This study uses a large and representative sample of adolescents to test the theoretically informed hypotheses comparing adolescent singletons with those who have siblings. The results found that, for academic related outcomes (educational expectations, time spent on homework, and self-reported grades), there are no differences between singletons and firstborns who have any number of younger siblings. Singletons are also not different from laterborns from two-child families. In contrast, singletons are more advantageous compared to laterborns who have two or more siblings on educational expectations and grades. Singletons also spend more time on homework than laterborns who have three or more siblings. For psychosocial outcomes (psychological distress, susceptibility to negative peer pressure, and problem behaviors), singletons are not different from both firstborns and laterborns with any number of siblings. The findings suggest that singletons are not at any disadvantage compared to their peers who have siblings and they enjoy some advantages over laterborns from medium to large families on academic related outcomes. 1. Introduction It is a common belief that siblings provide a necessary social environment for a child’s normal development. Recent surveys based on nationally representative samples of the US population indicate that only about 3–3.5% of respondents replied that one child would be the ideal number of children for a family [1, 2]. However, the US Census of 2008 showed that 20% of American families had only one child [3]. With a societal trend towards increasingly smaller families, the proportion of singletons (i.e., only children) has been growing in America. This is partly due to people getting married and having children at a later age, along with more serious concerns for family’s financial situations [2]. Therefore, the well-being of singletons deserves due attention. Our study thus addresses the concerns that whether singletons, with their rising number, can do well in their academic tasks to get prepared for future careers and whether they can grow into healthy and responsible citizens. There are two views in the existing literature regarding the welfare of singletons compared to those who have siblings. One view, originally proposed by early psychiatrists and psychologists [4, 5] and consistent with the popular thinking [6, 7], sees only children as relatively problematic and disadvantaged. With only one child, parents are likely to yield to the only child’s demands. Overindulgence is more likely to characterize the parenting style
References
[1]
“General social survey,” The Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), 2010.
[2]
A. Mancillas, “Challenging the stereotypes about only children: a review of the literature and implications for practice,” Journal of Counseling and Development, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 268–275, 2006.
[3]
A. Mancillas, “Only children,” in Sibling Development: Implications for Mental Health Practitioners, J. Caspi, Ed., pp. 341–358, Springer, New York, NY, US, 2011.
[4]
A. A. Brill, Psychoanalysis—Its Theories and Practical Applications, Elsevier Saunders, Philadelphia, Pa, USA, 1922.
[5]
N. Fenton, “The only child,” Journal of Genetic Psychology, vol. 35, pp. 546–556, 1928.
[6]
T. Falbo, “The only-child family in the United States: research issues and results,” Studies in Family Planning, vol. 13, no. 6-7, pp. 212–215, 1982.
[7]
T. Falbo, “Only children in the United States and China,” Applied Social Psychology Annual, vol. 7, pp. 159–183, 1987.
[8]
L. C. Roberts and P. W. Blanton, “‘I always knew mom and dad love me best’: experiences of only children,” Journal of Individual Psychology, vol. 57, pp. 125–140, 2001.
[9]
V. D. Thompson, “Family size: implicit policies and assumed psychological outcomes,” Journal of Social Issues, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 93–124, 1974.
[10]
E. N. Chow and S. M. Zhao, “The one-child policy and parent-child relationships: a comparison of one-child with multiple-child families in China,” The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, vol. 16, pp. 35–62, 1996.
[11]
V. A. Fong, Only Hope: Coming of Age under China’s One-Child Policy, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif, USA, 2004.
[12]
E. Hall, “China’s only child,” Psychology Today, vol. 19, pp. 44–47, 1987.
[13]
D. L. Poston and T. Falbo, “Scholastic and personality characteristics of only children and children with siblings in China,” International Family Planning Perspectives, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 45–54, 1990.
[14]
K.-T. Tao, “An overview of only child family mental health in China,” Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, vol. 52, pp. 206–211, 1998.
[15]
A. E. Stewart, “Can knowledge of client birth order bias clinical judgment?” Journal of Counseling and Development, vol. 82, no. 2, pp. 167–176, 2004.
[16]
T. Falbo, “Only children: an updated review,” Journal of Individual Psychology, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 38–49, 2012.
[17]
T. Falbo and D. F. Polit Jr., “Quantitative review of the only child literature: research evidence and theory development,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 100, no. 2, pp. 176–189, 1986.
[18]
D. F. Polit and T. Falbo, “Only children and personality development: a quantitative review,” Journal of Marriage and the Family, vol. 49, pp. 309–325, 1987.
[19]
D. F. Polit and T. Falbo, “The intellectual achievement of only children,” Journal of Biosocial Science, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 275–286, 1988.
[20]
T. Falbo and D. L. Poston Jr., “The academic, personality, and physical outcomes of only children in China,” Child Development, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 18–35, 1993.
[21]
D. L. Poston and T. Falbo, “Academic performance and personality traits of Chinese children: “Onlies” versus others,” American Journal of Sociology, vol. 96, pp. 433–451, 1990.
[22]
R. X. Liu, W. Lin, and Z.-Y. Chen, “School performance, peer association, psychological and behavioral adjustments: a comparison between Chinese adolescents with and without siblings,” Journal of Adolescence, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 411–417, 2010.
[23]
J. Blake, Family Size and Achievement, University of California Press, Los Angeles, Calif, USA, 1989.
[24]
D. B. Downey, “Number of siblings and intellectual development: the resource dilution explanation,” American Psychologist, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 497–504, 2001.
[25]
S. Jiao, G. Ji, and Q. Jing, “Comparative study of behavioral qualities of only children and sibling children,” Child Development, vol. 57, pp. 357–361, 1986.
[26]
C. Liu, T. Munakata, and F. N. Onuoha, “Mental health condition of the only-child: a study of urban and rural high school students in China,” Adolescence, vol. 40, no. 160, pp. 831–845, 2005.
[27]
R. S. Weiss, Going It Alone, Basic Books, New York, NY, USA, 1979.
[28]
D. F. Polit, “The only child in single-parent families,” in The Single-Child Family, T. Falbo, Ed., pp. 178–210, Guilford Press, New York, NY, USA, 1984.
[29]
D. B. Downey and D. J. Condron, “Playing well with others in kindergarten: the benefit of siblings at home,” Journal of Marriage and Family, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 333–350, 2004.
[30]
D. Bobbitt-Zeher and D. B. Downey, “Number of siblings and friendship nominations among adolescents,” Journal of Family Issues, vol. 34, pp. 1175–1193, 2013.
[31]
J. J. Arnett, “Adolescent storm and stress, reconsidered,” American Psychologist, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 317–326, 1999.
[32]
R. B. Zajonc and G. B. Markus, “Birth order and intellectual development,” Psychological Review, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 74–88, 1975.
[33]
R. B. Zajonc, “The family dynamics of intellectual development,” American Psychologist, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 490–496, 2001.
[34]
R. B. Zajonc, “Validating the confluence model,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 457–480, 1983.
[35]
R. B. Zajonc and F. J. Sulloway, “The confluence model: birth order as a within-family or between-family dynamic?” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, vol. 33, no. 9, pp. 1187–1194, 2007.
[36]
J. Blake, “Family size and the quality of children,” Demography, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 421–442, 1981.
[37]
P. M. Blau and O. D. Duncan, The American Occupational Structure, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 1967.
[38]
D. Featherman and R. Hauser, Opportunity and Change, Academic Press, New York, NY, USA, 1978.
[39]
D. B. Downey, “When bigger is not better: family size, parental resources, and children's educational performance,” American Sociological Review, vol. 60, pp. 747–761, 1995.
[40]
R. Hertwig, J. N. Davis, and F. J. Sulloway, “Parental investment: how an equity motive can produce inequality,” Psychological Bulletin, vol. 128, no. 5, pp. 728–745, 2002.
[41]
R. L. Trivers, “Parent-offspring conflict,” American Zoologist, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 249–264, 1974.
[42]
M. J. Cox and K. S. M. Harter, “Parent-child relationships,” in Well-Being: Positive Development Across the Life Course, M. H. Bornstein, L. Davidson, C. L. M. Keyes, and K. A. Moore, Eds., pp. 191–204, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2003.
[43]
J. Bowlby, Attachment and Loss, vol. 1, Basic Books, New York, NY, USA, 2nd edition, 1982.
[44]
J. Bowlby, A Secure Base, Routledge, London, UK, 1988.
[45]
M. D. S. Ainsworth, “Attachment: retrospect and prospect,” in The Place of Attachment in Human Behavior, C. M. Parkes and J. Stevenson-Hinde, Eds., Basic Books, New York, NY, USA, 1982.
[46]
G. C. Armsden and M. T. Greenberg, “The inventory of parent and peer attachment: individual differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 427–454, 1987.
[47]
S. Schachter, The Psychology of Affiliation, Stanford University Press, Stanford, Calif, USA, 1959.
[48]
L. Belmont and F. A. Marolla, “Birth order, family size, and intelligence. A study of a total population of 19 year old men born in the Netherlands is presented,” Science, vol. 182, no. 4117, pp. 1096–1101, 1973.
[49]
T. Bjerkedal, P. Kristensen, G. A. Skjeret, and J. I. Brevik, “Intelligence test scores and birth order among young Norwegian men (conscripts) analyzed within and between families,” Intelligence, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 503–514, 2007.
[50]
F. J. Sulloway, “Birth order and intelligence,” Science, vol. 316, no. 5832, pp. 1711–1712, 2007.
[51]
R. B. Zajonc, “Family configuration and intelligence,” Science, vol. 192, no. 4236, pp. 227–236, 1976.
[52]
R. B. Zajonc and P. R. Mullally, “Birth order: reconciling conflicting effects,” American Psychologist, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 685–699, 1997.
[53]
E. B. Page and G. Grandon, “Family configuration and mental ability: two theories contrasted with U.S. data,” American Educational Research Journal, vol. 16, pp. 257–272, 1979.
[54]
J. L. Rodgers, “What causes birth order-intelligence patterns? The admixture hypothesis, revived,” American Psychologist, vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 505–510, 2001.
[55]
J. L. Rodgers, “Are birth order effects on intelligence really flynn effects? Reinterpreting belmont and marolla 40 years later,” Intelligence, 2013.
[56]
W. Velandia, G. M. Grandon, and E. B. Page, “Family size, birth order, and intelligence in a large South American sample,” American Educational Research Journal, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 399–416, 1978.
[57]
R. B. Zajonc, H. Markus, and G. B. Markus, “The birth order puzzle,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 37, no. 8, pp. 1325–1341, 1979.
[58]
Z.-Y. Chen, “The relationship between parental constructive behavior and the adolescent’s association with achievement oriented peers: a longitudinal study,” Sociological Inquiry, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 360–381, 2000.
[59]
Z.-Y. Chen and S. M. Dornbusch, “Relating aspects of adolescent emotional autonomy to academic achievement and deviant behavior,” Journal of Adolescent Research, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 293–319, 1998.
[60]
L. S. Radloff, “The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population,” Applied Psychological Measurement, vol. 1, pp. 385–401, 1977.
[61]
L. Strohschein, A. H. Gauthier, R. Campbell, and C. Kleparchuk, “Parenting as a dynamic process: a test of the resource dilution hypothesis,” Journal of Marriage and Family, vol. 70, no. 3, pp. 670–683, 2008.
[62]
L. Steinberg, N. S. Mounts, S. D. Lamborn, and S. M. Dornbusch, “Authoritative parenting and adolescent adjustment across varied ecological niches,” Journal of Research on Adolescence, vol. 1, pp. 19–36, 1991.
