First Born? Only Child? How Birth Order Affects Personality
Topics: Birth Order
Scientists the world over have spent countless words and oceans of ink debating the issue of nature versus nurture. But how your child develops might have as much to do with the order in which they were born, as it does with their genes or environment.
Alfred Adler, a contemporary of Freud and Jung, first put forth the idea, claiming that when a child is born deeply impacts their personality. According to Adler, eldest children are socially dominant, highly intellectual, and extremely conscientious. Unfortunately, they’re also less open to new ideas, and prone to perfectionism and people pleasing – the result of losing both parents’ undivided attention at an early age, and working throughout their lives to get it back.
Middle children, sandwiched between older and younger siblings, often develop a competitive nature – making them natural entrepreneurs later in life. They tend to be the most diplomatic and flexible members of the family and often, eager for parental praise, develop musical or academic gifts.
Youngest children, according to birth order theory, tend to be dependent and selfish – as they’re used to others providing for them. But despite the negatives, they’re also quite often the life of the party – fun, confident, and comfortable entertaining others.
And only children? Like last borns, they are regularly spoiled, according to Adler, and have a hard time when they don’t get their own way. School can be a particularly difficult transition, as they’re used to being the center of the familial universe. But all that parental focus pays off. Only children are often mature for their age. They wow people with their vocabularies, and their comfort in adult circles. Plus, all that self-entertaining fosters creativity.
Adler’s theories have been debated for generations. Whether they’re scientifically sound or not much more than hogwash, muse about them as you raise your children. And regardless of when they were born, help each of your kids recognize what makes them unique and resist the urge to compare them to their siblings. That’s sure to make every member of your family thrive.
Take an action
- this article with friends and family.
- Have a question about Birth Order? Ask it here.
- Publish your work on education.com.
Comments from readers
My middle is very competivie, smart and wants all the attention and will do just about anything to get it, which makes her very good in sports. My youngest is dependent, passive/aggressive and is more of a follower than a leader in social settings. Her youthful innocence can be seen in her appreciation for the simple things in life that make her laugh.
Oldest-mature, middle-attention seeker, youngest-dependent
I am in the exact situation you are in. Mom's had 3 kids, re-married my dad and had me so I am the youngest of four. It really depends, do you think your are spoiled? When I think about it at a glance I don't think i am but then if you sit and really think about it for awhile - I really was. I had more freedom bc after the first 3 my mother was worn out a little, if mom or dad couldn't do it I would ask the oldest and just move down the line or vice versa, less responsibility, as the oldest is more aware of the family politics and arguments where I was to young to understand and did not feel as much deep emotion about the situation - you generally get upset if you see arguments as a child but you move on more easily due to lack of awareness. I believe that those examples I just mentioned are on a subconscious level for the youngest and possible never surface because you don't have a younger sibling that you would be responsible for. Yes the youngest may be spoiled, it depends on the parents to what extreme your spoiled. But 1/2 of it, just like I said, is subconciously so maybe spoiled isn't the right term and it is not necessarily a bad thing depending on how your "spoiled". Just my thoughts as well as others - I have been doing a research paper and have conducted interviews with several people.
Wow, you don't have a favorite or anything. Did you happen to catch the fact that you only listed good qualities about your first born while having no reservations about listing the negatives of your other two children? How can you be so harsh when you're the one who raised them? Oh, wait... are you an oldest too? 'Cause that would explain it. Nice, siding against your own children. And as for Adler, he use to claim that it was not the oldest that was the best off but the middle because they got to experience of being both an older and a younger sibling, thou he had no evidence to back this up other then that he himself was a middle-born... just goes to show you how hard it is to determine the effects of birth order, human ego and different family situations will always get in the way.
Can anyone help me?
The information in the article was helpful though.