A Norwegian study came out recently that found a trend that men who are first in birth-order, either by being born first or having older siblings die young, tend to be a few IQ points smarter than men born second or third. The study’s writers also mention a few similar studies done on women that find matching results. This is an interesting study to me on that fact alone.
What really interests me, though, is how this is being covered in the media. Some news outlets are so PC, they can’t even report it w/o feeling conflicted about reporting it because it shows biased towards something.
Time is fairly unapologetic about oldest boys being smarter.
The SF Chronicle spends two-thirds of the article trying to be PC about it and pointing out, anecdotally, about how it’s not always true, and reports it as “first-born kids,” which is technically less accurate.
This is so amusing to me as a journalist and as an anthropologist the way media grabs onto things even slightly sensational make a big deal out of them, and then at the same time try to hedge their bets. Although with the SF Chronicle I think it’s more that they know their audience is so liberal that if they didn’t write it like that they’d get tons of hate mail.