The Birth Order Factor Ordinal Position Social Strata and Educational Achievement - Proquest

12/7/2015
Back to results
Thebirthorderfactor:Ordinalposition,socialstrata,andeducationalachievementProQuest
4162 of 173-
The birth order factor: Ordinal position, social strata,

and educational achievement
Travis, Russell
Full text
Abstract
; Kohli, Vandana
. The Journal of Social Psychology 135.4 (Aug 1995): 499.
Abstract/Details
Translate
Hide highlighting
The relationship between birth order and academic attainment of 87 men and women from a variety of
socioeconomic backgrounds in the US was explored. Birth order was found to have an impact on years
of education completed among members of the middle class.
Full Text
Translate
Turn on search term navigation
THE INTERPRETIVE CONNECTIONS between birth order and its psychological and behavioral correlates
have been examined in a variety of different social and cultural settings. Although some studies report
the absence of a significant birth order effect (Edwards & Thacker, 1979; Hauser & Sewell, 1985; Kunz &
Peterson, 1977; Olneck & Bills, 1979; Svanum & Bringle, 1980; Tremans-Ziremba, Michayhuk, & Taylor,
1980), other studies have found a direct association (Blake, 1989; Breland, 1974; Forehand, Long, Brody, &
Fauher, 1986; Kauer & Dheer, 1982; King & Lillard, 1983; Lindert, 1974; Marjoribanks, 1991; Nuttal, Nuttal,
Polit, & Hunter 1976; Rosenblatt & Skoogberg, 1974; Sargong, 1989) and an indirect association (Belmont
& Marolla, 1973; Davis, Cafan, & Bashi, 1978) between ordinal position and educational attainment.
The two explanations most often offered are (a) the confluence hypothesis and (b) the resource-dilution
hypothesis. In the first instance, emphasis is on dilution of the intellectual milieu; in the second, on the
dilution of such factors as economic resources. Zajonc and Markus (1975) formulated the confluence
model to explain the impact of birth order on cognitive achievement as a function of the confluence of
two factors: family intellectual environment (average mental age of parents and children, thought to
decline with each successive birth), and a teaching function effect (older children intellectually
stimulated by the opportunity to mentor younger siblings--an opportunity denied last-borns and "onlies").
"Under the confluence model," according to Steelman and Mercy (1980, p. 580), "sibship size bears
directly on intelligence irrespective of other factors," such as socioeconomic location or other
confounding variables. Furthermore, Powell and Steelman (1990) indicated that, at best, this is an
incomplete model, one that "fails to specify the mechanisms by which the intellectual ambience renders
its impact on children, prompting some to refer to it as a 'contagion theory'" (p. 183).
http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lapl.org/docview/199812546/C65984700BFF40A5PQ/162?accountid=6749
1/9
12/7/2015
The resource-dilution hypothesis takes the critical importance of socioeconomic location as its point of
departure from the confluence hypothesis. It emphasizes the unequal allocation of resources among
children as an intervening variable between sibling structure and educational consequences. According
to Powell and Steelman (1990),
While the confluence model argues that the sibship structure is related to academic consequences
because it is a proxy for the intellectual milieu, the resource dilution hypothesis specifies that sibling
structure is related to educational outcomes because it constrains the amount of resources that are
distributed to children. (p. 184)
Moreover, the resource-dilution perspective is broader in scope and requires fewer assumptions than
does the confluence model.
These two competing explanatory schemes have been tested in the United States and in other countries.
Cherian (1990), for example, studied the linkage between birth order and academic achievement of
youngsters in Transkei, South Africa, and reported a significant relation between ordinal position and
educational performance. He concluded that first-borns and onlies occupy a unique and beneficial
position in the South African family constellation. According to a worldwide sample of 39 societies
analyzed by Rosenblatt and Skoogberg (1974):
Firstborns in many societies of the world increase parental status, stabilize parental marriage, and are
more likely to grow up with authority over siblings, with respect from them and with such special
attention as comes from elaborate birth ceremonies, parental teknonym [the naming of a parent after one
of the parent's offspring], and birth - order -relevant address, naming, or kinship terminology. (p. 52)
Accordingly, birth order effects are conditioned by cultural norms that regulate family structure, just as
intellectual destiny is influenced by the sibling situation into which one is born.
Method
Sample
In this study we examined the relationship between birth order and educational attainment. Because the
data were collected to test the effects of sibling structure per se, the analysis tends to be less post hoc in
its explanations, while avoiding the "incidental finding" syndrome of just happening onto birth order in an
investigation. Kammeyer (1968) believed that there is "considerable indication that research findings on
birth order are 'stumbled onto' by researchers who were initially interested in some other phenomenon
(usually a dependent variable)" (p. 73).
The data in this study were collected as part of the Adult Life Cycle Project. The data come from of a
sample of adults (male and female) from city blocks randomly chosen within census tracts mirroring the
actual class and racial percentages in a medium-sized California metropolitan area (population 221,000).
The Adult Life Cycle Project was completed over an 11-month period (ending in 1979) with the use of a
simple (single-stage) cluster procedure similar to Blalock's cost-sampling error model (Blalock, 1960). A
survey technique fostering maximum use of small field staff and administrative staff was used. A "leave
2/9
12/7/2015
behind" strategy was used, similar to that used in the Oakland study, wherein questionnaires designed for
self-administration were deposited with the respondent at home and retrieved on a subsequent visit 3
days later. This approach provides personal contact during the initial visit, plus an opportunity to answer
any questions that may have arisen by the time of the follow-up call. There was a completion rate of 74%
(after considering refusals, ineligibles, and those never at home), which yielded a usable sample of 817
respondents.
Another feature of this investigation is that the data were from an adult sample, unlike many of the
research findings based on samples of school children or college-age respondents. A data set based on
adults is particularly relevant for testing birth order effects on total number of school years completed.
In addition, however, to individual attributes, such as ordinal position in the sibling constellation,
outcomes over the life course may depend on socioeconomics (Clausen, 1986). A family's social status
appears to affect educational outcomes just as much as level of demonstrated ability does.
The fact that parents are a major element in the individual's life chances strongly suggests a need to
control for parental background variables, especially whether the respondent's family of birth was of low
or high socioeconomic status, and emphasis should be placed on the importance of economic period
effects (Blake, 1989). The concern is that birth order could interact with the family cycle to
systematically affect the educational achievement of adults, making it necessary to somehow control for
period effects. Children in small families are, as Blake indicated, more likely to be raised in similar periods
of the parents' life cycle and to be closer in age when compared with children in larger families.
This problem was anticipated in the present study and, instead of relying on more indirect but traditional
indicators of social origins (such as parents' educational level), we asked the respondents about their
economic situation as it existed during the majority of their growing-up years. This strategy represents an
approach that is different from the problem of determining social location during childhood, a process
that may generate a more accurate assessment of the relative impact of economic period effects.
Measures
Linear multiple regression was used to assess the impact of birth order on educational achievement. To
test for the unique influence of birth order on number of years of schooling completed, we controlled for
the effects of other variables known to influence educational attainment. These variables include the
respondent's social characteristics, such as race and sex (Powell & Steelman, 1990), as well as
characteristics describing the respondent's parents (Blake, 1989; Clausen, 1986). Consequently, we
controlled for age, sex, and ethnicity, as well as class of social origin, father's occupation and education,
and mother's education. Each respondent's characteristics were coded as follows: age was measured in
single years; sex was coded 1 for female, 2 for male; and ethnicity was coded as 1 for Whites, 2 for
Blacks, 3 for Chicanos, and 4 for others. The respondent's self-reported class of social origin was coded 1
for wealthy, 2 for comfortable, 3 for meager, and 4 for poor. Father's occupation was coded into nine
different groups as follows: 1 for professional, technical, and related occupations; 2 for managers,
officials, and proprietors; 3 for clerical and sales occupations; 4 for craftsmen, foremen, and related
occupations; 5 for operatives and related occupations; 6 for farmers and farm managers; 7 for service
workers; 8 for laborers; and 9 for farm laborers. Finally, the two control variables, mother's and father's
3/9
12/7/2015
level of education completed, were coded in seven categories: 1 for grade school or less; 2 for some high
school; 3 for high school diploma or equivalency; 4 for some college; 5 for college degree; 6 for some
graduate or professional school; and 7 for graduate or professional degree.
The test variable, birth order , was coded as 0 for only child, 1 for oldest child, 2 for youngest child, and 3
for others. The rationale for this directional coding was derived from the literature on the dilution
hypothesis and from Blake's (1986, 1989) studies, both of which indicate that only children complete
more years of schooling than first-borns do. In turn, first-borns are likely to complete more years of
schooling than last-borns. Finally, those who are neither only, first-born, nor last-born children--the
"others"--will be the most seriously disadvantaged and the least likely to attain the same level of
education as their brothers and sisters.
In multiple-child families, resources are not likely be equally distributed among all siblings. Parents make
conscious decisions about allocating financial privileges to their children, and these decisions are based
on the relative position of a particular child in the family constellation. This is not to argue that parents
prefer first-borns or last-borns and, therefore, financially favor one over another; rather, their resource
allocation decisions are based on their own financial conditions, which may change.
Results
We conducted the analysis by regressing the level of completed education on birth order and the control
variables. This procedure was performed to test for the influence of sibling position after controlling for
the effects of other socioeconomic variables known to influence education.
The regression results (see Table 1) indicate that age had a negative influence on educational
attainment. (Table 1 omitted) The older respondents had completed fewer years of schooling than the
younger respondents. These findings are not surprising, given the continuing "upward spiral of literacy
and education" in the United States during the last century (Weeks, 1994, p. 338). Gender had a positive
influence on educational attainment, indicating that, when all else was equal, men attained more
education. Furthermore, as expected, being of a non-White background had a decidedly negative impact
on educational attainment, although the effect of ethnicity on education was not statistically significant.
Regarding the family-background variables, class of social origin did not exert a statistically significant
impact on education; however, the respondents' parents' characteristics influenced total number of years
of completed schooling in the expected direction. A respondent's father's occupation had a negative
influence on the respondent's attained education. Because education was assigned values that ranged
from low to high scores and occupational prestige was coded from high to low scores, the results
indicated that higher prestige jobs resulted in higher education for the children. Furthermore, although
father's education had little direct impact on educational attainment, mother's education was strongly
and positively associated with the respondent's level of education: the more educated the mother, the
more educated the child.
Finally, after controlling for the aforementioned determinants of educational achievement, birth order
had a negative impact on education, a finding that was statistically significant at the .05 level. These
findings imply that the only children completed more years of schooling than those in the first-born, lasthttp://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lapl.org/docview/199812546/C65984700BFF40A5PQ/162?accountid=6749
4/9
12/7/2015
born, and other sibling positions, demonstrating that birth order had a statistically significant impact,
which carried into adulthood, on completed years of schooling. Monotonic movement from only child, to
first - born child , to last-born, and finally to other birth order position, was associated with lower
educational scores.
We further tested the resource-dilution hypothesis by dividing the sample into four groups, based on
social origin. Thus, there were categories of respondents who grew up in rich, comfortable, meager, or
poor families. These categories were based on the respondents' own estimation of their parents' financial
situation during the respondents' growing-up years. The resource-dilution hypothesis predicts that the
birth order effect will be strongest among those families who are concerned about resource distribution
and who also have sufficient resources to distribute. The wealthy do not have a resource-dilution problem
because they have more than enough to allocate. Similarly, the meager and the poor do not have a
resource-dilution problem per se because they do not have much to allocate beyond subsistence
demands. Middle-class families, those from a "comfortable" economic background, however, will be more
concerned about resource allocation among children, compared with families characterized by want
(meager and poor) or affluence (wealthy).
Accordingly, we regressed educational achievement on birth order for the four different social-origin
groups. Birth order had no impact on educational attainment of those children who classified their
families as either wealthy, meager, or poor during their growing-up years. These findings indicate that
resource dilution did not explain the differential impact of birth order on educational attainment among
those families characterized by want or affluence. However, the fourth regression run (see Table 1)
revealed that birth order had a strong, negative impact, which was statistically significant, on
educational achievement within the "comfortable" respondents' category. Moreover, the birth order
effect was stronger among respondents from a "comfortable" family background than it was in the entire
sample.
These regression results indicate the same pattern for the control variables as for the first run, except
that ethnicity no longer exerted a statistically significant impact on education. This tendency may be
explained by the fact that we did not have enough cases of Blacks, Chicanos, and others in the
"comfortable" social-origin group. After statistical controls, however, birth order had a strong and
statistically significant impact on total number of years of completed schooling. It is difficult to quantify
the exact magnitude of the birth order effect, because education was not coded in single years, but a
"movement" through the only-child, first-born, last-born, and other positions in the family configuration is
associated with an increase of nearly 33% over the educational categories.
The results of the second equation indicate that birth order affected the educational outcomes of
respondents who had experienced a comfortable family background during their growing-up years. In the
middle-class families, the parents' resource allocation decisions operated to favor first-borns within
multiple-child families, followed by last-borns and then children in other sibling positions. This
relationship provides support for the resource-dilution hypothesis.
Discussion
5/9
12/7/2015
The results of this research are consistent with those reported by Marjoribanks (1991), whose research
revealed a statistically significant relationship between birth order and educational attainment, but only
for the middle social-status group. Similarly, the importance of the socioeconomic factor in birth order
research has been recognized by other investigators (Glass, Neulinger, & Brim, 1974; Lichtenwalner &
Maxwell, 1969; Marjoribanks, Walberg, & Bargen, 1975; Powell & Steelman, 1990; Steelman, 1985;
Steelman & Mercy, 1980), all of whom have posited that socioeconomics are important for any analysis
of birth order effects. In sum, there is evidence of a strong relationship between sibling order and
educational attainment when the effects of early social origin are taken into account. Moreover, because
we instituted controls for the major variables known to influence educational achievement, and because
we took into account the fact that children in different birth orders appear and are reared at different
economic periods of their parents' life cycle, our interpretations are not likely to be spurious.
REFERENCES
Belmont, L., & Marolla, F. (1973). Birth order , family size, and intelligence. Science, 182, 1096-1101.
Blake, J. (1986). Number of siblings, family background, and the process of educational attainment.
Social Biology, 33, 5-21.
Blake, J. (1989). Family size and achievement. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Blalock, H. (1960). Social statistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Breland, H. (1974). Birth order , family configuration, and verbal achievement. Child Development, 45,
1011-1019.
Cherian, V. (1990). Birth order and academic achievement of children in Transkei. Psychological Reports,
66, 19-24.
Clausen, J. (1986). The life course. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Davis, D., Cafan, S., & Bashi, J. (1978). Birth order and intellectual development: The confluence model in
the light of cross-cultural evidence. Science, 196, 1470-1472.
Edwards, R. P., & Thacker, K. (1979). The relationship of birth - order , gender, and sibling gender in the
two-child family to grade point average in college. Adolescence, 53, 111-114.
Forehand, R., Long, N., Brody, G., & Fauher, R. (1986). Home predictors of young adolescents' school
behavior and academic performance. Child Development, 57, 1528-1533.
Glass, D., Neulinger, J., & Brim, O. (1974). Birth order , verbal intelligence, and educational aspiration. Child
Development, 45, 807-811.
Hauser, R., & Sewell, W. (1985). Birth order and educational attainment in full sibships. American
Educational Research Journal, 22, 1-23.
6/9
12/7/2015
Kammeyer, K. (1968). Birth order as a research variable. Social Forces, 46, 71-76.
Kauer, H., & Dheer, V. (1982). Birth order , academic achievement and personality structure. Indian
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 9, 189-192.
King, E. M., & Lillard, L. A. (1983). Determinants of schooling attainment and enrollment rates in the
Philippines. Washington, DC: Agency for International Development.
Kunz, P. R.. & Peterson, E. T. (1977). Family size, birth order and academic achievement. Social Biology,
24, 144-148.
Lichtenwalner, J., & Maxwell, J. (1969). The relationship of birth order and socioeconomic status to the
creativity of preschool children. Child Development, 39, 1242-1247.
Lindert, P.A. (1974). Family inputs and inequality among children. Discussion papers (University of
Wisconsin) No. 218-274.
Marjoribanks, K. (1991). Sibling and environmental correlates of young adults' status attainment.
Psychological Reports, 69, 907-911.
Marjoribanks, K., Walberg, H., & Bargen, M. (1975). Mental abilities: Sibling constellation and social class
correlates. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 14, 109-116.
Nuttal, E. W., Nuttal, R. L., Polit D., & Hunter, J. B. (1976). The effects of family size, birth order , sibling
separation and crowding on the academic achievements of boys and girls. American Educational
Research Journal, 13, 217-223.
Olneck, M., & Bills, D. (1979). Family configuration and achievement: Effects of birth order and family size
in a sample of brothers. Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 135-148.
Powell, B., & Steelman, L. C. (1990). Beyond sibship size: Sibling density, sex composition, and
educational outcomes. Social Forces, 69, 181-206.
Rosenblatt, P., & Skoogberg, E. (1974). Birth order in cross-cultural perspective. Developmental
Psychology, 10, 48-54.
Sargong, E. (1989). An investigation into the determinants of academic achievement in Transkei.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Transkei.
Steelman, L. (1985). A tale of two variables: A review of the intellectual consequences of sibship size and
birth order . Review of Educational Research, 55, 353-386.
Steelman, L., & Mercy, J. (1980). Unconfounding the confluence model: A test of sibship size and birth order effects on intelligence. American Sociological Review, 45, 571-582.
7/9
12/7/2015
Svanum, S., & Bringle, R. (1980). Evaluation of confluence model variables on IQ and achievement test
scores in a sample of 6-to-11-year-old children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 427-436.
Tremans-Ziremba, M., Michayhuk, J., & Taylor, L. (1980). An examination of some predictors of reading
achievement in grade four children. Reading Improvement, 17, 260-266.
Weeks, J. R. (1994). Population: An introduction to concepts and issues (5th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Zajonc, R. B., & Markus, G. B. (1975). Birth order and intellectual development. Psychological Review, 82,
74-88.
Received February 2, 1995
RUSSELL TRAVIS
VANDANA KOHLI
Department of Sociology/Anthropology California State University, Bakersfield
This research was made possible by several grants from the California State University Research Council.
Address correspondence to Russell Travis, Department of Sociology/Anthropology, California State
University, Bakersfield, Bakersfield, CA 93311-1099.
Word count: 3226
Copyright Heldref Publications Aug 1995
Back to top
Search ProQuest...
Cite
9 Email
Print
More
Add to Selected items
Cited by (32)
8/9
12/7/2015
Related items
Search with indexing terms

Subject
Social research
Social psychology
Social classes
Birth order
Academic achievement
Search
Contact Us
Terms and Conditions
Accessibility
Privacy Policy
Cookie Policy
Copyright 2015 ProQuest LLC.
9/9

The Birth Order Factor Ordinal Position Social Strata and Educational Achievement - Proquest

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

The Birth Order Factor Ordinal Position Social Strata and Educational Achievement - Proquest

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

12/7/2015

The birth order factor: Ordinal position, social strata,

. The Journal of Social Psychology 135.4 (Aug 1995): 499.

Turn on search term navigation

Add to Selected items

Search with indexing terms

Terms and Conditions

Copyright 2015 ProQuest LLC.

Вам также может понравиться