Why First-Borns Have Higher IQs

Post Reply New Topic

I don't understand this, not saying you're wrong but would appreciate a further explanation. How would it effect the child? and how would coming first or second or whatever affect the conditions experienced in the womb?

I don't know enough to go into detail about the mechanisms that might be involved, but I can give a layman's view.

In answer to the first part of your question, take an extreme case ... you have probably heard that pregnant women are advised not to drink alcohol or smoke, right? Why? Because a pregnant woman who does so would likely harm the development of the child she is carrying. I.e., conditions inside the womb affect the child's development.

See the Newsweek article "shaped by life in the womb" here. According to this article, conditions in the womb do not need to be nearly as extreme as those I've described above in order to have an impact.

In answer to your second question, I would take a layman's guess that when it comes to conditions inside the womb, there are going to be differences - on average - between women having their first child and women having their fifth child, or between 21 year old women and a 40 year old women.

There is an article here about the supposed correlation between birth order and autism. It's probably been covered on WrongPlanet before somewhere, but never mind.

Conversely one could argue that younger siblings benefit from the parents' experience gained from the older siblings. I think there has been at least one study showing younger siblings in the US tend to get better educations because by the time they enter school the parents are better versed in the ropes of the school system.

My brother and I look exactly the same (which is weird, I know) and he's four years older than me.
The study that was conducted using the 99 men's family history, almost half was the end result. So, not even fifty percent were first born or from an only child family. That's not that much, that really doesn't conclude anything, that means more than fifty percent were second/later born people. So how can that really mean anything? In my eyes (biased as they are since I'm the second born) the younger siblings have a higher IQ because more than half of the scientists were the not first born.
Also, I'm more creative, and I have better street smarts. On the other hand, my brother finished college with a degree with a great GPA, and has a good job. I work part time, didn't finish college, and still live at home (but I know I'm a better person than him, and that's a story for later).

I think a lot of psychological research is a bit half-arsed and not really very scientific, and then it's reported in the media as solid fact. There was a story in the British press a few months ago about how women preferred the color pink because when we were hunter gatherers women would often go out foraging for berries and so they were hard wired to like the color pink. Completely without any valid scientific grounds but reported as fact in almost all the broadsheets.



Thanks. I'm still a little bit skeptical of how much of an effect this can have on IQ or weather or not you turn out to be autistic but it's an interesting idea.

How ironic being that I'm the first born with the lowest IQ among my 2 siblings...