This question was asked in the Answer and Ask Comment Game
Keith wants to know...
Do you believe in the idea that birth order plays a large determination in personality?
Michele wants to know: Are you an only child, first born, middle, or youngest in your family?
I think it does influence personalities, I don't think it determines them.
I'm a first born, an only child for six years until my sis came along.
Posted by: Jennie | December 02, 2007 at 09:11 PM
I'm not sure whether it does or not.
I was the second of five children - but the oldest child that lived.
Posted by: Sara | December 02, 2007 at 09:23 PM
I am positive it influences personalities, actions and results. I am the second daughter but the first of a second marriage and older sister to a brother that I have not seen or talked to in over 10 years by choice.
Posted by: Rosemary | December 02, 2007 at 09:39 PM
I think it matters in the beginning, middle, and end, but the rest of us in the mix, not so much.
I'm third of nine.
Posted by: colleen | December 02, 2007 at 09:51 PM
I'm second of four, and I think it makes a bit of a difference, but doesn't really determine who we are unless our parents treat us differently.
Posted by: Hannah | December 02, 2007 at 10:11 PM
absolutely!
i am the youngest in my family and therefore, am always treated like a baby. however, i am also the only girl so i am treated like a princess. a princess baby.
Posted by: barbie2be | December 02, 2007 at 10:41 PM
It definitely has an effect. I am an only child, and therefore somewhat selfish and self-centered.
Posted by: kenju | December 02, 2007 at 11:23 PM
I think it's one of many factors that influence personality.
I'm the oldest of three.
Posted by: DebR | December 02, 2007 at 11:46 PM
I think the order is influential: I'm the oldest, or the "practice kid". I was (and am) more responsible than my younger siblings, and my parents let them get away with FAR more than I was allowed.
And of course, they never got stuck babysitting. I did.
Posted by: aka_monty | December 03, 2007 at 12:11 AM
According to Bradshaw on The Family, yes.
But I think there are several contributing factors that shape it, the most important of which is the personalities of the parents.
I am both the youngest and the only, as I have older step-siblings.
~S
Posted by: Shephard | December 03, 2007 at 12:19 AM
I'm the 4th AND 5th ; I blame that fact for my weirdness...
Posted by: Just a trumpet player | December 03, 2007 at 10:01 AM
I think it does, yes. I'm the oldest, and my parents "experimented" with me, and if it worked, they did the same thing with the younger kids. However, they also got to do a LOT more than I was allowed to do because by the time the younger ones came along, they realized they'd been overly cautious.
I think this is one reason why the oldest child is often rebellious. I really resented the fact that my three younger siblings so easily got to do so many things I was denied, simply because my parents didn't understand 'then.'
Posted by: Mamacita | December 03, 2007 at 10:23 AM
I am sure that it influences who you become: I know that LOML and I spent much more individual time with Boo before her brother was born than we were ever able to do with him. And that sort of early attention has to make a difference.... otherwise we parents are wasting an awful lot of time!
I'm the eldest.
N.
Posted by: BreadBox | December 03, 2007 at 10:28 AM
No. Some characteristics may match, but I suspect it's more coincidence than anything else.
I am the oldest of 2.
Posted by: Bev | December 03, 2007 at 10:58 AM
I think it has an effect. I'm the youngest of 3 and the only girl. My oldest brother was the responsible one, the middle one was terrible and tended to always get into trouble. I was quiet and well behaved believe it or not (most people don't)
Posted by: Heather | December 03, 2007 at 01:28 PM
Yes, I think it can.
My oldest brother is always trying to be the over-achiever, (but not very successful at it) my middle brother was always the lost one or the scapegoat, then there was quite a gap until I came along and the only girl, I was spoiled yet quiet and well behaved. Until I was a teenager, then I got away with a lot more. I think my parents were tired at that point!
Posted by: annie | December 03, 2007 at 02:32 PM
yes, definitely!!!
I'm the youngest of three. Everything they say about the middle child is true
Posted by: leslie | December 03, 2007 at 03:12 PM
Being the eldest sucked......I had to look after my two siblings. I was never allowed out or went on excursions and of course got the blame for everything. (still do). My two younger sister got to do more than I did and they became the naughtiest in my mums eyes later when they ran away from home. (One was 21 and the other 29 - hahaha)
Posted by: Marisa | December 03, 2007 at 09:22 PM
No. I'm first of two.
Posted by: omykiss | December 03, 2007 at 09:47 PM
I did a lot of reading about this when I had my third child. (Something I got caught up in while pregnant.) I do believe birth order does play a huge part on the child's personality. My oldest is the quiet reserved one, the middle one is always trying to get attention, and the last one is just plain naughty.
I am the youngest in my family. My parents had a perfect little family. A girl, then a boy. Then 14 years later they had a whoops. Me. I honestly can say that I was spoiled rotten. My family, including my sister and brother, doted on me. I am 37 and my siblings still call to check on me. Don't get me wrong. I love it and them!
Posted by: Deputy's Wife | December 03, 2007 at 10:11 PM
It certainly has an influence, but it's not the be all and end all of personality development. I was the youngest of 4, and in spite of stereotypes, I am surely the most intelligent, the funniest, most charming, and most humble of them all... ;)
Posted by: Thumper | December 04, 2007 at 01:06 AM
I do believe Birth order has a lot to do with many things about one's personality, etc.
I am the youngest of four...I will never know what it is to be the First Born, or the Second Child, or The Boy of the family....All I know is "The Baby" position...lol...And no matter how old we all are..These positions never change, nor do the dynamics of them change...!
Posted by: OldOldLady Of The Hills | December 04, 2007 at 03:26 AM
I am a YOT (Youngest Of Three). Yes, I believe sibling placement is important and we have distinct characteristics attributed to our birth order. My spouse is oldest of five and is definitely the man for me. He manages to keep me on track with his stability.
Posted by: Granny Annie | December 04, 2007 at 06:59 AM
Thanks Michele. Yes, I think it has a lot to do with personality.
Posted by: Keith | December 04, 2007 at 08:02 AM
Yes I do.
I'm the second child but the oldest girl. Which is kinda nice in a mixed up sort of way. I think I lead fairly well and know when to follow. I am often overlooked as I don't seek out attention like my little sister who is a true middle child or my youngest sister who is the baby. My older brother is just a plain ol' weird pervert, who has yet to grow up!
Posted by: Paige | December 04, 2007 at 11:10 AM
I'm an oldest child, though my brother died 18 years ago so I'm sort of an only now.
Posted by: Becky68 | December 04, 2007 at 12:53 PM
I might have debated this as a teen, but now I know that absolutely yes. Looking at my three kids, I can see how many of their personality traits come from their "position" in the family.
I am the oldest and SUCH a people pleaser. I used to be an over-achiever. I got over it.
Posted by: buffi | December 05, 2007 at 12:45 AM
I am the oldest of three, and I am certainly a peacemaker and caregiver. I was called "the golden child" jokingly by my parents and siblings.
Posted by: sophie | December 07, 2007 at 09:56 PM