Birth Order & IQ Differences

[FDG]

Originally Posted by nightning

IQ means something... but an average difference of 2 points in IQ between first/second born is negliable considering the normalized standard deviation of IQ tests are fixed at 11. The tiny different there, to me, means nothing more than a sampling error. Unless there's more info given on the data... ie SE/variance, the average IQ scores can't be compared.

Agreed, we should have all the info on how the data has been collected and crunched to see if it's significant. In fact, the article hasn't stated if the statiticians have claimed it to be significant or otherwise.

I think it's been said before in a post that there's a correlation between language ability and time a parent spends with the child. This means that in order to more accurately test if the impact is sweked towards this factor, they should control for age difference between siblings.

[Anentropic IxTx]

I am the eldest sibling of three and have always done well on tests. I'm quite sure I have a relatively high IQ.

interested in the future of Industrial Light and Magic

True.

[A Schnitzel]

I don't really want to give away our IQ scores on a public forum, but there is much larger than 3 point difference between my older sisters professionally tested IQ score and mine.

While it's probably true that there is a measurable difference between siblings over the entire population, it would get washed out by a large variation between families.

[Mondo]

I am part of a family where everyone has high IQs.
Not surprising, given that both my parents are really smart.

However, I would say the most intellectually accomplished in my immediate family is my older brother (who is the eldest child) by far (did a lot of science/math research in high school, majored in math at Harvard, is finishing up his Philosophy PHD, was pretty much the model student...).....and I believe he has the highest IQ of us.

[Prototype]

... Honestly, what is the significance of this "Higher IQ/Older sibling" theory?

[ptgatsby]

Originally Posted by Demigod

... Honestly, what is the significance of this "Higher IQ/Older sibling" theory?

It would help narrow down causation factors in intelligence.

(And make some first borns feel more special than they really are, of course.)

[entropie]

Wasnt there even a time where they killed their firstborns ? That would explain a lot

[Darjur]

Originally Posted by Uberfuhrer

This is logical, but isn't it funny that the media often portrays the youngest as the most intelligent?

I would say, though, that the firstborn is more likely to be the fatherly/motherly sibling.

The youngest are the most rebellious. I can't remember it exactly but I think there was a study done on this.

Basing on information that is currently somewhere in between my ass cheeks I could hypothesize that what's more likely is that the younger aren't more intelligent, but are more prone to try to prove what ever intelligence they have.

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by entropie

Wasnt there even a time where they killed their firstborns ? That would explain a lot

In China, they did, if the firstborn was a girl and then a boy came along.
(But that's probably not what you were thinking.)
Sigh.

[sade]

Originally Posted by Darjur

The youngest are the most rebellious. I can't remember it exactly but I think there was a study done on this.

Based on the empiric results from the people I know and their families, I'd confirm that. Someone needs to make the way for the others..