Hostname: page-component-68945f75b7-z7ghp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-05T19:22:20.987Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effect of Birth Order and Family Size on Self Concept

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2024

Michaels Nystul
Michaels Nystul*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology University of Queensland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study presents an evaluation of the effects of birth order and family size on the self-concept as measured by the 29 scores of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale (TSCS). One hundred and seventeen middle and upper class 18 to 22-year-old female American university students were administered the TSCS and divided into the following birth-order groups: only, first, middle, and last; and family-size groups: subjects that came from two-child families, three or four-child families, and five-or-more-child families. Analysis of variance and t test statistical procedures showed the only-born to have the most favored birth-order position in terms of self-concept and tendencies to avoid the characteristics associated with pathological disorders. The most favored family size (in terms of self-concept and tendency to avoid the characteristics associated with pathological disorders) was three or more children with the least favored being a family with two children.

Type
Research Article
Information
Children Australia , Volume 2 , Issue 4 , September 1977 , pp. 19 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adler, A. What life should mean to you. New York: Capricorn Books, 1958.Google Scholar
Bartell, P. W. Birth order of siblings and differences in orientation toward parents. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Ohio State University, 1972.Google Scholar
Bonney, M. E. A study of the relation of intelligence, family size, and sex differences with mutual friendships in the primary grades. Child Development. 1943, 13, 79–100.Google Scholar
Bonney, M. E. Relationships between social success, family size, socio-economic home background, and intelligence among school children in grades III to V. Sociometry, 1944, 11, 26–39.Google Scholar
Coopersmith, S. The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco, Calif.: W. H. Freeman, 1967.Google Scholar
Curry, M. W., Manning, R. J., & Monroe, D. R. A study of self-concepts of juvenile delinquents in specific institutions in the State of Tennessee. Unpublished Masters thesis. University of Tennessee, 1971.Google Scholar
Fischer, W., & Hayes, S. P. J. R. Maladjustment in college predicted by Bernreuter Inventory Scores and family position. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1941, 25, 86–96.Google Scholar
Fitts, W. H. Tennessee Self Concept Scale (Manual). Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Test, 1965.Google Scholar
Fitts, W. H. Research issues in self-concept change: A study of sensitivity training with teachers. Nashville, Tenn.: Counselor Recordings and Test, DWC Papers, No. 3, 1973.Google Scholar
Hollingshead, A. B. & Redlich, F. C. Social class and mental illness. New York: Wiley, 1958.Google Scholar
Nystul, M. S. The effects of birth order and sex on self-concept. Journal of Individual Psychology. 1974, 30, 211–215.Google Scholar
Nystul, M. S. The effects of birth order and family size on self-concept. Australian Psychologist, 1967, 11, 197–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oberlander, M., Jenkin, N., Houlihan, K., & Jackson, J. Family size and birth order as determinants of scholastic aptitude and achievement in a sample of eighth graders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1970. 34, 19–21.Google Scholar
Platt, J. J., Moskalski, D. O., & Eisenman, R. Sex and birth order, and future expectations of occupational status and salary. Journal of Individual Psychology, 1968, 24, 170–173.Google Scholar
Purpura, P. A. A Study of the relations between birth order, self-esteem and conformity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Fordham University, 1970.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, M. Society and the adolescent, self-image. Princeton University Press. 1965.Google Scholar
Sampson, E. E. The sludy of ordinal positions: Antecedents and outcomes. New York: Academic Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Schooler, C. Birth order effects: Not here not now.Google Scholar
Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 78(3), 161–175.Google Scholar
Sears, R. E. Relation of early socialization experiences to self-concepts andgenderrole in middle childhood. Child Development, 1970, 42, 267–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stotland, E., & Dunn, R. E. Identification, opposition, authority, self-esteem, and birth order. Psychological Monographs, 1962, 76(9, Whole No. 528).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toman, W. Family constellation. New York: Springer Publishing Company, 1969.Google Scholar
Vockell, E. L., Felker, D. W., & Miley, C. H. Birth order literature 1967-1971: Bibliography and index. Journal of Individual Psychology. 1973, 29, 39–53.Google Scholar