Return to “Polls”

At five years old, where were you in your family?

A: Only child of your gender within five years both ways (overrides B and C)
Total votes: 18 (28%)
B: Oldest of your gender (overrides D)
Total votes: 24 (37%)
C: Youngest of your gender (overrides D)
Total votes: 15 (23%)
D: Middle child
Total votes: 8 (12%)
Total votes: 65
Post

Birth Order

#1
This should be a mildly psychological poll. The actual method of doing this can get complicated, as there are a lot of factors involved, but I'm sticking to four things:

Type A (Functional only born): Only child of your gender born within five years both ways (overrides B)
Type B (Functional first born): Oldest of your gender (overrides D)
Type C (Functional last born): Youngest of your gender (overrides D)
Type D (Functional middle born): Middle child

To pique your interest:
- Most pastors, politicians, and architects are functional firstborns or only children.
- Most comedians and salespeople are functional youngest children.
- Most psychologists and writers are middle children.

And, finally, just for Flatfingers:
Middles and youngest children are more likely to be Idealists/Socializers or Artisians/Killers.
Firstborns and only children are more likely to be Rationals/Explorers or Guardians/Achievers.

Also, if you like this sort of thing, you might want to check out Kevin Leman's The Birth Order Book.

From the book:
First: perfectionist, reliable, conscientious, a list maker, well organized, hard driving, a natural leader, critical, serious, scholarly, logical, doesn’t like surprises, a techie
Middle: mediator, compromising, diplomatic, avoids conflict, independent, loyal to peers, has many friends, a maverick, secretive, used to not having attention
Last: manipulative, charming, blames others, attention seeker, tenacious, people person, natural salesperson, precocious, engaging, affectionate, loves surprises
Only: little adult by age seven, very thorough, deliberate, high achiever, self-motivated, fearful, cautious, voracious reader, black-and-white thinker, talks in extremes, can’t bear to fail, has very high expectations for self, more comfortable with people who are older or younger
In reality it's a little more complicated than this - having a single younger sibling of the opposite gender can make you either a functional only or a functional firstborn, for instance, and there's a vast variety of other ways your personality can develop... but I'm putting it this way to keep it simple.
(also, take it all with a grain of salt - little of it is scientifically based, and it's largely just guesswork)
Last edited by Talvieno on Thu Dec 04, 2014 4:00 pm, edited 7 times in total.
Have a question? Send me a PM! || I have a Patreon page up for REKT now! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: Birth Order

#3
Both parents. Just where you were when you were five, taking account all the siblings that were living with you most of the time. For you, I'd say the oldest. The five-year thing is because past that, our siblings don't have much role in shaping our personalities.
Have a question? Send me a PM! || I have a Patreon page up for REKT now! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: Birth Order

#4
I'm the very eldest, born in '94, with siblings from '98 and '01. Already moved out technically, my relationship is still love and admiration with them, never got sour or rivalizing. Nice to have it that way, but damn I miss the little scamps >.>
I have no idea what I'm gonna turn out as. I'm in uni as a mechatronical engineering student, sucking at it. I've got my sparse hobby of digital art, but I'm not persistent. We'll come back to this once I got a career consisting of more than vidya gaymes and beer, alright? :lol:
panic
Post

Re: Birth Order

#5
Can't say I'm surprised about the engineering career - eldests like us tend to enjoy careers that are either very exacting or put us in a leadership role. Doesn't mean we're going to be good at it, though. :P

Interestingly, eldests have an odd split right down the middle - they're usually either ambitious or rebellious, and few are a mix. I was the ambitious sort - being rebellious never even occurred to me.
Have a question? Send me a PM! || I have a Patreon page up for REKT now! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: Birth Order

#8
I first ran across this theory quite a few years back when I read Lucille K. Forer's The Birth Order Factor.

After mulling it over for years, observing people and comparing them to the model of this book, I tentatively accept some of the ideas but I wouldn't try to use it in daily life. For quality, I rank it above the enneagram and astrology, but below Myers-Briggs and temperament theory.

OK, that said: I fit the profile of the eldest in some ways but not others. I'm rational and questioning and conscientious, but not driven or intolerant. And my two younger brothers invert the descriptions of the middle and youngest children: my middle brother is the best salesman you'll ever meet, while the youngest is the peacemaker and entertainer.

So from that if nothing else, I give a little credence to birth order theory. I can see how it could affect (but not supersede) innate, neurochemically-predisposed core behavioral motivations, but it's not super-accurate.

Fun to think about, though. I look forward to following this poll.

(Side note: I wouldn't have tried to make gender part of this poll, but that's me.)
Post

Re: Birth Order

#10
Flatfingers - I completely agree - that's why I called it "mildly psychological" - some of it seems to be luck, but it's mildly accurate. It's fun, but not fit to be used in anything requiring a fair degree of accuracy.

The book, as I recall, actually suggested specifically that you split it via genders - that's why I did so in the poll. And it's really the only reason - I haven't seen the book in about five years. :P


Dinosawer ninja'd me. :lol:
Have a question? Send me a PM! || I have a Patreon page up for REKT now! || People talking in IRC over the past two hours: Image
Image
Image
Post

Re: Birth Order

#15
Flatfingers wrote:Let's put it like this:

I don't think astrology is as good as the "enneagram"; I think the enneagram is nearly as bad as astrology.

Hope that helps. ;)
I would put it on the same scale as "assigning people to a very vague personality category based on a dice roll ;)
Talvieno wrote:Ooh, ooh, ooh! Numerology!
Alright, now you're just trying to make me upset on purpose :lol:
Warning: do not ask about physics unless you really want to know about physics.
The LT IRC / Alternate link || The REKT Wiki || PUDDING
Image

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron