves, we are aware that not all relationships can be put into a box such as this. One major aspect of a healthy relationship is to get along and to complement each other. Particularly in a group that is working on a project, such as for school, having members that balance the strengths of the others will create a group with better dynamics, that will be able to produce a more rounded and superior project. As test subject #168 stated when picking out which was the most desirable personality trait for a group, "Well, I know that I would need someone to lead the group, because, well, I wonÕt." This individual was aware of his/her weaknesses and decided that a leader was the only position they wouldnÕt feel comfortable filling, and therefore it was the most desirable characteristic for someone that they would be working with.
The individualÕs then picked the characteristics that they found most desirable in a romantic relationship. It was interesting to hear one subject second guessing her own decisions and preferences, and yet still feel so strongly about the basic essence that they found necessary in a significant other. "Good willed, number one. I think. I mean, if youÕre not good willed, you could be self confident and an asshole. ItÕs like a personÕs core and then you build from there" (Test Subject #121). This youngest child valued the stereotypical youngest characteristic over the other birth order positions. This obviously isnÕt limited solely to youngest children; however, if this is the type of person he/she is attracted to than the likelihood of ending up with another youngest is high.
The only child is stereotypically an overachiever and a perfectionist. Yet it still seemed shocking that at least 5 times during the interview the subject mentioned how he/she required things to get done. This need had affected his/her previous romantic relationship and all group undertakings, although the individual hated those on principle. At the end, while picking out the most desirable characteristics, test subject 180 expanded upon his/her earlier comments. "I want someone who will go the extra mile, to do things well, and always makes sure that the things get done." During our interview time, it seemed as if some of the answers from the questionairre were misrepresentative of the true personality of the individual. However, it seemed to be an unintentional misleading, simply because the individual was not fully able to comprehend his/her own desires and motivational factors.
Discussion:
This study provides many non-statistically significant trends in the predicted direction. Oldest children were much more likely to be friends with other oldests, while youngest children showed no clear or predictable pattern. Therefore, the data rejected the null hypothesis by showing some statistically significant data proving that the results were not arrived at purely by chance. Although the data clearly shows that a correlation exists between birth order influenced personality traits and social preferences, there are many other factors that also play a role in individual and social development. One main factor that would have altered the significance drastically would be to increase the sample size. While one hundred and eighty three provides a substantial base to obtain data from, opening the study up to many more individuals would increase its accuracy. Additionally, it would be beneficial to perform the study in another location. The dormitories of Miami University are characteristically a small section of the rest of the population. Obviously all the individuals we tested were college aged, and the majority of our subjects were white middle to upper middle class. A larger and more diverse sample size would increase the reliability of the results and be a more archetypal representation of the population.
Though many trends were determined, we canÕt help but think about how the questionnaire could have been altered to create a wider breadth in responses. While the personality statements did not provide the data that we anticipated, it is difficult to know how much of our results were from the questions which were based off several other questionnaires, or whether the individuals who filled them out were not straightforward. Therefore, we are unsure whether it would be better to change those questions or not. However, the final two questions on the back definitely should have been retouched to become gradient scales, just like the rest of the questions on the survey.
Although determining personality traits of individuals can be a difficult undertaking we believed that a general knowledge of our subjects would be beneficial to understanding their social preferences. Additionally, the general knowledge could help us to determine whether the individualÕs personality is actually linear to the stereotypically expected results. It is particularly difficult when the data is collected in first person, and not all the subjects will be entirely straightforward. To counteract this, we have tested a large sample of students, and have performed several interviews in hopes of noticing a trend for all the subjects.
Social relationships are affected by many aspects of life. The experiences of an individual, most of which are uncontrollable, play such an important role in development that no study could analyze the entire affects of these aspects. Many of these facets such as race, class, family order, experiences, and gender are the basics of life into which an individual is born. One aspect of life that only affects certain families is adoption, step-siblings, half-siblings. Unfortunately, given the small size of our study, we are unable to look for any statistically significant information or trends among these important aspects of life. One way we determined would expand our study was to include the birth orders of the subjectÕs parents, looking for a correlation in long-term relationships as well.
The true jewel of understanding how family relationships affect people in such a profound way throughout their entire life is to learn about as many aspects of the individuals life and experiences. This should be done in first and third person methods. One major way to follow up on this would be to perform in depth interviews on almost every subject, and then handpicking a few to carefully watch and keep a record of their experiences.
References:
Asendorpf, Jens B., Wilpers, Susanne. June 1998. Personality Effects on Social Relationships.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Vol: 74, Issue: 6,
Bank, Stephen, and Michael Kahn. 1997. The Sibling Bond. New York: BasicBooks.
"Birth Order." 7/16/03. Real Families Inc. 2/16/05. Bosma, Harke and Sandy Jackson, Eds. 1990. Coping and Self-Concept in Adolescence. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Burns, Nick Kristy Antos, Nicky Ziomek, and Lindsey Sabo. 11/9/99. "Birth Order, Demographics and Your Personality." JrScience. Chris Myers. Western College: Miami University. 2/16/05. Cicirelli, Victor. 1995. Sibling Relationship across the Life Span. New York: Plenum Press.
Cutts, Norma E. and Nicholas Moseley. 1954. The Only Child: A Guide for Parents and Only Children of All Ages. New York: G.P. PutnamÕs Sons.
Dusek, Jerome. 1987. Adolescent Development and Behavior. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Grose, Michael. 2005. "How Birth Order can affect your Child's Behavior and Personality." Positive Path Network. 2/16/05. Forer, Lucille K. 1969. Birth Order and Life Roles. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas.
Head, John. 1997. Working with Adolescents: Constructing Identity. New York: The Falmer Press.
Hetherington, E. Mavis, David Reiss, and Robert Plomin. 1994. Separate Social Worlds of Siblings: The Impact of Nonshared Environment on Development. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
Hoopes, Janet. 1982. Prediction in Child Development: A Longitudinal Study of Adoptive and Nonadoptive Families. New York: Child Welfare League of America.
Magoun, F. Magoun. 1956. Love and Marriage. New York: Harper & Brothers.
OÕConnor, Anne. 2005. "Birth Order and Your Child's Personality." Birth Order - its Effect on Personality. Roller Coaster. Plomin R, Owen MJ, McGuffin P. 1994. "The genetic basis of complex human behaviors." Center for Developmental and Health Genetics, Pennsylvania State University. Science. Jun 17;264(5166):1733-9.
Reiss, David, Jenae Neiderhiser, E. Mavis Hetherington, and Robert Plomin. 2000. The Relationship Code: Deciphering Genetic and Social Influences on Adolescent Development. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press,
Sulloway, Frank. 1997. Born to Rebel: Birth Order, Family Dynamics, and Creative Lives. New York: Vintage Books,
Toman, Walter. 1969. Family Constellation: Its Effects on Personality and Social Behavior. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Wilson, Bradford and George Edington. 1981. First Child, Second Child É Your Birth Order Profile. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company,
Zukow, Patricia. 1989. Sibling Interactions Across Cultures: Theoretical and Methodological Issues. Berlin: Springer-Verlag,
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu
Here is a list of responses that have been posted to this Study...
Important: Press the Browser Reload button to view the latest contribution.
Respond to this Submission!
IMPORTANT: For each Response, make sure the title of the response is different than previous titles shown above!
DOWNLOAD the Paper Posting HTML Formating HELP SHEET!
We also have a GUIDE for depositing articles, images, data, etc in
your research folders.
Article complete. Click HERE
to return to the "What is Human Nature?" Menu.
Visit the rest of the site!
Listen to a "Voice Navigation" Intro!
(Quicktime or MP3)