New research suggests that siblings don't impact social skills
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail Published on Tuesday, Aug. 17, 2010 9:21AM EDT Last updated on Tuesday, Aug. 17, 2010 9:31AM EDT
New research suggests parents needn't worry. Children who grow up without siblings have just as many friends as peers with them, according to findings published Monday.
In a study of more than 13,000 American students from Grade 7 to 12, subjects were asked to name up to five girls and five boys at their school they considered friends. Students were nominated an average of five times by their schoolmates – and having siblings had no impact.
“By the time they get to adolescence, the people who had siblings don't
fare any better or any worse than the ones who don't,” says sociologist
Previous research in 2004 by Dr. Bobbitt-Zeher's co-author, sociologist
But the new research shows that the pattern does not persist as a child ages. Dr. Bobbitt-Zeher speculates that starting in kindergarten, interacting with peers both in school and during extra-curricular activities allows only children to overcome any disadvantages.
The research used data gathered from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, which interviewed middle- and high-school students at more than 100 schools during the 1994-95 academic year.
The findings challenge the common thinking that a sibling provides a child with a partner to practise social skills, say Dr. Bobbitt-Zeher, an assistant professor of sociology at Ohio State University. “It may be true when they're younger, but we're not finding it here.”
The researchers controlled for family characteristics that are known to affect family size and which also affect social skills, such as socio-economic status and parental age. “None of those things changed our findings,” she says. Nor did any difference in the number of siblings, the gender or whether they were half-siblings, step-siblings or adopted.
Dr. Downey has also followed up with the same kindergarten group he studied in 2004 and found that differences in social skills between kids with and without siblings seem to fade by Grade 5.
The findings add to a growing body of research on the role of siblings. Most social science research has looked at the cognitive outcomes of having siblings, finding that children from larger families tend to do worse on educational tests than children from smaller families.
That research has generally suggested that having larger families dilutes the resources – emotional and financial – that can be given to any one child, says Dr. Bobbitt-Zeher.
And with fertility rates on the decline in much of the industrialized world, there is a particular interest in the effects of having fewer siblings – or none at all.
“We did come into this study wondering, from a population perspective, what might the consequences be?” says Dr. Bobbitt-Zeher. “These findings suggest they may not be as dire as many people would have expected.”
She's interested in further research on whether sibling relationships do benefit a person later in life, such as when caring for an ill or aging parent.
While Dr. Bobbitt-Zeher says she wouldn't suggest parents make any decisions about whether to have a second child based on her study, she does see an immediate benefit for parents of only children.
“It provides a little bit of assurance.”
We have a society that is in two groups, those with kids and those without,
no kids, double income no kids. The we have those with kids, split between those
with one child and those with more than one.
There is a problem in assuming "sibling", around 50% of those modern "siblings" are in fact step siblings, and many of those grow up trained not to respect the non biological parent, the step parent.
The survey is a joke and a meaningless waste of time and money.
An incredibly stupid survey that avoids the very obvious fact that Parents
with one child, only have ONE chance to learn how to be parents.
50% of those parents either can't agree on how to parent or have personality disorders and or mental health problems that the marriage ends, and that is, assuming that a father is an equal parent in that only child's life.
The real missing information is that increasingly lesbians and "career women" who don't want or wish to have a the "inconvenience" of a male around, simply carefully research out male singles for all the right genetic traits and have sex on that day of ovulation while telling him that they can't get pregnant.
Its the modern classic way that women rape men for their cperm and then make him pay child support while preventing him from having any relationship with the child.
For this we can thank the Canadian Association of Man Haters, that are found in the underbelly of the Ontario Judiciary, feminist lawyers who believe that the end justifies the end so, they personally fabricate evidence and do what ever it takes to get rid of yet another father.
Child born to such single mothers with those personality disorders grow up to be adults with similar personalty disorders.
Its the children of those dysfunctional "parents" who become parents and then raise subsequent generations of children who grow up to be again, adults with personality disorders.
This survey totally fails to recognize that children develop best with a mother and father, two parents of both genders and in the event of separation, the sanest parents decide on an equal parenting arrangement while those who have personality disorders go for broke and treat the children as pets.
Until parliament legislates a presumption of equal parenting we will continue to have a declining birth rate and an ever increasing percentage of the population with personality disorders and mental health problems.