This story is archived
Study on I.Q. prompts debate on family dynamics »
Posted by: JamesMarcus 2 years, 6 months agoThe new evidence that eldest children develop higher I.Q.'s than their siblings has intensified the debate over two of the most stubborn questions in social science: What are the family dynamics that enhance intelligence? And can they--and should they--be changed?
Read Full Story at iht.com »
Submitted By:
JamesMarcus
James Marcus is a writer, translator, critic, and editor. He is the author of Amazonia: Five Years at the Epicenter of the Dot-Com Juggernaut and ...
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 63
-
KSUmarksman
June 25, 2007, 2:43 p.m.I don't know about our IQs but my kid brother is smarter than me academically.
However, in practical areas of life he is like "the absent minded professor".
I am still in the top % of my school and university in scholarly performance, although inferior to my brother's performance. However, I am better organized in real life whereas he is better organized in academics.
More than anything I think this is due to the fact that the eldest child gets piled with responsibilities so they have to "grow up" faster. More of the older child's mental "resources" go towards learning to take command and be a good leader.
-
justgotmarried
June 25, 2007, 3:38 p.m.This may be accurate on the average, however let me just say that my older sister is not the brightest academically person in the world. She does have some street smarts though, so I am proud of her for that. Alls I remember when I was a kid is that I was in Calc and she was struggling with algebra. We were both seniors at the same time. I think sports and socializing were more important to her. But even so, my IQ is a recorded 40 points higher then hers and she is two years older then me.
Now having said all that I she was the one who used to come home and teach me what she learned in school when she was in kindergarten and 1st grade, so I do owe her a lot of gratitude for making me love math. I was reading at 3 and doing multiplication at 4. I started kindergarten when I was 4, and I was 16 as a senior in high school.
-
marshx
June 25, 2007, 3:39 p.m.I have 3 older brothers and i wouldn't say their smarter than i am, academically i've done better.
-
farmerman
June 25, 2007, 3:50 p.m.I thought it was "politically incorrect" to even mention the letters IQ. If we can make valid comparisons to family members using IQ, is is also valid to make comparisons to different races or ethnic groups, using IQ?
-
Worldview
June 25, 2007, 4:46 p.m.Isn't G. W. the oldest of the Bush children . . . so much for that argument.
-
OnionHeadComment has been removed: User banned.
-
tehranchik
June 25, 2007, 5:27 p.m.There is another study out Of Norway that supports this finding. They studied 250,000 military draftees to get there results. The story was a submit by Bkumm last week I think.
-
Formidable
June 25, 2007, 5:50 p.m.Answer this. I was first born and have an extremely high IQ, but it took me until I was almost thirty to realize how smart my parents were.
-
WCFIELDS
June 25, 2007, 7:59 p.m."...evidence that eldest children develop higher I.Q.'s"
This is no mystery. The First born has the highest likelihood of being the actual child of the "Father". The second, third, fourth, etc. has a very high likelihood of having been "sired" by the Gardner, Preacher, Pool Man or Mailman.
-
shead
June 25, 2007, 7:59 p.m.IQ is one thing, but there are many who believe in multiple intelligences. Such as:
Emotional Intelligence (EQ), Physical Intelligence, Spiritual Intelligence and Social Intelligence.
And concerning Social Intelligence. Let's face it: people with high IQs don't necessarily have a high degree of social ability.
-
cronuslord
June 25, 2007, 9:42 p.m.It's really funny to me that there's a news story about what causes I.Q. to develop faster in a country where the medium I.Q. is 100.
Intelligence has nothing to do with what order you were born, it has to do with how you are taught from an early age. The brain is a device of conditioning, adjusting according to stimulus. Influencing a higher I.Q. comes from influencing a curiosity in learning.
I have an I.Q. of 165, my younger brother brother has the same. Age has nothing to do with it.
-
yinyangbaby
June 26, 2007, 12:39 a.m.Me and my bro tested ourselves in high school and we were both at 120 which looks to be well above the average woo-hoo!! im gonna keep eating my wheaties!!
-
palamaComment has been removed: User banned.
-
TOtheMOON
June 26, 2007, 8:13 a.m.I think it is a waste of time to know what your IQ is. Does it automatically make someone more intelligent because they have a 136 IQ? Smart people are those who use what they have got and strive for more, regardless their IQ. Dumb people don't use what they have and do nothing with their lives. The numbers are useless.
-
curley-zark
June 26, 2007, 12:05 p.m.The book "Born To Rebel" makes the case for almost all revolutionary jumps forward for the human race have been made by laterborns. Firstborns have too much respect for authority to ever rebel against the status quo (required for new paradigms). What mommy & daddy told firstborns was right and therefore authority is never to be questioned. Then the firstborn tries to force these authoritarian ideologies on siblings and the laterborns rebel for the rest of their lives!
Supposedly, the Knights Templar sent their firstborn into the church where unquestioning respect for authority bolsters church traditions. Templars sent their secondborn son into the military where questioning authority and onesself might keep one from charging off into a trap, taking your men and perhaps your nation with you...
How many in the current administration besides George W. are firstborn authoritarians with high IQ and no sense at all?
-
moxxxxxxxxxx
June 26, 2007, 12:27 p.m.IQ is just one type of intelligence. There are different types of intelligences. Social,language, logical,musical,spatial, intrapersonal. You can have a high IQ but no social awareness, inability to speak in public, no common sense, inability to keep a beat, play a sport or even know your own feelings and thoughts. Success in America isn't all related to IQ. Parents are much better served to be taught how to determine what type of intelligence their child has and help the child develop in those areas.
-
moxxxxxxxxxx
June 26, 2007, 1:09 p.m.Knowledge is something that can be learned. You cannot teach
a person to keep a beat, play a sport, speak in public, or know himself if he does not have the innate ability to (intelligence) to do so.
-
Tigra
June 26, 2007, 1:56 p.m.Genetics may play a role in the retention of information and knowledge, but that myth of older siblings having a higher IQ is hogwash. I have an IQ of 136 and my older sister does not. It's up to an individual to gain and retain knowledge, and also age and experience can account for the hogwash study findings. In my opinion, a 22 yr old person with as much knowledge as a 52 yr old should be automatically given a higher IQ score.
-
curley-zark
June 26, 2007, 2:29 p.m.I'm reading a book called, "I Am A Strange Loop". The author included four pages he wrote when he was ten years old as the prologue. It reminded me of a paper I wrote in college at 20 years of age.
The author published his first book at 27 years of age and got a Pulitzer for it. This sort of stuff will put an earthly tug on your high IQ self image, unless you are a wing nut, circling some narrow-minded ideological planet, beyond gravity, or so you believe. Re-entry for you will be a long, burning, self denying bitch! "But, ... My Southern Baptist church (and/or perhaps Aristotle & Aquinas) gave me all the wisdom I will ever need..."
-
eviln3d
June 26, 2007, 2:29 p.m.Well in an attempt to save the government billions of dollars in grant money to pay goof ball scientists to figure it out... I'll gladly tell you the simple reason.
The first child gets 100% of the parents time and attention during his early life. Any child after that (unless the first child has died) will get less time and attention.
Gee... pretty damn simple if you think about it - but I guess we'll still see scientists and professors yammering for money to figure out what is common sense.
-
curley-zark
June 26, 2007, 3 p.m."Common sense", like "Politically Correct", is a term people think they understand, but when overused, is shorthand for "I've been bamboozeled by politically motivated, corporate sponsored, BS" and really don't know what I'm talking about at all.
Does it make you feel good to use the term "goofball scientists"? By doing so you have joined the giant corporate impetus to completely discredit real science which we will need to advance, rather than devolve into the stupid consumers giant corporations and their paid politicians/media encourage us to be. They may very well win, if you don't gather a much deeper understanding of wisdom (not intelligence) - on you own. Can the internet save us?
Most all of the junk science you see on TV is corporate generated BS, not real science. Real science is good for you. It's our leaders that are misleading us.
-
curley-zark
June 26, 2007, 3:30 p.m.Research says "Coffee is bad for you". New research says, "Just the smell of Coffee is good for you". New research says, "Coffee is bad for you". "This is your brain on drugs!" New research says Government Research is bad for you, but coffee is good!"
On and on, back and forth, until the public loses faith in science and clings to the only thing left... "great" big corporations.. "great" big politicians... there to help us... even the one's who say they'll save us from worthless government research then give our taxes to worthless corporate research. Both sides are screwing us in oh so many ways! The one that has undermined us all, the most, is the drug war. It has caused a thousand times more damage than it ever saved! Follow the money...
-
ILian1
June 26, 2007, 7:48 p.m.I always thought my older sister got all the brains in the family. She was an achiever, I was a dreamer. At age 38, I took two IQ tests on a lark, I was invited to join Mensa and Interetel, the top 2% and 1% respectively. I served on the board of directors of Intertel for six years. I have learned that IQ was originally designed to predict academic potential, not intelligence, wisdom, knowlege, personality or anything tangible. I like to say it is a test of how well you can take multiple guess tests, and not much more. I do find that people with high IQs understand my puns, like to party, most don't take themselves too seriously and can be the gargbage man or Bill Gates. Some fit in socially and others are misfits in general society. That's it in a nutshell. Oh, my sister doesn't qualify for either society.
-
jumpmaster
June 27, 2007, 9:42 a.m.I get a kick out of people who are hung up on IQ numbers. The only people that I run across who place an importance on IQ numbers are typically those in acedamia or government employment.
I guess it makes them feel good. Kind of a one-time achievement that they can milk their entire lives. Meanwhile the doers (sp?) are out there making things happen.
It is reassuring that the achievers don't stand around at cocktail parties all puffed up about an IQ test they took 20 years ago.
-
innocent-bystander
June 27, 2007, 12:28 p.m.When my oldest was an only child she was happy she says. As soon as her cute brother came along he stole the spot light. So she used her "smarts" to get attention. She talked for him. Cut him off and became an A student. When he became an A student it pushed her. So she became "the athlete" to him because she was bigger and then he grew up. Then she became the artist: singer, dancer, actor and painter. He is trying his hand at it. Next she wants to start her own business or be a CEO. Attention drives children.
All 63 comments are shown.
Submit a Story
Advertisement
