Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 1

Critical Analysis on Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory

Written by:

Sarwar, H., Aijaz, S., Fatima, I., Naveed, M., Saeed, M., Bilwani, Z.

Institute Of Business Management

Course: History of Psychology

Instructor: Dr. Sana Sadia

Date: 18 December 2023

Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 2

Summary.........................................................................................................................................3

Introduction....................................................................................................................................3

Literature Review.......................................................................................................................... 5

Discussion....................................................................................................................................... 8

Conclusion...................................................................................................................................... 9

Limitations......................................................................................................................................9

References..................................................................................................................................... 10
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 3

Summary

The research paper delves into the impact of birth order on personality development, drawing on

theories by Alfred Adler, Carl Rogers, and Frank J. Sulloway. Adler set forth that birth order

influences personality traits, with firstborns exhibiting higher responsibility and drive, while

later-borns are more disobedient and self-reliant. Sulloway challenged this, suggesting that birth

order affects traits due to evolutionary advantages and family dynamics. The paper also discusses

empirical findings on birth order and personality, highlighting factors like intelligence,

self-esteem, and sibling dynamics. It emphasises the application of birth order theory in fields

such as family therapy, education, and psychology, and how it can be applied to diverse cultural

groups. While Adler's framework provides valuable insights, contemporary research highlights

the need for a more comprehensive understanding of personality development within familial

and cultural contexts. Additionally, the paper addresses the limitations and debates surrounding

Adler's theory, including empirical support and generalizability across diverse populations.

Keywords: Birth Order, personality traits, intelligence, self esteem, sibling dynamics, parental

investment.

Introduction

Birth order refers to the order in which a child is born in their family; it has a profound and long

lasting effect on psychological development. Multiple figures have tried to explain the marvel

behind the development of each individual's characteristics, resulting in various opinions and

theories (Theories of Personality (Ryckman), 9th Ed., n.d.). One of the most prominent works

regarding this study has been put forward by Alfred Adler. Born in 1870, Adler was an Austrian

psychotherapist who was one of the first theorists to state that birth order influences personality
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 4

(Liebenau & Stein, n.d.). Though Adler's work is quite diverse, his theory of birth order is the

most relevant to the development of specific personality traits. He believed that due to the

individual's order of birth, his characteristics and experiences are altered;this can have both

positive and negative influences on their development, though the person's perception of the

order he is born in is more salient than the actual order. A theorist named Carl Roger did not

address birth order theory in particular but laid a strong emphasis on the significance of

individual experiences, development, and the role that the self-concept serves when analysing

personality. Rogers' method highlighted the individual perspectives and experiences, stressing

the concept that people are naturally predisposed toward self-actualization and personal

development. His beliefs placed more weight on an individual's current experiences than on

elements from the past, such as birth order (Mcleod, 2023). In birth order theory Adler stated that

firstborn children typically have higher expectations from their guardians. As a result, they grow

up to be more responsible and driven. In comparison with firstborns, he claimed that siblings

born later in life were often provided with greater autonomy by their parents, resulting in

children more disobedient and self-reliant. Not all have agreed to his work with respect to birth

order impacts; a prominent figure further in our report includes Sulloway whose work brought a

different perspective to Alfred Adler's theory. Sulloway proposed that birth order affects

personality traits not only because of family dynamics but also because of evolutionary

advantages. Challenging Adler's standard psychological perspectives on birth order, he claimed

that qualities like rebelliousness and openness to new experiences are influenced by how

individuals struggle for resources within the family (Apa, n.d.) In Birth order theory Adler has

also written about the traits expected for each of the ranks of birth order; these traits for each

child are not dependent on the order they are born, but on the social interactions they experience
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 5

as a result of that factor. He later emphasised that there are many aspects other than birth order

that play part in development of certain characteristics in an individual like children with

disabilities, death of a child, large size of family and gender. Adler also cited a process called

sibling de-identification. Because all individuals have the ability to fit into one of the categories

put forward by Adler, a lot of research has been conducted to know the accuracy of his

characteristics per rank. It is important to keep in mind that not everyone agreed with Adler's

beliefs and that a person's personality is not always determined by where they are in their family

tree.

Our report consists of various prominent figures like Frank J. Sullovey, Carl Rogers etc.We have

based our term report on this psychoanalytic theory because it has offered a distinctive

perspective on how the development of personalities is influenced by the order of birth. The

theory is useful and intriguing to study since it can be applied to an extensive spectrum of

cultural groups and communities. It also has applications in family therapy, education, and

psychology, amongst other fields.

Literature Review

According to Sulloway (1999), it has been found that birth order plays a major role in causing

differences in personalities among siblings. Firstborns typically tend to be more achievement

oriented, conscientious and dominant while siblings born later on tend to agree more easily, are

inclined to seek excitement and be more open to new experiences. It was also found that birth

order accounts for 4.1% variance in personality traits however the differences are also caused by
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 6

other factors such as age, gender, individual differences, social class, etc. Comparisons can be

drawn between first borns and laterborns in terms of their creativity levels with either parties

seeking parental favour and developing different coping mechanisms which in turn shapes their

innovation and imagination.

A previous research conducted by Zajonc and Markus (1975) also studied the impact of birth

order on personality. This study was aimed at investigating the factors influencing the results of a

previous study which concluded that firstborns are more linguistically expressive, better

academic performers, more career oriented and less impulsive and also tend to outperform their

younger siblings. The research findings included that as family size grows, the intellectual

environment of the family also increases. However, this in turn has detrimental effects on the last

borns.

The study conducted by Dixon et al. (2008) explored the influence on personality of birth order

within large families by focusing on Eysenck’s Big Three Model dimensions: Psychoticism (P),

Extraversion (E) and Neuroticism (N). Out of a sample of 394 individuals from 42 Caucasian

families, it was found that the youngest siblings scored higher for extraversion and psychoticism

in comparison to older siblings. However, age played a significant part as younger individuals

were seen to be scoring high for extraversion and psychoticism. On the other hand, after

adjusting for additional predictors, the effect of age on psychoticism levels were seen to

diminish. The study suggests that the dynamics within large families leads to increased social

and impulsive behaviours of younger siblings.

Sandra E. et al. (2007) emphasised on the subject of age in terms of IQ (Intelligence Quotient).

This archival research collected data from Norway consisting of birth records from 1967 to 1988,

administrative data from the Norwegian Registry and military records from 1984 to 2005. The
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 7

findings of the research concluded that earlier born children tend to have higher IQ levels in

comparison to later borns. The average difference between a first born and second born is

approximately one fifth of a standard deviation or 3 IQ points. Despite the significant

differences, birth order only accounts for 3% of the variance in personality within families.

Erns and Angst (1983) further expanded on the age effect.Initially, their research was aimed at

studying the effects of birth order on self-reliance of Japanese preschoolers during daily routines.

Data was collected from 265 mothers through a questionnaire and the results concluded that

reliance on a parent was not dependent on birth order, rather more so on the age the child was at.

Unlike most other researches focusing on the categories they defined as “earlier borns” and “later

borns”, Jeannie S. Kidwell (year) focused on “middle borns”. This study collected data from

2,200 adolescent males and the findings suggested that if the age gap between middle born and

their adjacent sibling is two years rather than one, the self esteem of the middle child is found to

be lower. Furthermore, first borns and lastborns enjoy a position well defined due to the

uniqueness provided by their birth order. While middle borns usually receive less attention,

status and recognition. Other findings also claimed that the self esteem of the middle born is

enhanced when all other siblings are females compared to when other siblings are either male or

of mixed gender.

On the other hand, Rodgers and Cleveland (2000), conducted a study which completely refuted

the direct effects of birth order on intelligence levels among children born later in families. This

study calls for a more holistic approach towards analysing data such as instead of using a cross

sectional study design, data accurately understanding the within family dynamics should be

collected. It concluded that the link between birth order and intelligence is a methodological
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 8

illusion. The research also stated that out of the abundance of research available on birth order,

only a handful have taken family relations into account.

Discussion

Adler's Individual Psychology offers a lens to understand the multifaceted impacts of birth order

on personality and achievement within families. It emphasises the significance of subjective

experiences, acknowledging the influence of cultural, racial, ethnic, and familial values in

shaping individuals' development. The discussion underscores the need to delve beyond ordinal

birth order to explore psychological birth order, capturing the nuanced and diverse experiences

within families. By incorporating Adler's framework, the study highlights the idea that unique

individual experiences within familial contexts significantly contribute to personality formation,

presenting birth-order personality as a valuable tool in comprehending the environmental context

of an individual's development.

This view aligns with contemporary research, such as Rohrer et al. (2015), which highlights the

role of family dynamics and cultural contexts in shaping children's independence and caregiving

tasks, emphasising the need to explore mechanisms beyond birth order alone.

Contemporary research, including Kidwell's study on middleborns and Salmon's examination of

birth order and relationships, further nuances the discussion. Kidwell's findings shed light on the

intricate impact of sibling dynamics, highlighting how a middleborn's self-esteem might be

shaped by the sex composition and spacing of siblings. Salmon's study emphasises the

significance of non-kin relationships, indicating that birth order may influence attitudes towards

friendships and mating strategies, aligning with Adler's emphasis on social variables but also

extending beyond his theories to explore broader social and evolutionary implications.
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 9

Conclusion

In essence, while Adler's Individual Psychology offers a robust framework, contemporary studies

reveal complexities beyond birth order alone, emphasising the need for a more comprehensive

understanding of personality development within familial and cultural contexts. Integrating

Adler's insights with contemporary research provides a richer perspective, underscoring the

multifaceted nature of individual experiences and their impact on personality formation.

Throughout various studies, including those by Kidwell, Salmon, Zajonc and Markus, and

Rohrer et al., Adler's framework resonates by highlighting the intricate interplay between birth

order and personality.

Limitations

Adler's theory encounters several limitations and debates. Firstly, empirical support for certain

concepts, such as the "inferiority complex" and the birth-order influence on personality traits,

lacks consistent validation. Moreover, the theory's generalizability across diverse cultures and

populations is a subject of contention, as cultural variations might impact the applicability of

Adler's emphasis on subjective experiences and social variables. Additionally, criticisms arise

regarding Adler's potential overemphasis on early experiences in personality development,

potentially neglecting ongoing influences from other developmental Empirical validation of key

concepts like the "inferiority complex" or birth-order-induced personality traits lacks consistent

support across studies, as observed in the critical review by Sulloway (1999). Moreover, the

theory's universal applicability across diverse cultures and populations remains debated, echoing

the concerns raised in Salmon's study (2002/2003) regarding the cultural specificity of certain

Adlerian concepts. Additionally, Adler's potential overemphasis on early experiences in

personality formation overlooks ongoing influences from other developmental theories, a point
Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 10

echoed in the limitations highlighted in Zajonc and Markus (1975), which underscore the

complexity of causality in understanding birth order effects theories and factors.

References

● Theories of Personality (Ryckman), 9th ed. (n.d.). AIU e-Books Repository. Retrieved

December 15, 2023, from https://ebooks.aiu.ac.ke/show/1013/pdf

● Mcleod, S. (2023, October 24). Carl Rogers Theory & Contribution to Psychology.

Simply Psychology. Retrieved December 17, 2023, from

https://www.simplypsychology.org/carl-rogers.html

● Liebenau, G., & Stein, T. (n.d.). Alfred Adler. Wikipedia. Retrieved December 16, 2023,

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Adler

● Apa. (n.d.). Born to rebel: Birth order, family dynamics, and creative lives. APA

PsycInfo. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1996-98980-000

● Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to rebel: Birth order, family dynamics, and creative lives.

Pantheon Books.

● Zajonc, R. B., & Markus, G. B. (1975). Birth order and intellectual development.

Psychological Review, 82(1), 74–88. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076229

● Dixon, Missy & Reyes, Carla & Leppert, Mark & Pappas, Lisa. (2008). Personality and

birth order in large families. Personality and Individual Differences. 44. 119–128.

10.1016/j.paid.2007.07.015.

● Black, Sandra & Devereux, Paul & Salvanes, Kjell. (2007). Older and Wiser? Birth Order

and IQ of Young Men. CESifo Economic Studies. 57. 103-120. 10.1093/cesifo/ifq022.

Critical Analysis of Alfred Adler’s Birth Order Theory 11

● Kojima, Yasuo. (2019). Effects of Birth Order on Self-Reliance of Japanese Preschoolers

during Daily Routines. Psychology. 10. 1262-1268. 10.4236/psych.2019.109081.

● Kidwell, J. S. (1982). The Neglected Birth Order: Middleborns. Journal of Marriage and

Family, 44(1), 225–235. https://doi.org/10.2307/351276

● Rodgers, Joe & Cleveland, H. & Oord, Edwin & Rowe, David. (2000). Resolving the

Debate Over Birth Order, Family Size, and Intelligence. The American psychologist. 55.

599-612. 10.1037/0003-066X.55.6.599.

● Rohrer, Julia & Egloff, Boris & Schmukle, Stefan. (2015). Examining the Effects of Birth

Order on Personality. SSRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.2704310.

● Salmon, Catherine. (2003). Birth order and relationships. Human Nature. 14. 73-88.

10.1007/s12110-003-1017-x.