Recently in Post #3 Category

While reading chapter 10 of the textbook, I was specifically intrigued by the last section that deals with our social and moral development. It was especially interesting to learn about all the different temperament styles and attachment styles

It's fascinating how babies differ in their social interaction styles, but I wonder what the underlying cause is for these differences. For example, any parent wouldn't want their child to have high levels of behavioral inhibition, since it leads to shyness and anxiety disorders later in childhood. So is there anything parents can do to decrease this? Or is it all genetic?(102)

Since I have a 2-year old cousin, I can definitely set him in a specific attachment style. However, this varies depending on the relationship with the person leaving. For example this past weekend I went to visit, and when we were about to go he would refuse to let us leave. He would hold my hand and ensure that I stayed with him, until I really had to leave. He started crying and got very fussy as I ran out the house to meet my mom in the car. I now know that he has a secure attachment with me, but it hurts that I have to see him cry so much each time I leave.

All in all, reading chapter 10 has provided me with better knowledge with how we psychologically develop. It's really fun to watch all these changes with younger children I'm close to!

I am always tired at the end of the day. I go to school and work several jobs. When I get home I have to eat dinner and settle in to do some hard core studying. By all intensive purposes I should be able to put my head on the pillow and sleep. A few times that has not been the case.
I was reading an article in the February, 2012, Psychology Today, magazine, when I came upon an article on insomnia. Some researchers have noticed a possible correlation between the amount of sun we get everyday and our ability to drop off to sleep. They attributed the need for sunlight because it is the blue light in the solar spectrum which triggers our brains into knowing it is time to sleep or it is time to stay awake. Approximately 25% of the U.S. population suffers from insomnia. There is no substitute for actual sunny rays. Artificial lighting won't cut it. That lighting cannot fool our circadian clocks. So next time you want to go outside for class, be sure to tell your professor you'll learn better if you do. http://youtu.be/wA7Q45XHoD8

When it comes to what type of parenting is best, there is much attention zoned in. There are books, researchers, critics, etc. that are all spending their time on "How could you be a better parent?" It makes sense; everyone has parents so we all know the feeling of bad and good parenting, we all wonder how our childhood and home life affected us today, and we all are hoping for one sure-fire answer.

I personally think that it doesn't matter what type of parenting one uses, or how "good" a parent is. I believe we are very good at finding faults and flaws in people that matter to us, with parents at the top of our list. My parents are great and mostly understanding, but I still get frustrated in my mother's lack of reaction to some things and my father's misunderstanding of "normal" youth matters. When something happens, my mother will say, "Just one more thing to talk to a therapist about when you grow up."

Very few people can find perfection in their parents, or perfection in anyone. That's because humans are not perfect and everyone is different. We react to things differently. I'm sure if my mom worried more on my appearance, I would wish she looked at "the real me." But my mother instead has a passive opinion on matters of fashion, so I feel like she doesn't care about something that I put some thought in to.

Also, when it comes to parenting skills, it's just like every other activity. We all have our own way of doing things and are difficult to change so why should this be any different? Most of the time, people won't change their ways unless some traumatic experience happens.

Diana Baumrind's work on parenting styles is useful because it serves as a basis to understanding a particular child's behavior or social state. When trying to understand why a child displays certain behaviors the first thing that should be evaluated is that child's relationship with their parent(s). I say that because a relationship between a child and their parent(s) is usually the most influential and plays a major role in how that person will interact with others socially and emotionally.
I can say that Diana's learning styles hold some truth because of my own personal experiences. I come from a two parent household where my parents raised me using the "authoritative" parenting style. The parenting style that my parents used has made me the person I am today. I grew up having a healthy relationship with both of my parents, which remains the same as I am in my adulthood. My parents raised me in a household that was similar to a democracy between parents and children. My brother and I knew our place as children and respected our parents and their house rules, but our parents also respected us as children and we were allowed to voice our opinions and concerns. The way our household was ran allowed there to be a healthy and strong relationship between children and parents. The way I was brought up has made me a strong individual that can advocate for myself. I know that Baumrind's work is based off of a specific race and class, but I am an African-American woman from a lower-middle class background and her findings on parenting styles still relate to me.
Is there any association or link between personality traits of children and parenting styles used by that child's parent(s)?

Have you ever stared blankly, with eyes glazed over, at a particular problem in your calculus textbook and then walked away frustrated and bored because you just can't make heads or tails out of it? Well, then George Polya may be your savior.

When faced with a problem, scholarly or otherwise, we are often faced with impediments that prevent us from arriving at a solution. Professor Fletcher had lectured on the differences of how an expert versus a layperson approaches a problem. Consider this silly question from famed mathematical educator George Polya's book "How to Solve It:"

A bear, starting from the point P, walked one mile due south. Then he changed direction and walked one mile due east. Then he turned again to the left and walked one mile due north, and arrived exactly at the point P he started from. What was the color of the bear?

If you happen to be an expert on bears or navigation perhaps the answer is obvious and a proof of your answer is trivial. As evidenced in Fletcher's research, an expert is already familiar with the narrative and can easily progress down a solution path.

The layperson may have a rough time. A naïve problem solver may go through a lengthy parameter search over a potentially large solution space. George Polya had developed an algorithm for applying a set of heuristics that has proven to be useful Roughly the steps are:

1.) Understand the Problem
2.) Devise a plan
3.) Execute the plan
4.) Review and reflect on what worked and didn't work

In each of these steps we may employ any number of strategies or heuristics from devising simpler analogous problems, drawing diagrams, backward chaining, restating the problem in your own words, making a list, and etc. What he has assembled is a method for a layperson to construct a narrative; that an expert may do intuitively.

I have found these steps useful in avoiding some of the pitfalls I encounter in solving certain kinds of problems. I become more aware of when and where I may be fall prey to focusing too much on surface similarities, functional fixedness, or mental sets. Polya's algorithm fails where all algorithms fail: if we can't satisfy a particular step then our solution path falls apart. If I just don't know anything about bears how can I possibly hope to figure out what color a bear is?

All in all, Polya's book is a great read and offers insight into the nature of reasoning from one of the great mathematicians and educators of the 20th century. So, what color is the bear?

Because of the nature of Anorexia nervosa, it is one of the most life threatening psychological conditions out there according to our textbook. When I read that, I was shocked. I also didn't quite know the specifics that went along with the disorder. One of my close friends has Anorexia - she is obsessed with eating and congratulates herself when she skips a meal. Recently I've heard of more and more boys being diagnosed with Anorexia. Boys are also pressured to be lean, muscular, and fit just like girls are. This MSNBC video gives great detail as to why this disease affects boys too.

The video describes the young men who end up with this disorder as straight-A students who usually are athletes; all in all, they are outstanding kids. I feel like this disorder probably affects more males than is recorded because men are so afraid to let anyone know. It's up to the family and friends of that person to tell them and get them help. That can be an extremely hard conversation to have but it needs to be said.

What I wonder is what initially triggers the obsessiveness with food? Every little kid I've ever met enjoys food. Every middle school aged kid I've ever met absolutely adores junk food. Most high school aged kids love having the freedom of taking the car and going out to eat. So, what triggers it?

If you've had your eyes open in the last month in the twin cities, you have probably noticed this title posed as a question on a billboard or city bus. It's part of the Emily Program's (Eating Disorder Treatment Services) latest campaign offering help, and any one of the estimated 10 million females and 1 million males battling Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia, or Binge Eating Disorder (Crowther et al., 1992; Fairburn et al., 1993; Gordon, 1990; Hoek, 1995; Shisslak et al., 1995) have an all too painful answer to that question. I have a very personal experience with this issue, and while I could write a book about my experience and healing, I'll use this post to share a couple brief thoughts from my point of view and a few research findings that are new to me and what questions these leave hanging.

1. Brain Chemistry.Once you've been entangled with an eating disorder, it never fully goes away. Even after doing the work of challenging psychological distortions and maintaining 'healthy' eating habits over a long enough period to be considered 'recovered', you will never have an unaffected relationship with food. While I'm able to look back and acknowledge the period of wasted time and unhealthy coping mechanisms as a closed chapter in my life, reading about hunger, eating, and eating disorders brings up emotions and re-analyzing the motivations of control, fear, and self esteem that cycled, evolved, and even transformed disorders up until the point of therapy.

One of the documented affects of both anorexia and bulimia are changes in brain chemistry. Does this reverse after recovery? A 2005 University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Study reported increased Dopamine and Serotonin in recovered anorexic and bulimic people. Chemicals related to reinforcement, reward, appetite, mood, and impulse control. This study also found increased activity in a specific serotonin receptor in recovered bulimia type anorexia, and receptor overactivity strongly associated with Harm Avoidance Anxiety in restrictive type anorexics. Hormones also differed from those who had never had a eating disorder. Elevated levels of the neuropeptide Y and peptide YY in former anorexics and low levels of hormone of cholecystokinin (which seems to cause satiation) in bulimics.

Beyond brain chemistry, culture's obsession and constant discussion of diets in everyday light conversation will never let you avoid it like alcoholics can avoid the bar.

2. Western Culture to blame? Because most eating disorders take their hold during the ages of adolescence/young adulthood, the popular belief is that magazines, media, and cultural standards are to blame. Are they? I don't know if media alone can be causal of a true eating disorder. I think there are those who deliberately 'diet' themselves underweight, but know they are doing it. Research supports though that the belief that being thin is the answer to all problems is prevalent in Western Culture, and there is a focus on body image as a way of improving lives, getting better jobs, etc. Still, the fact that disordered eating behaviors have been documented throughout most of history calls into question the assertion that eating disorders are a product of current social pressures.

Here's an article with more on culture and eating disorders

3. Prevention. Imagine that included in the routine teen-age doctor visit was a brain scan that identified whether a teen was at risk for an eating disorder?Would this knowledge be empowering? Would a teen given this predisposition guard themself against falling into an eating disorder? Would it make a difference? Can the medical field and/or parents do a more vigilant job of acknowledging the beginnings of disorder?

When I was 16, my concerned Mom made a doctor appointment without my knowing, when she knew my period had stopped. The doctor asked me questions, I lied. I sat there and said I ate whatever wanted (which was true, but I just didn't want to eat anything but 1/4 C. cereal and lettuce/cucumber in a day at the time). The doctor did nothing but tell me I needed to eat more or workout less. She offered me birth control, told me I could go to Dairy Queen, and sent me on my way. This only fueled me. I sometimes think adults, even doctors, can be in denial or exercise judgement toward young females with eating disorders, especially anorexia if it's not yet medically dangerous. Years later I wondered what might have happened differently had someone asked genuine questions of motive rather than focus on food.

If you or someone you know is struggling, I recommend talking to a therapist because there is healing. Recommended reading for understanding what your friend might be experiencing, Unbearable Lightness by Portia de Rossi

Here's the full articles on Biochemical Correlates of Anorexia and Bulimia
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1727

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20050906/brain-chemical-may-be-key-in-eating-disorders

Sorry for the long post, if anyone's still reading.

In the past, people used to believe that animals tended to create bonds at such a young age with those that provided nourishment for them. In 1950, Harry Harlow created an experiment to test this. He found that baby rhesus monkeys actually preferred to create bonds with the fake mother that was softer that he could cuddle with, rather than the fake mother that provided nourishment, but wasn't comfortable. He termed this contact comfort, observing positive emotions associated to touch. This phenomenon is very much observed with younger humans. If an adult is with her child when she comes across an old friend that the child hasn't met yet, it is very common that the child will hug tight to its mother's legs, burying its face. It has been agreed that this contact comfort is pretty much a basic need. This has been noticed that in orphanages filled with many kids: kids tend to become underdeveloped, get sick, and even die when this need has not been met. Apart from possibly keeping the child alive, soothing touches such as gentle back rubs, according to Linda Sonna, can help build trust between the infant and its caregiver. She then goes on to say that caregivers ought not to try to hold an embrace if the infant is trying to get away, unless the initial embrace was in an attempt to calm them down, otherwise it may result in the infant growing weary of the touch of another.

Self-control is something we all must deal with from time-to-time. Whether it's not going to that party to stay in and study for a test, or skipping dessert when you're on a diet. Whatever the case maybe, this may all start out from when we are just a child. A portion of the text stated an experiment where they left children in a room with a cookie. They told the children if they could wait 15 minutes they could receive two cookies. Now these kids had to make a choice: wait the 15 minutes and get a better/bigger reward or eat the scrumptious cookie that sits in front of them. What would you do? Reading this remind me of addicts. Many addicts, in recovery, say "the reason I wanted to use is that I wanted the instant gratification." Instant gratification meaning, they wanted it NOW! Reading up on impulse control I found out that people with ADHD are more likely to take the faster and smaller reward. I know I never had been diagnosed with ADHD, but I have always been impulsive myself. I love to live impulsively. The day I turned 16yo I bought a motorcycle with my life savings, not a car. My parents said it was an impulsive buy and I would regret it living in Minnesota. Still have it today, and in the past two years I have put more miles on it then my car. I love that bike. Not all the time, and it may be wrong, but I figure you have more fun eating the first cookie. Thoughts?

I have dealt with a multitude of different phobias over my life so far, and they can really become annoying after awhile once they begin to hinder your daily life. The biggest of these phobias would probably be my fear of heights, which can actually become quite comical sometimes when looking at some of the ridiculous things I avoid because of them (i.e. an open staircase no more than thirty feet high that I have to climb every year to get to my seat at the Daytona 500). However, being a business major and realizing that I could very well find myself in a job in several years located atop one of the many skyscrapers of this world, I now have a new sense of urgency to get rid of my phobia completely.

I was very interested in what Professor Gewirtz had to say about these new methods of using exposure therapy to get rid of these phobias. However, through my many experiences of trying (I use the term "trying" very loosely) to get rid of this phobia, I was a bit skeptical that mere exposure could get rid of this. Then I came across this article which described a new finding that taking a pill of the stress hormone cortisol could help get rid of these phobias when taken during exposure therapy. According to the article, this hormone plays a key role in the body's "fight or flight" response used in fear-provoking situations, and actually opens up and "reprograms" the brain to stop coupling the fear response with the fear provoking stimulus. In the research study described in the article, half of the participants (all of which suffered from acrophobia) were given cortisol while the other half were given a placebo, and the portion that receive the hormone experienced significantly less anxiety levels during further exposure therapy sessions than those that were given the placebo. So while this research is very promising for people wishing to get rid of a fear without truly having to confront it, I still believe that "facing your fears" in really life will still be the best way to get rid of these phobias.

If you desperately want to lose weight, you might be interested in the tapeworm diet. This video is from Tyra Show with the purpose of persuading people to go on a healthy diet:

A tapeworm is a tapelike parasitic flatworm living in the alimentary canal of vertebrates including humans when adult. You can incubate it in your body by swallowing a pill. It will grow in your stomach and eat about a half of what you eat. Ideally, you can eat whatever you want but lose weight! This is all women's dream, isn't it? That's why even though it's illegal in the United States, still many women are willing to go to Mexico, pay $2000, and culture a parasite in their body.

All you can imagine grotesque side effects, however, may hinder you from putting it into action. Dr. D. Scott Smith, Stanford University Parasitologist, warns against trying this diet, for the tapeworm can cause abdominal pain, indigestion, headache and nausea and finally can be deadly. If the tapeworm goes to the brain, it can cause people to have a seizure, to lose the function of motor control, to go psychotic, and so on.

I go on a diet every summer. I once tried to reduce the amount of food by half, but had to quit because my orthostatic hypotension went really bad and made me almost faint at the bookstore. Health first. The right way to lose weight must accompany proper exercise, not a fad diet.

Audrey Hepburn, Grace Kelly, Kurasina Kana, Priyanka Chopra, Jennifer Aniston and Halle Berry. Johnny Debb, Tom Cruise ..............

What comes first when you think of them?

Yes, they are the attractive actors around the world.

It feels like that countries might have their own criteria that decide whether the face is attractive or not because all countries pursue distinctive culture.

However, there is one thing in common among those actors I listed.
The answer is that their faces are symmetry.
According to the text book and what we have done at our discussion session, people are more likely to be attracted by average appearance with symmetry outline.
Of course, people who I listed above don't have "average" appearance, but they have better face than average. However, the important thing is that all of them have symmetry outline.
It seems that having a symmetry face outline is the basic factor of being beauty regardless of culture.

Then, whichspecific factors make people more beautiful than others?
These specific factors are the standard of beauty for countries.

Japanese think that beauty skin and straight hair style make people attractive. Most women have soft and flawless skin. In japan, people can get collagen which is good for skin from supermarkets easily. Moreover, japanese think that having some projecting teeth makes a person cutter than before.

Members of the Kayan tribe in the Burma and Thailand thimk that long neck is the attractive point of a person. Since 5 years old, they have circular bracelet around their neck and those bracelets are added as they grow.

In Iran, a sharp little nose is the attractive point of a person's face. This is because, women in Iran wear clothes that cover their body from head to toe so that what they can show to others is face only so that women want to have cute nose not big nose that Iran women normally have. In order to have a sharp little nose, women undergo plastic surgery.

In Brazil, slim body and beautiful nose are the factors that affect people to be attractive or not. Thus, diet pill and plastic surgery are widely spread and performed in the Brazil. For the nose plastic surgery, Brazil is the best in the world.

Finally, people in Indonesia think that slim is important for being attractive.
In order to be a slim person even after pregnant, women wrapped around their body using Stage to suppress waist. Stage works as a corset so that their waist can be reduced to fit into the size of stage or corset.

Like this, beauty standards are different from all over the world.
However, I think along with symmetry face, one factor is same all over the world without cultural differences which is broad mind without bias.

Eating disorders are a major issue that many people face, mostly teens, but sometimes even adults. I think the reason it is escalated so much is because no matter where we look there are images of what perfection should look like. For example, models always look super thin, usually portray a sexy thin body, and are usually everywhere we look. They are on magazine covers, billboards, clothing stores, and much more. Seeing these types of women make girls even more vulnerable to look "perfect." They want to look just like the models, so they go to any extreme to get there. However, the models that are on magazine covers don't even look like that; most of have them have been airbrushed to look "perfect." Plus, even if they do look like that it is not healthy at all, and the girls that go on the eating disorders are just harming their bodies, when they are usually perfect the way they are. The media is a major cause of eating disorders because they put out various things that say this is the "perfect" body and this what girls should look like. Some girls then get self conscious about themselves because they don't look like that and then use dangerous methods to make themselves look "perfect."

Self-esteem is related to many aspects of personality. But I am going to discuss mainly about two aspects. What is self-esteem? Self-esteem is basically a collection of our believes of ourselves. Two main concepts that deal with that are self-worthiness, I am a valuable person who is valuable for receiving love and for receiving other people's care. The other part is confidence, I am a capable and able person who is able to do task in front of me.

First, self-esteem is related to an ability of empathizing with others. If a person thinks he is not loved or he is always in trouble and unlucky, he doesn't have enough energy to read other people's mind and he can't respond to it properly. Therefore, he has distorted viewpoint. It makes misunderstanding more and more, which makes a person has difficulty in making healthy social relationship with others.

Moreover, a person with high self-esteem usually has good leadership. If a person has affection for himself, he is warmhearted, so he can understand others' mistakes or bad behavior without blame. At the same time, he can lead to a desirable result coping with others and respecting each person's opinions and their strength.

To conclude, self-esteem is quite closely related to social relationship (empathizing) and leadership. I can't easily conclude this is obvious causation, but it's clear that there is a correlation between self-esteem and these two aspects of personality.

As if job hunting wasn't difficult enough these days, let's add another factor to that resumé: physical attractiveness. While there is no law prohibiting discrimination regarding physical attractiveness, some studies have shown that these superficial biases exist when choosing new employees.
The effect of physical attractiveness depends on the type of job for which the person is being interviewed, and the person's gender. In one study, college students played the role of hiring managers for a fictitious company and were given resumes and photographs of applicants. The position was for a high-level manager, which (like it or not) is traditionally a job done by men. When the researchers reviewed the students' choices, it was found that attractive male applicants were consistently chosen to fill the position. However, attractive women were overtaken by "plain" women in this fake review of potential employees.
The halo effect seemed to work in favor of attractive male employees, but not in the case of their female counterparts. The subjects' reasons for not choosing the attractive women for the position varied, the general consensus was that her feminine qualities would impede her ability to be high-level manger.
Of course, the results of these studies aren't going to be the same for all professions. The halo effect can only take you so far. Someone needs to tell this British women, who laments, "Women hate me because I'm beautiful."

There is a difference between and heathy way to lose weight and a non healthy crash diet. Most of us have seen commercials with ridiculous claims on losing weight fast and getting a ripped six pack. These diets do not keep off the weight lost for long and can be very dangerous to your health. The right diet and exercise plan over a long period of time is the right way to lose weight. The media shows you so many false realities on what men and women are suppose to look like. This causes people to try crash diets to lose weight that lead to health problems and even death. This video shows some extreme cases of anorexia and bulimia. Hope you enjoyed reading my post and next time you decide to go on a diet make sure you are doing it the right way!

As I was reading the post prompts, I found the opportunity to test my own unconscious bias/prejudice intriguing. The process for taking the IAT was very straightforward, simply pressing the 'e' or 'i' keys to put given words into designated categories.
While I was reading the description of the test in the textbook, I wondered if it created biases rather than measuring them. After taking it, though, I can see that this would not be the case. I do question whether or not one can truly measure an unconscious prejudice based on the amount of time it takes you to categorize the given words. As the book pointed out, there doesn't appear to be a correlation between the two, and using the lack of correlation as proof makes the test's hypothesis difficult to falsify.

Below is the screenshot of my test results and a summary of the test itself.

It's very interesting that the test could detect that I preferred the policy option that I did. One might suspect that because the test asks you your preference outright and then uses the categorization to report your preference that it would simply retort back the selection that you clicked as a preference. Because the test is not administered by humans, but by computer instead, I highly doubt that the test is that subjective. I encourage you guys to click the IAT link above and try it yourself. From my understanding, test prompts vary, so you may not get the political policy one.

According to the IAT, I have a slight preference for black people over white people. However, the IAT found I have a moderate preference for Rick Santorum over Herman Cain. This proves to be very interesting to me because Rick Santorum is white and Herman Cain is black. I don't completely understand how they can come to this conclusion. The way the system works is to press "K" whenever a picture of the specific subject or a "good word" (love, friend, success, etc.) appears, and to press "D" whenever the other subject or a "bad word" (hate, terrible, enemy, etc.) appear. I believe they judge your beliefs off of how long it takes you to answer and how many errors you make in each set. Their results would conclude I answered the questions faster when "black people" or "Rick Santorum" was mixed in with "good words". These results seem absolutely ridiculous. I don't believe it is accurate to assume I have a preference for either of these subjects based off of me making more or less mistakes when seeing quick images appear on screen. I believe many people have preferences/prejudices over liking white or black people more, but I don't believe this test is the one to prove it. I don't think the IAT is very credible but it is funny to see what this data reveals.

When you were younger, you know the "cool kids" don't usually have glasses and braces, all you wanted was to be popular.We all want to be a part of something; we don't want to be that person on the side that no one talks to or likes. But why do we feel that way? Why do we form groups? According to out textbook being cut off from the social contract "hurts" literally and figuratively. Social isolation can lead to self-destruction or even impair our mental functioning. To be needed means that we want affection, we want that feeling that someone cares about us and that we make a difference in their life. All of that is important to our self-esteem, without it, as stated earlier it could lead to self-destruction.
Most of us have also done stupid things just because others said we should. You were trying to do something to make you feel like you belonged, even though you knew it may have been a bad idea. Some people may or may not notice but most of our friends are our friends because we have something in common, something to talk about and not feel like you are the only person feeling like that. But if everyone took that fact into account, we would all be friends because we all have that need to belong. Things other people say can also damage our self esteem and make us feel different and out of place.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVjbo8dW9c8&ob=av3e

Why children have different personality in a family? They living in the same environment, some children even share the same genes. However, the order of they came to this world decided the character of each one.

In recent years, the Harvard University historian and psychologist Frank Sulloway, tested this argument in 894 scientists, 893 members of the French National Assembly, 62 leaders of the reform movement in the United States, as well as 700 people of the Protestant Reformation in Europe in order to use this theory to more areas.

Sulloway suggested, the eldest children are more diligent, responsible and conservative, they tend to be successful in life; later-born children are more likely to accept radical and innovative thinking and more likely to become rebels. For many parents, this theory sounds true. The author of the book Sibling Rivalry, Dr. Richard Wolfson -a child psychologist, said: "There is evidence show that birth order do influences personality, and common sense tells us this is true. Sulloway leads this theory to an extreme. "

Sulloway concluded that the point is that the eldest children treated with favour from parents, they tend to maintain the status so that they respect for authority. Sulloway said in an interview on the Internet: in general, the eldest children tend to prepared work diligently, and do better at school.

The later-born child have more difficult task, since the duty of responsible in the family has been taken by their older brother/sister, they either to compete for this position, or choose another way to find suitable position to avoid direct competition in their family. Sulloway said: "later-born children are more likely to accept radical innovation in the field of science and social.

I think people believe the theory because it is happened in real life, and we can confirm that in ourselves' family. Even there is some special case, the idea still supported by majority.