台湾无码,夜夜操天天舔,av第一线路,亚洲日韩香蕉视频

First children are smarter—But why?

"Those born earlier perform better in school"—and according to a new study, it's because of the parents.

Moms and dads simply go easy on their later-born kids, according to data analyzed by economists V. Joseph Hotz and Juan Pantano, and as a result, first-born children tend to receive both the best parenting and the best grades.

The first thing to say about a study like this is that lots of readers will reflexively disagree with the assumption. With kids, as with anything, shouldn't practice make perfect? Don't parents get richer into their 30s and 40s, providing for better child-rearing resources? I'm a first child, myself, well-known within the family for being unorganized, forgetful, periodically disheveled, and persistently caught day-dreaming in the middle of conversations. For this reason, I've put stock in what you might call the First Pancake Theory of Parenting. In short: First pancakes tend to come out a little funny, and, well, so did I. And so do many first-borns.

But international surveys of birth orders and behavior (which might have offered me an empirical excuse to behave this way) aren't doing me any favors. First borns around the world, it turns out, have higher IQs, perform better in school, and are considered more accomplished by their parents. Looking at parent evaluations of children from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth in 1979, the researchers found that mothers are much more likely to see their first children as high-achievers. They regard their subsequent children as considerably more average in their class (see table and chart below).

Let's briefly count off and nickname some of the leading older-kids-are-smarter theories reviewed by the economists, which push back against the principle of first pancakes.

1) The Divided-Attention Theory: Earlier-born siblings enjoy more time, care and attention than later-born siblings because attention is divided between fewer kids.

2) The Bad-Genes Theory:The strong evidence of higher IQs among first children leads some to believe that later kids are receiving diminished "genetic endowment."

3) The I've-Had-It-With-Kids! Theory: Some parents decide to stop having more children after a difficult experience raising one. In that case, the poorer performance of later children isn't genetic, so much as selection bias: Some parents keep having children until they have one that's so problematic it makes them say "enough."

4) The No-One-to-Teach Theory: This is the idea that older siblings benefit from the ability to teach their younger brothers and sisters. Building these teaching skills helps them build learning skills that makes them better in school.

5) The Divorce Theory: Family crises like divorce are far more likely to happen after the first child is born (first marriage, then divorce, then a first child is not a common sequence) and they can disrupt later kids' upbringing.

6) The Lazy-Parent Theory: The general idea here is that first-time parents, scared of messing up their new human, commit to memory the first chapter of Battle Hymn of the Tiger Motherbut by the second or third child, they've majorly chilled out.

Hotz and Pantano settle close to Theory (6). Parents are more likely to make strict rules (about, e.g., TV-watching) and be intimately involved in the academic performance of their first children, according to survey data. They're also more likely to punish their first child's bad grades. Hotz and Pantano say moms and dads start tough and go soft to establish a "reputation" within their household for being strict—a reputation they hope will trickle down to the younger siblings who will be too respectful to misbehave later on.

The theory is interesting but not entirely persuasive. First it seems nearly-impossible to test. The survey data is much better at showing that parents chill out as they have more kids than at showing that parents chill out *because* they're explicitly establishing a reputation for strictness. Nothing in the paper seems to argue against the simpler idea that parents seem to go soft on later kids because raising four children with the same level of attention you'd afford a single child is utterly exhausting. What's more, if later-born children turn out to be less academically capable than their older simblings, it suggests that the economists' reputation theory is failing in families across the country.

查看譯文

根據(jù)一個新調(diào)查顯示“家庭中更早出生的孩子一般會比他們的弟弟妹妹在學(xué)校里表現(xiàn)得好”，并且原因有可能就在于他們的父母。

根據(jù)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家約瑟夫霍茨和胡安分析得知父母在照顧第二個孩子時總是更得心應(yīng)手，不像第一個孩子時那么緊張和小心翼翼。因此，家庭中長子總是會受到父母更精心的照顧并且在學(xué)校中也能得到很好的成績。

一看到這個命題的研究，大多數(shù)讀者一定會對其表示質(zhì)疑。對于照顧孩子或是其他的事情來說，難道不是越來越熟練嗎？父母從三十到四十的過程中，難道不是越來越富有，并且所提供給孩子的物質(zhì)條件不是會越來越好嗎？我是長子，我自己在家庭中開始時總是被照顧得不是太有條理，甚至有些凌亂。甚至在與父母溝通交流中有一種不真實的感覺。就是因為這個原因，我相信你所說的這個關(guān)于父母的“第一個煎餅”的理論，也就是說，我們在第一次做煎餅時，總是手忙腳亂的。就像我當(dāng)時被我的父母所照顧的時候一樣。我想其他那些跟我一樣在家里是第一個孩子也是一樣的感受吧。

但是根據(jù)非常可靠的國際出生調(diào)查表中所顯示的數(shù)據(jù)消息，跟我的預(yù)期是不一樣的。世界上出生的第一個孩子，據(jù)調(diào)查來看，相比其他的孩子，都有更高的智商，并且通常在學(xué)校里能表現(xiàn)的更好，現(xiàn)在讓我們看看1979年關(guān)于父母對于孩子表現(xiàn)的縱向數(shù)據(jù)，調(diào)查者發(fā)現(xiàn)母親都偏向認(rèn)為她們的第一個孩子的能力更好，或是更希望她們的第一個孩子能夠更有能力，或是她們認(rèn)為她們的幼子在學(xué)校里大多表現(xiàn)得一般般。（詳情看下面的圖表）

圖表一：母親對出生順序不同的孩子在學(xué)校的表現(xiàn)情況的評估

出生順序

第一個 第二個 第三個 第四個

最好 33.8% 31.8% 29.0% 27.2%

較好 25.1% 24.3% 23.6% 22.5%

中等 33.8% 35.7% 38.3% 38.5%

中下 5.5% 6.2% 7.0% 8.1%

較差 1.8% 2.0% 2.1% 3.6%

資料數(shù)據(jù)來源：全國青年縱向調(diào)查（1990-2008）中關(guān)于母親對她各個孩子的評估。

數(shù)據(jù)一：出生順序與學(xué)校表現(xiàn)的關(guān)系

總之就是據(jù)母親來看，自己孩子中年長的孩子在學(xué)校的表現(xiàn)比年幼的孩子要更好。

現(xiàn)在讓我們簡單概括一下并回顧一下經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家對于那個“第一個煎餅”的理論，并且來做出反駁。

1.分散注意力的理論：年長的孩子會享受到更多的照顧和疼愛相比于年幼的孩子，因為家長的注意力或是疼愛會被較為年幼的孩子所分散。

2.基因不好理論：由于一些強(qiáng)有力的證據(jù)表明，一些人趨向于相信第一個孩子智商更高并且年幼的孩子的遺傳基因沒有第一個孩子所接收得好。

3.過多理論：一些父母在經(jīng)歷過第一個孩子辛苦的養(yǎng)育經(jīng)歷以后會不太再想要孩子，并且就是因為那樣，年幼的孩子在她們心里不如第一個孩子其實并不是基因問題而是她們的偏好問題，一些家長甚至于不會想要很多的孩子除非是他們的孩子已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)了問題而迫使她們再去生養(yǎng)小孩，否則的話，他們真的是會覺得孩子過多。

4.自學(xué)理論：年長的孩子在家庭里總是充當(dāng)老大的角色，她們總是傾向于照顧年幼的弟弟妹妹，而從小被弟弟妹妹所依賴的思想會帶到學(xué)校中去，所以他們在學(xué)校里也傾向于表現(xiàn)得很棒，做弟弟妹妹的榜樣。

5.離婚理論：家庭危機(jī)就像離婚一樣大多數(shù)是在孩子出生以后（結(jié)婚然后離婚，爭取撫養(yǎng)權(quán)的壓力不在第一個孩子上，）如果生的孩子過多的話，他們也許會更有壓力而離婚。

6.懶父母理論：一些第一次當(dāng)父母的人很怕自己會陷入那些很混亂的境地，就像那個虎媽一樣，被第二個第三個孩子所“折磨”得很累，她們傾向于盡心培養(yǎng)一個孩子。

霍茨也補(bǔ)充了一些理論。父母總是對第一個孩子要求的比較嚴(yán)格：例如關(guān)于看電視的規(guī)定啊 這對孩子在學(xué)校的表現(xiàn)是很有關(guān)系的，并且有數(shù)據(jù)表明，他們甚至還會對孩子的成績不好做出懲罰。父母喜歡在家庭中營造一種氛圍——他們希望在她們年幼孩子的耳濡目染中灌輸榮譽(yù)感和是非觀。哪些事情不能做而哪些事情是可以受到表揚(yáng)的。

這樣的理論是有趣的但并不是很具有說服力的，首先這個理論實在不好證明可信度。調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)也只能顯示父母在孩子的培養(yǎng)過程中會表的越來越冷靜熟練，二所謂的冷靜熟練也僅僅就是他們會直接建立一種明確的獎懲制度。這份數(shù)據(jù)不能表明對于培養(yǎng)一個孩子所付出的的辛苦可以等同于培養(yǎng)四個。顯而易見，培養(yǎng)四個優(yōu)秀的孩子要比一個累得多。更多的是，第一個孩子比其他的孩子更聰明的理論也在暗示一些經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家所謂的“獎懲制度”在現(xiàn)如今的家庭中也是說不通的。