Signaling of earlier-born Children's endowments, intra-household allocation, and birth-order effects

2022 ◽  
pp. 105754
Author(s):  
Xu Wei ◽  
Yi Zhou ◽  
Yimin Zhou
2007 ◽  
Vol 150 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abraham Reichenberg ◽  
Christopher Smith ◽  
James Schmeidler ◽  
Jeremy M. Silverman

2015 ◽  
Vol 235 (1) ◽  
pp. 41-60
Author(s):  
Martina Eschelbach

Summary This paper contributes to the literature on the determinants of children’s human capital by analyzing the effects of birth order in Germany. These effects are typically attributed to sibling rivalry for parental resources. For our analysis we use data collected as part of the German Life History Study on birth cohorts 1946-1977. We find a substantial positive impact of being first born on the probability of completing higher secondary education. Analyzing gender differences, we find stronger effects for boys. Furthermore, birth order effects are more prevailing in small families. The results are discussed against the background of equal opportunities in the German educational system.


1986 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. 495-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
N L Keltner ◽  
C W McIntyre ◽  
R Gee

Author(s):  
Martin Arstad Isungset ◽  
Mats Lillehagen ◽  
Elisabeth Ugreninov

Abstract Birth order causes social inequality between siblings. In Western countries, earlier-born perform better than later-born. In non-Western countries, however, earlier-born generally perform worse than later-born. We use administrative data to compare birth order effects between the native population and Norwegian-born children of immigrants (450,864 individuals nested within 202,191 families). The outcome is based on lower secondary school points—a combined measurement of all marks at the end of compulsory education. We found negative effects of birth order on school points for Norwegian natives. This finding is in line with previous studies from Western countries using measures of educational achievement. Birth order effects amongst Norwegian-born children of immigrant parents vary according to maternal country of origin, with some displaying similar effects as natives and others displaying no birth order effects. These findings are surprising in light of the main theories on birth order, which are universalistic and do not predict group-differences. We argue that the universalistic theories need to be supplemented to account for our findings, and discuss the potential importance of cultural variation in family-related behaviours such as strategic parenting, kindergarten attendance, and peer-influence in high-achieving immigrant groups.


2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 342-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Eckstein ◽  
Mark A. Sperber ◽  
Kristen Aycock Miller
Keyword(s):  

1985 ◽  
Vol 144 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
John S. H. Tay ◽  
William C. L. Yip ◽  
Roy Joseph ◽  
H. B. Wong

2000 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-159
Author(s):  
Ray Blanchard

In my comments on Townsend's detailed critique of Sulloway's (1996) book, I want to make two general points about birth order research. The first is that several authors—including Ernst and Angst (1983), who are extensively quoted by Townsend—have concluded that the effects of birth order on adult personality and behavior are either completely nonexistent or else so negligible as to be useless to science. I agree that the methodology of birth order studies is often flawed, and that many, if not most, of their findings are probably irreproducible. However, an assertion that birth order has no effect on adult behavior would be as extreme in its way as the assertion that birth order's effect on behavior is decisive. My own research demonstrates that a categorical dismissal of any and all birth order effects is not only premature but demonstrably erroneous.


Author(s):  
Ray Blanchard ◽  
Klaus M. Beier ◽  
Francisco R. Gómez Jiménez ◽  
Dorit Grundmann ◽  
Jurian Krupp ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document