<p>"While a 2.3 IQ point difference doesn't seem large, it translates into about a 30 percent increased chance of a child getting into an Ivy League university, Sulloway said"</p>
<p>This article about first-born gets higher IQ seems convincing. Me, and many of the people I know who are first-borns go to better college that their younger siblings. I think it's a mix of biology and environment. after all when the first one is conceived the parents are younger and healthier. then there's that pressure to set up an example for your brother or sister to follow. </p>
<p>How much do people at CC believe this? And how do everyone compare with his younger or older sibling.</p>
<p>Same as above.
But my parents had more time with me and taught me how to read when I was 3 and all that good stuff. I have a stronger foundation.</p>
<p>umm... this is a tough one with me. first off, I have two half-sisters (we share the same mother), so i don't know if i should count them or not.</p>
<p>if I do, then the first born probably is the smartest. My oldest sister had a really easy time acadmeically. She never studied for the ACT, and got a 35 :confused:</p>
<p>however, for my brother (also older), i would say isn't as smart as I am. I don't have to work as hard as he, and I would also say I am more self-motivated. he is far more athletic, but that's not the questoin.</p>
<p>i'm the youngest, so I naturally say this is wrong.</p>
<p>Youngest of seven, and I say it's hogwash. :) At least in my family, anyway. I only know the IQ for four of us, including myself of course, but it kinda jumps around.</p>
<p>Not that I'm saying I'm the smartest (and really, define "smart"), but I don't think it holds up for us. Maybe we're the weird ones, though!</p>
<p>Judith Rich Harris says that Frank Sulloway fabricated a lot of his data in the book "Born to Rebel" - based on his defensive reactions against a person who tried to replicate his data. </p>
<p>But this study is independent of any research of Frank Sulloway (even though he was the one who wrote the article in Science).</p>
<p>Anyhow - does anyone notice that younger siblings have the opportunity to capitalize on all of the resources of the elder siblings - yet oftentimes/sometimes fail to do so? My younger brother has the opportunity, but has squandered it all. He took the SAT in 7th and 8th grades (I only learned of the CTY Talent search JUST AFTER the deadline for 8th grade - I was only able to get in because the deadline was extended in 2002), went through the same summer programs I did in 7th and 8th grade (I learned of the summer program a week BEFORE the deadline), studied off the Art of Problem Solving books that I got off in 9th grade, but then pretty much stopped being academically focused afterwards. Now I'm more academically bent than he is (even though he got an 800 on the SAT I Math in 8th grade). He only took 2 AP exams in 10th grade - whereas I took 4 (all self-studies). He is going to college 2 years early just like I am - but he's not taking advantage of the personal library that I've accumulated (I have A LOT of books that he could just impulsively pick up and read). And he's not aiming for a PhD program. He'll get a higher GPA than I ever will (I don't have the personality traits associated with high GPAs) - but he isn't as intellectual as I am. </p>
<p>Meanwhile, I only read "The Bell Curve" and "The Nurture Assumption" in 9th grade, since those were the only books my mother had. I eventually took advantage of my university's libraries and read A LOT of books over the past year - I just wish I could have had access to those books earlier so that I would have freed myself from my narrow-minded thinking earlier.</p>
<p>==</p>
<p>If he DESIRED it, he could have EASILY taken advantage of all of the resources I spent YEARS trying to acquire. He did take advantage of some of those resources, and was an academic superstar in 8th grade (how many 8th graders get 800 in SAT I Math and then study off Art of Problem Solving?) But then he just fizzled out into squandering a lot of time to nothing.</p>
<p>==
Anyhow I was always more expressive and open to new academic experiences than he ever was. And neither of us really socialized well with our grade school peers - though I had close Internet friends. Stat-wise, he has better GPA + test scores than I do. But he doesn't really use any of his cognitive capabilities for anything beyond what's expected - whereas I do. And he never went to any summer programs the summers after his 9th or 10th grades. He could have easily done so if he wanted. He doesn't have any of the issues with distractibility that I have. But somehow - he just doesn't have initiative.</p>
<p>But he doesn't get into anything as deeply as I ever did. He didn't really get into the computer games I played. I was a hardcore gamer in 6th and 7th grades, but my gaming habits were sparse from then on out. He never was much of a hardcore gamer.</p>
<p>i'm the youngest of three and i say that's trash.
i know this is really shallow but if you just look at our three SAT scores, mine is far better than theirs (in order of age: sister-1350, brother-1210, me-1470) :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Anyhow - does anyone notice that younger siblings have the opportunity to capitalize on all of the resources of the elder siblings - yet oftentimes fail to do so
[/quote]
</p>
<p>no matter how intellecutal you are, however, i fear you've made the mistake of taking a personal experience and expounding it fit the masses.</p>
<p>
[quote]
no matter how intellecutal you are, however, i fear you've made the mistake of taking a personal experience and expounding it fit the masses.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I used the word "oftentimes". Perhaps it is too much of a generalization. But out of all potential cases of such opportunity, there must be at least a number of cases where they fail to do so. Perhaps the word "sometimes" is more appropriate here (I need more information - but based on what this article says - I can say that it could be accurate).</p>
<p>One's utilization of cultural capital is contingent upon how deeply one pursues such resources as well. One could read the AoPS books and do the problems mechanically, but not reflect at all on any of the problems. Mindless problem-solving won't get you anywhere - you have to THINK about the way you problem-solve once you run into potential error.</p>
Anyhow - does anyone notice that younger siblings have the opportunity to capitalize on all of the resources of the elder siblings - yet oftentimes fail to do so
[/quote]
I think it's fairly true though. as the oldest I had to learn all about the SATs and college applications as I went along. now that it's my sisters turn she's completely uninterested in the whole process. add I know if she tried she could do really well. I'm sure it's fairly common.</p>
<p>On a side note, he didn't even take SAT IIs in 10th grade, whereas I 790'ed Chemistry and 800'ed Math IIC that year... And I had the perfect resources for those.</p>
<p>On a side note - do your younger siblings often capitalize on the distractions of their older siblings? Do they adopt the computer games of their older siblings? :p (or other potential distractors?)</p>
<p>i don't know. I think that you're almost acting like a helicoptor parent, in that you're giving them what YOU think they need to succeed (because it's what you used), and they want to get out of your shadow.
I know that my brother often times tried to get me to work harder at soccer. He'd invite me to go running, practice with his friends, etc., etc., but I didn't want it.</p>
<p>While i think there's some merit to what both of you are saying, i think your siblings are looking for a way to prove themselves to people while stepping out of your shadow.</p>
<p>
[quote]
i don't know. I think that you're almost acting like a helicoptor parent, in that you're giving them what YOU think they need to succeed (because it's what you used), and they want to get out of your shadow.
I know that my brother often times tried to get me to work harder at soccer. He'd invite me to go running, practice with his friends, etc., etc., but I didn't want it.</p>
<p>While i think there's some merit to what both of you are saying, i think your siblings are looking for a way to prove themselves to people while stepping out of your shadow.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not. I was insanely jealous of my brother when he was in 8th grade. I tried to hide my AoPS books from him (though I didn't have time to study for them when he was in 8th grade). It's just that I now realize that he hasn't taken advantage of the resources I've acquired - and it gives me the impression of "wasted opportunity". It's not necessarily bad - it's just that I lost A LOT of time from public schooling so I'm still somewhat neurotic over the notion of "wasted opportunity/talent". And now I only have a few years before my fluid intelligence starts to decline - and now I also have realized that cognitive psychology is just as useful as to me as math + all the other sciences. </p>
<p>Of course, rationally speaking, the world is full of wasted potential/talent.</p>
<p>==
Another funny thing is that whereas I'm agnostic, he decided that he wanted to go to church last year. Yet he doesn't really act like any other Christian either (it seems as if he lacks conviction).</p>
<p>If my older brother's technically smarter than me it still doesn't really matter. I'm much more responsible with money and getting things taken care of, so his extra smarts still don't make up for those things. </p>
<p>Younger siblings have the advantage of learning from their older sibling(s) accomplishments and mistakes...the oldest have to pave their own ways and learn more from personal trial and error than we younger ones have to.</p>
<p>ITS SOOO TRUE!! I am the youngest of 3 boys. </p>
<p>Brother 1: </p>
<p>1600/1600 SAT (1st try), genius. 5s on 7 APs, 4.0GPA... etc. Accepted to Harvard, MIT, Chicago, Penn, Swarthmore, Haverford. Attended Harvard. Became Philosopher.</p>
<p>Brother 2:</p>
<p>1570/1600 SAT. SMART. But more laid back. Accepted to UMich. Became engineer. </p>
<p>Brother 3: (me)</p>
<p>2090/2400 SAT :( (first try though) I was convinced to apply to smaller schools by my brother who hated Harvard and my parents who agree with him. I definitely don't think I am as smart.</p>
<p>I really think it is all based on the Parents. For the 1st child, the parents are more engaged, and able to develop the brain in the early days. Me and my brothers are 5 years apart and I think my parents may have gotten a bit burned out. (or just really old.. :) ) It's all about those formative early years.</p>
<p>I also think as the youngest, I never take responsibility because I always seem myself as "the little one" and I can never grow up because my brothers are always ahead of me. I think. "Geez, I'm in highschool. i remember when my brothers were there and they seemed so old. But now, they are all grown up and highschool is like for little kids..."</p>
<p>Hmm..I think it has more to do with how much attention you're given during the critical periods of growth. My brother is developmental slow, or so the school says while they consider me "gifted." The main difference between my brother and I was my grandparents raised me until I was 5 and the TV raised my brother. (My parents thought they could only take care of one child so I was sent to live with my grandparents, but they couldn't give my brother the attention needed because they ran and operated a restaurant so he was raised by TV and basically nothing else.) But compared to CCers I'm average :P Oh well..</p>