For centuries, humans have been curious about the effect that birth order has on personality, possibly because eldest children in ruling families typically inherited the seat of power. A new study published in PNAS finds that firstborn children tend to score higher on objective measures of intelligence and self-reported measures of intelligence. But it finds that there are no birth-order effects on other personality characteristics.
Older by minutes or even seconds, makes no difference… 😉
Pregnancy and birthing are very taxing on women, I’ve read studies that claim a woman’s body does not return to normal for 4-5 years after a pregnancy. I wonder if there is some correlation between the intelligence gap and the age difference of the siblings. Would not surprise me to find that pregnancies that happen before the body has fully recovered means that the woman’s body cannot give as many resources to the subsequent children during those critical developmental stages.
TLDR: Got older siblings? If so, here’s something shiny to play with. …but you missed the squirrel.
If “Mr Hydes” made up 23% of the drinkers – two thirds of which were female… When you’re that bad, they call you Mr? 364 people isn’t the smallest sample, but still not worth painting any gender related implications. I thought Hemingway meant depressive…
There’s not a lot to the article, not even a break down of how many men vs women in the sample.
Criteria like housing prices, population density, and crime rates are often emphasized when people consider the desirability of living in an urban area. These “livability” factors are associated with higher life satisfaction, both directly (by making the lives of residents better) and indirectly (because more affluent and satisfied people live in these neighborhoods).
However, according to a recent PNAS paper, these livability factors can only account for two-thirds of the difference in life satisfaction, with a large portion of the difference being attributed to something more surprising: a match between personality and neighborhood. In London, personality traits cluster in different neighborhoods and contribute to the life satisfaction of the residents there.
In other news: Your personality influences where you work—and how happy you’ll be there.
A majority of people tend to take their own conclusions about things and project them onto others, equating what they think they need and want and believe into what other people need and want and believe. Happiness, as a transitive emotional state, is the most relative thing in the world to try to measure.
People tend to adapt and don’t want to live in an unsatisfied state. Mankind is a tribal creature, and tends to emulate the behaviors of others when in crowded situations (such as a large city like London) in order to “fit in”. Most people tend to stay in a relatively small geographical region and will then emulate the behaviors of that region. Not wanting to seem “outside the tribe” they may even think that they’re “happy”. It’s not that their personality influences where they live, or how happy they are there. At least not for most people, which is what the study concludes. It may well be that the opposite occurs due to man’s tribal nature.
Are you as worry-prone as Woody Allen, or as chill as Seth Rogan? Your answer might give you a glimpse into your future. Certain personality traits make you more likely to develop serious diseases down the line, reports a study released this week in the journal Social Psychology and Personality Science.