This groundbreaking book takes on the influence of birth order in personalities and offers some surprising conclusions. Frank J. Sulloway, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, has undertaken the first comprehensive study of birth order in determining personality and social outlook. He produces overwhelming evidence that, because of the evolutionary hierarchy in families, first-born children are more likely to be conformists while the later-borns tend to be more creative and more likely to reject the status quo. He documents just how different siblings are from each another--a person tends to have more in common with any randomly chosen person of their own age than with a sibling--and explains why sibling differences occur. The book offers new insights into the determining factors of who we are and who our children will be, and it is unlike any research yet published. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
The thesis advanced by M.I.T. research scholar Sulloway (Freud: Biologist of the Mind) in this provocative, sure-to-be-controversial study is that firstborn children identify more strongly with power and authority and are more conforming, conventional and defensive, whereas younger siblings are more adventurous, rebellious and inclined to question the status quo. He bases this conclusion on birth-order research and on his theory that siblings jockey for niches within the family in Darwinian fashion: while firstborns defend their special status, later-borns are more open to experience because accessibility helps them maximize attention and love from their parents. Providing a detailed statistical analysis of thousands of individuals' responses to 28 scientific innovations?Darwinism, the Copernican revolution, Einstein's relativity, etc.?Sulloway concludes that most have been initiated and championed by later-borns, whereas firstborns tend to reject new ideas. He overstates his case when he interprets the French Revolution's Reign of Terror as fundamentally a battle between firstborn conservatives and later-born liberals, and his analysis of the Protestant Reformation in similar terms is debatable. And although Darwin, Voltaire, Ralph Nader and abolitionist Harriet Tubman were later-born siblings, Einstein, Freud, Galileo, Newton, Kepler, Lavoisier and many other radical innovators were firstborns, casting doubt on birth-order influence. Photos. First serial to the New Yorker.
Copyright 1996 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
amazing concept of the importace of birth order. A must read for shrinksPublished 8 months ago by ferenc vegh
Everyone on the planet, past, present, and future, has a birth order. Apparently during the first five years of human life there is an amazing unconscious development. Read morePublished 20 months ago by Jim Nichols
I am doing research in the area of Family Dynamics and Birth order and I find these books to be very helpfulPublished 20 months ago by Amazon Customer
A fascinating book! Sulloway is an MIT History of Science specialist who has done a lot of research and a lot of number crunching to make his case for birth order characteristics. Read morePublished on March 20, 2013 by Marya
I have just heard Mr. Sulloway interviewed this morning on KQED regarding his Darwinian interpretation of struggles within family niches. Read morePublished on July 16, 2010 by Sabrikitty
This is a book that attracted a great deal of attention when it first came out. And, indeed, ironically, a couple colleagues and I had a related book, "Birth Order and Political... Read morePublished on February 8, 2009 by Steven A. Peterson
First of all, I'm not qualified to evaluate the statistical analysis work that Sulloway has done. I left this book with the feeling that he has uncovered a trend worth considering... Read morePublished on December 29, 2008 by frumiousb
Many reviews posted here do not argue his statistics, but rather argue the outcome. As science goes, the only way to refute the results is to refute the methodology or the data. Read morePublished on October 22, 2008 by Stephen H. Buck