| Title |
Birth order and relationships
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Nature, March 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12110-003-1017-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Catherine Salmon |
| Abstract |
Previous studies (Salmon 1999; Salmon and Daly 1998) have found that sex and birth order are strong predictors of familial sentiments. Middleborns tend to be less family-oriented than firstborns or lastborns, while sex differences seem to focus on the utility of kin in certain domains. If this is a reflection of middleborns receiving a lesser degree of support from kin (particularly in terms of parental investment), are middleborns turning to reciprocal alliances outside the family, becoming friendship specialists? Are there comparable birth order differences with respect to mating strategies? In this study, the impact of birth order on attitudes toward family, friends, and mating were examined. Two hundred and forty-five undergraduates completed a questionnaire relating to their attitudes toward friends and family as well as some aspects of mating behavior. Birth order did have a significant impact in several areas. Middleborns expressed more positive views toward friends and less positive opinions of family in general. They were less inclined to help family in need than firstborns or lastborns. Mating strategies also appeared to be influenced by birth order, most notably in the area of infidelity, with middleborns being the least likely birth order to cheat on a sexual partner. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 8% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 28 | 53% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 84. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 September 2023.
All research outputs
#512,191
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#52
of 555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#411
of 63,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 32.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 63,907 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.