Developmental Psychology 1975, Vol. 11, No.

6, 749-756

Effects of Mother and Older Sibling on the Problem-Solving Behavior of the Younger Child
VICTOR G. CICIRELLI Purdue University

The effects of aid from mother or older sibling on the child's problem-solving behavior were determined in relation to the sexes of the two siblings and family size. Subjects were 120 first-grade children with a third- or fourth-grade sibling, half from two-child families and half from larger families; the four possible sex combinations were equally represented. Children worked on practice problems alone or were aided by sibling or mother prior to testing. Children with older brothers performed as well alone as after aid by sibling or mother, whereas children with older sisters showed more advanced problem solving after aid by sibling or mother (p < .05). Children with same-sex siblings solved the problems more rapidly; family size had no effect. Results are interpreted in terms of family interaction patterns.

The influence of one or both parents on the characteristics, behavior, and development of the child is well known. Typically, certain child-rearing practices of the mother are seen as leading to particular child outcomes (e.g., Bayley & Schaefer, 1964; Bing, 1960). However, when the child has siblings, the situation is much more complex than this simple causal model suggests because the influence of the child's siblings as well as that of the parents must be considered. The family can be viewed as an interactional network consisting of three subsystems: parent-child interactions, parent-parent interactions, and sibling-sibling interactions. In such a system, the influence of the mother on the child would depend both on the nature of the interaction between the mother and father as well as on the interaction between the siblings. Similarly, the interaction between any two members of the family is qualified by the interactions involving other members of the family.
This research was supported by Grant HD 07201-01 from the Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The assistance of Kathleen Campbell, James Patton, and Paige Rhine in the collection and coding of data is gratefully acknowledged. Requests for reprints should be sent to Victor G. Cicirelli, Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907.

The long history of interaction between family members results in the development of stable and enduring modes of communication between them. (Handel, 1965, noted the stability of the family interpersonal system and its resistance to change when one member of the family is engaged in psychiatric therapy.) One aspect of the family interaction pattern is educative, where the younger or less knowledgeable family members learn from those older or more knowledgeable. Typically, parents fill the role of teacher and model for the child, but for the second- or later-born child, older siblings may exert a significant influence (Minuchin, Montalvo, Guerney, Rosman, & Schumer, 1967; Irish, 1964; Sutton-Smith & Rosenberg, 1969, 1970) and in some cases may influence their younger brothers and sisters more than the parents do, particularly in large families, poor homes, isolated environments, or in situations where the mother works outside the home. There are several lines of evidence that bear on the relative influence of mother and older sibling on the child's cognitive development. Sibling Structure Effects The generally negative effects of a later birth order and increased family size on in-

749

750

VICTOR G. CICIRELLI

telligence and achievement are widely accepted (Altus, 1966; Anastasi, 1956; Belmont & Marolla, 1973; Breland, 1973, 1974a, 1974b; Zajonc & Markus, 1975), although still debated by some (Schooler, 1972, 1973). When, in addition, the child's sex and that of his sibling(s) and the age spacing between them are taken into account, the effects are more complex. Both Koch (1954) and Schoonover (1959) reported that in the two-child family, children with a male sibling were superior in IQ and achievement to children with a female sibling. Rosenberg and Sutton-Smith (1964) confirmed this finding for college students' quantitative American Council on Education Psychological Examination (ACE) scores, but found that students with a female sibling had higher language scores than those with a male sibling. For three-child families, Rosenberg and Sutton-Smith (1966) found that quantitative ACE scores were enhanced for girls who had two brothers and for boys who had both a sister and a brother, while Cicirelli (1967) found lower school achievement scores for sixth-grade children with two brothers. Effects of siblings were most pronounced for sibling age spacings of 2-4 years (Koch, 1954). Cicirelli (1967) found higher achievement scores for sixth-grade children who had a sibling of like sex close in age, and Rosenberg and Sutton-Smith (1969) found this to be true for college girls, whereas college boys scored higher on the ACE when they had widely spaced siblings of either sex. This research makes it evident that a child's abilities and achievement are influenced by the sex and spacing of the siblings who surround him.
Sibling Interaction

structure variables. Cicirelli (1972) attempted to demonstrate that sibling interaction is an intervening mechanism between sibling status and sibling achievement; he investigated the effect of older siblings and nonsiblings of both sexes as teachers of younger children on a concept learning task. Older sisters were significantly more effective than older brothers as teachers of younger siblings (while there was no difference in effectiveness of older boys and girls as teachers of unrelated younger children), and they used a deductive teaching method (explaining, describing, demonstrating, illustrating) more than other groups. A second study (Cicirelli, 1973, 1974) investigated the behaviors of sibling pairs of different ages and age spacing interacting on an object sorting, task and related this behavior to younger siblings' subsequent categorization and conceptual styles. Children aided by siblings on the practice task made more groups than children who worked alone, while those aided by siblings 4 years older made larger groups and left fewer objects ungrouped than those aided by siblings 2 years older. In regard to conceptual style, children aided by sisters 4 years older used a higher percentage of inferential categories than those in other groups. Children were found to be more likely to accept help from an older sister than from an older brother and from a sibling 4 years older than from a sibling only 2 years older. (See also Cicirelli, 1975; Cicirelli, in press).
Parent-Child Interaction

There has been relatively little direct study of interaction between siblings. SuttonSmith (1966) found in an interview study that children interact differently with their siblings than with their peers, while a later study (Sutton-Smith & Rosenberg, 1970) reported that tactics used by older siblings in dealing with younger siblings depended on the sibling structure. Similarly, Bigner (1974) found that children's perceptions of sibling power and function depended on sibling

The literature provides evidence that parents give different treatment to children in different positions in the family. For example, Bossard and Boll (1960) describe the distinct role expectations for children depending on their position in the sibling structure. In an interview study, Dean (Note 1) reported that mothers perceived their older child differently from their younger child of the same sex; in an observational study, Lasko (1954) noted that mothers were less warm emotionally and more demanding and coercive toward their first-born child than toward their second. Cushna (Note 2) found that mothers of first-born infants had

EFFECTS OF MOTHER AND OLDER SIBLING

751

greater expectations for their behavior than did mothers of later borns; mothers gave the first-born infants more help and prompting, although they were more exacting in their demands for girls than for boys. Gewirtz and Gewirtz (1965) found that mothers of only children interacted with their infants twice as much as did mothers of later-born infants. In a laboratory study, Hilton (1967) found that mothers of first-born children were more likely to interfere with and direct the behavior of their first-born than their second-born child. In another laboratory study, Rothbart (1971) observed mothers of children from two-child families with siblings of the same sex as they interacted with their kindergarten-age child on achievement tasks. Rothbart's study supported Hilton, but found more specifically that the mother's critical intrusiveness was strongly accentuated toward the first-born girl, while the first-born boy and second-born girl were treated more approvingly than the secondborn boy. In an animal study, Deets (1974) found that infant-mother interaction was attenuated for those monkey families where an age-mate peer or twin was reared as a sibling with the infant. Although none of the studies cited here attempted to relate differing parent-child interactions to child outcomes, they do provide support for the hypothesis that mothers interact differently with children in different positions in the family and that the laterborn child receives less interaction and less direct parental influence. (This would tend to become more true as family size increased, for it would become more difficult to interact with a greater number of children). Unfortunately, these studies did not take into account the sex of the child in relation to the sex of sibling (even Rothbart's study considered only those children with same-sex siblings). On the basis of the studies of sibling structure effects and of sibling-sibling interactions, one would expect that sex of child and sex of sibling would also have important effects on mother-child interactions.
Problem

mother on a younger child's problem-solving behavior and determined how such effects depended on the sexes of the two siblings and family size. Previous sibling studies have suggested that older siblings, as well as the mother, should have an effect on the younger child's cognitive behavior. While the mother has greater age and experience as a basis for her aid to the child, the older sibling may understand the child's difficulties with the problem from a more similar perspective. It was hypothesized that the relative influence of the older sibling would be greater as family size increased and the mother had less time for interaction with each child. On the basis of previous studies of sibling interaction, it was hypothesized that the older sister would have a greater influence than an older brother when an older sibling aided the child. Previous studies of mother-child interaction are too limited to lead to hypotheses about how the mother's effect might depend on sex of child and sex of sibling; however, sibling structure studies and reasoning by analogy from studies of sibling interaction indicate that these variables should be important in mother-child interaction as well.
Method Design
A 3 X 2 X 2 X 2 factorial design was used, with three sibling structure factors (sex of child, sex of sibling, family size) and one treatment factor. On the family size variable, "small" families were those with two children and "large" families were those with three or more children (modal family size was four children). The younger child of the sibling pair was at first-grade level (6 years old), while the older child was at third- or fourth-grade level (8 or 9 years old); thus age spacing between the two siblings was from 2 to 3 years. There were three treatment conditions: In the alone condition, the first-grade child carried out a problem-solving task alone; in the sib condition, the child was helped by the older sibling; and in the mother condition, the child was helped by his mother. Dependent variables were measures of the child's performance on a second problem-solving task, obtained on trials at the end of the interaction session when mother and sibling were no longer helping the child.

Population and Sampling

A population list of first-grade children with third- or fourth-grade siblings was identified from school records

The present study investigated the relative effects of interaction with an older sibling or

752

VICTOR G. CICIRELLI pattern would light. The child was instructed: "One of these pictures (pointing to pattern models) is the one that shows which bulbs will light. Your job is to find out which picture is the right one. Use its few bulb presses as you can. As soon as you are sure you know which picture is the right one, point to it." The mother or older sibling was instructed: "You can watch as he/she tries to find out which picture is the right one. If you think he/she needs help, then tell him/her what you think he/she should do." It was felt that this task would provide a loosely structured situation wherein the mother or older sibling could give as little or as much guidance to the child as desired, depending on the personalities and skills of the mother, older sibling, and younger child and their characteristic ways of interacting. Olson (1966) found that performance on this task increased with age, so that the older sibling should in general possess more advanced problem-solving skills as a basis of his advice to the younger sibling.

of two central Indiana school systems involving a total of 12 elementary schools. There were 154 such sibling pairs. These were divided into two groups: children from two-child families and children from families of three or more children. Each of these two population groups was subdivided into four subgroups: boys with older brothers, boys with older sisters, girls with older brothers, and girls with older sisters. A sample of 15 subjects was randomly drawn from each of the subgroups; 5 of the 15 were assigned to the alone treatment condition, 5 were assigned to the sib condition, and 5 were assigned to the mother condition. There were 120 sibling pairs in all. Of these, 16 pairs were lost from the study for various reasons (parent did not give permission for study, 12; illness, 2; moved, 2); these were replaced with pairs from a randomly selected oversample list for the appropriate population subgroups.

Task
A problem-solving task described by Olson (1966) was used. The task involved determining which one of two (or more) alternative patterns displayed to the child was correct; that is, which pattern corresponded to a prearranged pattern of bulbs (which light when pressed) on a "bulb board" that the child could manipulate. The bulb board, constructed of black Bakelite material, was 17.5 cm long, 13.5 cm wide, and 7.0 cm high; 25 red indicator lights, .5 cm in diameter, were set into the top of the board in a 5 X 5 array. Next to each light was a small button (.5 cm in diameter), which when pressed permitted the bulb to light if it was one of the pattern bulbs. Switches on the back of the board controlled each of the bulbs individually, so that bulbs making up the pattern could be preset to light when pressed. A sample problem displays the following alternative patterns to the child, with the pattern on the right the "correct" one: x x x x x
00000

Procedure
In the sib condition, the first-grade child and his older sibling were brought into the experimental room (a small room in the school, containing a table and chairs) and given the first set of four problems, during which the interaction between the siblings was recorded. When the task was completed, the older sibling was dismissed. Then the younger child was given the test set of three problems. In the mother condition, the first-grade child and his mother were given the first set of four problems, following which the child alone was given the test set of three problems. In the alone condition, the first-grade child was brought into the experimental room alone and given both sets of problems in succession.

x x x x x
0 0 X 0 0

o o o o o and o o x o o ooooo ooxoo ooooo ooxoo

The child presses bulbs on the bulb board until he is sure that he can identify the correct pattern. (Logically, only one bulb press is needed to distinguish between the two alternatives.) The number of actual bulb presses needed for the child to solve the problem depends on the sophistication and efficiency of his informationgathering and processing strategy. Four problems of the same type as the sample problem were presented to the child during the interaction or practice part of the experimental session, and an additional three problems were presented in the test part of the session. The child was introduced to the task by being shown the correspondence between a single pattern model and the bulb board. (The pattern model was a drawing of the top of the bulb board, of the same size, with the pattern bulbs shown in color. It was displayed on a clipboard behind the bulb board.) For each problem, the switches on the back of the bulb board were set so that only those bulbs forming the correct

Measures of Problem Solving

Each bulb press made by the child in solving each problem was recorded in sequence. The total number of bulbs pressed before reaching a solution to the problem was recorded, as well as the number of bulb presses in each of three categories: on-pattern redundant bulbs (bulbs common to both pattern models), on-pattern informative bulbs (bulbs that appear in one pattern but not in another), and off-pattern bulbs. Time to reach a solution was also recorded. To determine the child's problem-solving strategy, two judges assessed each sequence of bulb choices and the relative proportions of the various types of bulbs chosen using Olson's (1966) criteria. The child was judged to have used a search strategy when the bulbs pressed were apparently independent of the pattern models provided, with off-pattern bulbs pressed with at least as great a frequency as on-pattern bulbs; the time per bulb press was short, and relatively many bulbs were pressed. (Children using this strategy might also fail to reach a solution.) In the successive pattern-matching strategy, the bulbs pressed tended to be part of the pattern suggested by one or both of the models, but on-

EFFECTS OF MOTHER AND OLDER SIBLING pattern presses were no more likely to be informative than redundant. The child tries to trace out the entire pattern; because the entire pattern is tested, the child requires a large number of trials to solution but the time required per bulb is still relatively small (although intermediate to the other two strategies). In the information-selection strategy, on-pattern informative bulbs are pressed earlier and oftener than on-pattern redundant bulbs; the child requires relatively few trials to solution, but the time required per bulb is relatively large. Olson (1966) reported 94% agreement between independent judges in classifying strategies according to these criteria. In this study, search strategies were coded as 1; successive pattern-matching strategies were coded as 3; and information-selection strategies were coded as 5. If a given child's performance could not be unambiguously assigned to a search or successive pattern-matching strategy, it was coded as 2, while if it was not clearly a successive pattern-matching or information selection strategy, it was coded as 4. Thus the strategy score represents the degree of complexity of the problem-solving strategy used by the child. There was 95.3% agreement between two independent judges in classifying strategies on a total of 360 problems according to the criteria for classifying and coding strategies. Each problem was scored individually, and scores were summed over the three problems in the test session to give total scores for each of the six measures. (Total scores were also computed for the four problems in the practice session. An estimate of reliability for these measures is given by the correlation between practice and test session scores for the 40 subjects in the alone condition. These were; response time, .64; number of responses, .81; number of redundant responses, .62; number of informative responses, .65; number of offpattern responses, .79; strategy, .71.)

753

Table 1: Means and Standard Deviations of Problem-Solving Variables (N = 120) Variable8 Response time (sec) Number of bulbs pressed Number of redundant bulbs Number of informative bulbs Number of off-pattern bulbs Strategy

M
104.48 36.49 21.42 9.63 5.75 9.12

SD
55.41 18.67 10.80 7.03 10.67 2.45

* Variables were measured over the three test problems.

each of the problem-solving variables; these, of course, were not completely independent. 1. Response time. There was a significant main effect of sibling sex on the child's response time, F(l, 96) = 4.06, p = .04. Children with older sisters had a longer response time (M = 114.77 sec) than children with older brothers (M = 94.20 sec). However, this effect was qualified by the significant interaction between sibling sex and the sex of the child, F(l, 96) = 5.46, p = .02. Among children with older brothers, girls (M = 104,97 sec) had a longer response time than boys (M = 83.43 sec), while among children with older sisters, boys (M= 127.83 sec) had a longer response time than girls (M = 101.70 sec). Looking at this interaction in another way, children with same-sex siblings had shorter response times than children with opposite-sex siblings. 2. Number of bulbs pressed. There was a significant interaction between sex of the older sibling and treatment condition, F(2, 96) = 3.69, p = .03. Among children with older brothers, those who solved the problems alone pressed fewer bulbs (M = 29.20) than those helped by the older sib (M = 39.35) or the mother (M = 38.00). Among children with older sisters, those who solved the problem alone used more bulb presses (M = 43.60) than those helped by the older sib (M = 38.25) or the mother (M = 30.55). 3. Number of redundant bulbs pressed. There was a significant interaction between sex of the child and sex of the older sibling in their effect on number of redundant bulbs pressed, F(l, 96) = 3.90, p = .05. Boys with an older sister pressed more redundant bulbs (M = 22.50) than boys with an older brother (M = 18.53), while girls with an older sister

Results Means and standard deviations for each of the measures of problem solving on the three problems of the test session are presented in Table 1. The three problems took 104.5 sec to solve, or about 35 sec per problem, on the average. For the three problems, 36.5 bulb presses were needed to reach a solution, or about 12 bulb presses per problem. Of these, about 3 informative, 7 redundant, and 2 off-pattern bulbs were pressed per problem. The mean strategy score was 9.12, or approximately 3 per problem; this means that most of the children were using the successive pattern-matching strategy to reach a solution to the problems. (The variability was sufficiently great to indicate that search and information-selection strategies were also being used by a substantial number of children.) An analysis of variance was carried out for

754

VICTOR G. CICIRELLI

pressed fewer redundant bulbs (M- 20.57) than girls with an older brother (M = 24.10). Looking at the interaction in another way, children with same-sex siblings pressed fewer redundant bulbs than children with opposite-sex siblings. 4. Number of informative bulbs pressed. There were no significant effects. 5. Number of off-pattern bulbs pressed. There was a significant interaction between the sex of the older sibling and treatment condition, F(2, 96) = 4.02, p = .02, in their effect on the number of off-pattern bulbs pressed. Children with older brothers pressed fewer off-pattern bulbs after they had worked alone (M = 3.05) than after they had been helped by older sib (M = 3.65) or by mother (M = 7.65), while children with older sisters pressed more off-pattern bulbs after they had worked alone (M = 11.45) than after they had been helped by older sib (M = 5.80) or by mother (M = 2.85). 6. Strategy. There was a significant interaction between the sex of the older sibling and treatment condition in their effect on the .younger child's strategy score, F(2, 96) = 3.71, p = .03. Children with older brothers had a slightly more advanced strategy after they had worked alone (M = 9.60) than after they had been helped by older sib (M = 9.30) or by mother (M= 9.20), while children with older sisters had less advanced strategies after they had worked alone (M = 7.85) than after they had been helped by older sib (M = 8.40) or by mother (M = 10.35).
Discussion

The major question addressed by the study was the relative effect of mother and older sibling on the younger child's problemsolving behavior. It was hypothesized that a child who had been helped by mother or an older sibling should perform better on the test problems than a child who worked alone on the practice task. This hypothesis was only partially borne out, since the effect of the treatment condition depended on the sex of the child's sibling. Children with older sisters performed in a direction that supported the hypothesis; however, children with older brothers tended to perform best when they worked alone dur-

ing the practice period. Either children with older brothers did not profit from the help given to them, or older brothers and mothers of children with older brothers gave a different quality of help than that given to children with older sisters. This interaction between sibling sex and treatment condition was found for number of bulb presses to solution, number of off-pattern bulbs, and strategy. Of these, number of bulb presses to solution and strategy are the most crucial measures of problem solving on this task; thus this finding is an important one. When the child worked alone on the practice task, those children with an older brother had higher strategy scores than those children with older sisters. This fits in with earlier sibling structure studies (Koch, 1954; Rosenberg & Sutton-Smith, 1964, 1966; Schoonover, 1959) which suggested that an older brother was somehow stimulating to the younger child's cognitive development. However, when children with older brothers were helped by the older brother or by the mother, they showed no improvement in strategy over children who worked alone. Perhaps the child with an older brother has had to learn to be independent in order to cope with the power and sibling rivalry of the older brother. This suggests that an older brother creates a situation for the younger child in which help on a task is unacceptable, in which working on the task on one's own is preferable to doing the task better with help. In the case of the child with an older sister, the help of the sister or mother led to an improvement of problem solving. Since the mother typically delegates responsibility to an older sister in caring for the younger child (Bossard & Boll, 1960; Mead & Heyman, 1965), the two children have developed a customary relationship where the younger child expects help from the older sister (and the older sister expects to give it). Previous studies (Cicirelli, 1972, 1974) have demonstrated that older sisters are more effective teachers of younger siblings than are older brothers. This study indicates that receptiveness to help from older sisters and independence regarding help from older brothers are well-established characteristics that transfer to a situation in which the sibling is absent and the mother is offering help.

EFFECTS OF MOTHER AND OLDER SIBLING

755

Finally, the hypothesized effect of family This is an important finding because it indicates an indirect effect of sibling-sibling in- size was not borne out by the study, for there teractions on the mother-child interaction. was no relationship between family size and In other words, the effectiveness of the the child's problem-solving performance on mother in helping the child depends on the the task. This study has provided further evidence sibling structure in the family, that is, the sex of the older sibling. This implies that sibling of the effects of the sibling structure on the structure variables should be taken more child's cognitive functioning. seriously when studying mother-child interactions. REFERENCE NOTES While there appears to be an inconsistency 1. Dean, D. A. The relation of ordinal position to perbetween the notion that older brothers are sonality in young children. Unpublished master's stimulators of intellectual development of thesis, State University of Iowa, 1947. younger siblings and the evidence that older 2. Cushna, G. Agency and birth order differences in very early childhood. Paper presented at the meeting of the sisters are more effective helpers of younger American Psychological .Association, New York, siblings, this can be easily reconciled: Under September 1966. informal or incidental learning conditions, the younger child is stimulated by the comREFERENCES petitiveness and rivalry of an older brother Adams, B. N. Kinship in an urban setting. Chicago: to learn more than from an older sister, but Markham, 1968. in a more formal teaching situation, the Altus, W. D. Birth order and its sequelae. Science, 1966, 151, 44-49. younger child will learn more from an older sister than from an older brother because she Anastasi, A. Intelligence and family size. Psychological Bulletin, 1956, S3, 187-209. expects to give help and the younger child ex- Bayley, N., & Schaefer, E. S. Correlations of maternal pects to receive it. and child behaviors with the development of mental abilities: Data from the Berkeley Growth Study. A secondary question of the study was Monographs of the Society for Research in Child whether the child's problem-solving perforDevelopment, 1964, 29, 3-79. mance depended on the sibling structure of Belmont, L., & Marolla, F. A. Birth order, family size, the family. The relationship of the treatment and intelligence. Science, 1973, 182, 1096-1101. conditions to sibling sex has already been Bigner, J. J. Second boms' discrimination of sibling role concepts. Developmental Psychology, 1974, 10, discussed. In addition, the sex of the child 564-573. had an effect which depended on the sex of Bing, E. Effects of childrearing practices on developthe sibling, but which was independent of ment of differential cognitive abilities. Child Developwho helped the child in the practice session. ment, 1960, 31, 321-338. Children whose sibling was of the same sex Bossard, J. H. S., & Boll, E. H. The sociology of child development (3rd ed.). New York: Harper, 1960. had a shorter response time and pressed H. M. Birth order effects: A reply to Schooler. fewer redundant bulbs than children whose Breland, Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 210-212. sibling was of the opposite sex. Thus there Breland, H. M. Birth order, family configuration, verbal appears to be a tendency for children with a achievement. Child Development, 1974, 45, 10111019.(a) sibling of the same sex to press for a more rapid solution to a problem, while there is a Breland, H. M. Birth order, family size, and intelligence. Science, 1974, 184, 118. (b) slower, more cautious approach by children Cicirelli, V. G. Sibling constellation, creativity, I.Q. with an opposite-sex sibling. The comand academic achievement. Child Development, 1967, 38, 481-490. petitiveness and sibling rivalry between pairs of brothers has been noted in earlier work Cicirelli, V. G. The effect of sibling relationships on concept learning of young children taught by child on siblings (Adams, 1968; Koch, 1960; teachers. Child Development, 1972, 43, 282-287. Rosenberg & Sutton-Smith, 1969; Sutton- Cicirelli, V. G. Effects of sibling structure and interacSmith, 1969); the present analysis suggests tion on children's categorization style. Developmental Psychology, 1973, 9, 132-139. that this may extend in some measure to pairs of sisters as well. This is not surprising Cicirelli, V. G. Relationship of sibling structure and interaction to younger sib's conceptual style. Journal of in view of the more extensive interaction Genetic Psychology, 1974, 125, 37-49. between same-sex siblings close in age in the Cicirelli, V. G. Sibling influence on the development of the individual. In K. F. Riegel & J. A. Mecham day-to-day family situation.

756

VICTOR G. CICIRELLI An exploration of their structure and treatment. New York: Basic Books, 1967. Olson, D. R. On conceptual strategies. In J. S. Bruner, R. R. Olver, & P. Greenfield (Eds.), Studies in cognitive growth. New York: Wiley, 1966. Rosenberg, B. G., & Sutton-Smith, B. The relationship of ordinal positions and sibling sex status to cognitive abilities. Psychonomic Science, 1964, /, 81-82. Rosenberg, B. G., & Sutton-Smith, B. Sibling association, family size, and cognitive abilities. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1966, 109, 271-279. Rosenberg, B. G., & Sutton-Smith, B. Sibling age spacing effects upon cognition. Developmental Psychology, 1969, /, 661-668. Rothbart, M. K. Birth order and mother-child interaction in an achievement situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971, / 7, 113-120. Schooler, C. Birth order effects: Not here, not now! Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 78, 161-175. Schooler, C. Birth order effects: A reply to Breland. Psychological Bulletin, 1973, 80, 213-214. Schoonover, S. M. The relationship of intelligence and achievement to birth order, sex of sibling, and age interval. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1959, 50, 143-146. Sutton-Smith, B. Role replication and reversal in play. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1966, 12, 285-298. Sutton-Smith, B., & Rosenberg, B. G. Modeling and reactive components of sibling interaction. In J. Hill (Ed.), Child psychology (Vol. 3): Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1969. Sutton-Smith, B., & Rosenberg, B. G. The sibling. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970. Zajonc, R. B., & Markus, G. B. Birth order and intellectual development. Psychological Review, 1975, 82, 74-88. (Received February 24, 1975)

(Eds.), The developing Individual in a changing world (Vol. 3): Social and environmental issues. The Hague: Mouton, 1975. Cicirelli, V. G. Siblings helping siblings. In L. V. Allen (Ed.), Inter-age interaction in children: Theory and research on the helping relationship. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1975, in press. Deets, A. Q. Age-mate or twin sibling: Effects on monkey age-mate interactions during infancy. Developmental Psychology, 1974, 10, 913-928. Gewirtz, J. L., & Gewirtz, H. B. Stimulus conditions, infant behaviors, and social learning in four Israeli childrearing environments: A preliminary report illustrating differences in environment and behavior between the "only" and the "youngest" child. In B. M. Foss (Ed.), Determinants of infant behavior (Vol. 3). New York: Wiley, 1965. Handel, G. Psychological study of whole families. Psychological Bulletin, 1965, 63, 19-41. Hilton, I. D. Differences in the behavior of mothers toward first- and later-born children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967, 7, 282-290. Irish, D. P. Sibling interaction: A neglected aspect in family life research. Social Forces, 1964, 42, 279-288. Koch, H. L. The relation of primary mental abilities in five- and six-year-olds to sex of child and characteristics of his sibling. Child Development, 1954, 25, 209-223. Koch, H. L. The relation of certain formal attributes of siblings to attitudes held toward each other and toward their parents. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 1960,25, 1-124. Lasko, J. K. Parent behavior toward first and second children. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1954, 49, 97-137. Mead, M., & Heyman, K. The family. New York: Macmillan, 1965. Minuchin, S., Montalvo, B., Guerney, G. G., Jr., Rosman, B. L., & Schumer, F. Families of the slums: