Those poor, idiotic Duggars.

What then subby, what then?

Sanduskyed In The Shower: [fashionablygeek.com image 270x270]

What then subby, what then?

Guess that explains all those Mormon families I've met. 10 kids all 10 months apart.
/We joke about one guy's poor wife - never had a period or an orgasm the past 15 years.

Oldest of 7 here. Spacing from older sib:

32 months
27 months
19 months
25 months
28 months

7 years

each one a genius

Having been born 13 months after my older brother, who is a genius, and i'm a genius, i was concerned about this article, but after reading it, its not about being 'smart'... its about doing well in scholastics....

I have no problem admitting that i underachieved in school.
just don't tell me that i'm not a genius.

Andromeda: I'm the youngest of three within two years (I was half of twins), and was by far the worst at school of the three of us while my oldest sis was the best. Except to further complicate this anecdote I am currently the only one of us three pursuing a doctorate, so...

Huh. I'm the youngest of three within two years, half of twins, and despite doing the best in school I'm the only one not pursuing an advanced degree.

So, I guess anecdotal anecdote is anecdotal?

Earpj: My brightest child, so far, is 17 months younger than her brother.

I have it on good authority that she always will be.

Or it could be that people with an education and common sense tend to wait about 2 years before having kids because it makes sense to have the first kid at least somewhat independent before popping out another.

And people who are like totally in love and will find a way to pay for this kid and take care of two infants at the same time because it's fate, you know?, maybe don't make the best parents or smartest kids.

/having numerous books in your house correlates with more successful offspring. Give poor, illiterate folks books and they'll turn out Nobel prize winners!

My kids are screwed. They were born 90 seconds apart.

/triplets

Andromeda: I'm sure this thread will be filled with anecdotes that are not the plural of data, but that's not enough for me to not share mine-

I'm the youngest of three within two years (I was half of twins), and was by far the worst at school of the three of us while my oldest sis was the best. Except to further complicate this anecdote I am currently the only one of us three pursuing a doctorate, so...

You can get a doctorate in pole dancing? Who knew?

Tossing in my anecdote: three kids, I'm the eldest. My middle sister is 2 years 10 months younger, the baby is 9 years 2 weeks younger. I'm a polymath and they're dumb as rocks.

Statistically, we corroborate that the eldest is always the smartest.

jonny_q: Earpj: My brightest child, so far, is 17 months younger than her brother.

I have it on good authority that she always will be.

Zing!

So the results say that for the oldest child, they perform better when their parents have more time to spend raising and focusing on just one child and that the length of time when their parents don't have to split their attention on multiple children might affect how prepared they become for scholastic achievement. Once the parents have multiple children, it doesn't seem to matter - only how long they had just one child.

Seems reasonable.

I have a younger brother, born more than 5 years behind me. I had academic success, he did not. He dropped out of a college after a few semesters, and throughout his academic career, he never had good grades.

\Anecdotal, sure... But when it comes to 2 children, I have a hard time believing younger siblings are generally as academically successful as their older siblings based on others I know. The old sibling is smarter, the younger sibling is better at sports. Age difference does not seem to be a factor at all.

RexTalionis: Mugato: Could this be a correlation != causation thing, that most people who fire out kids like a Pez dispenser aren't always exactly the cream of the intellectual crop?

Giving birth through a massive laceration in the throat?

A bloody gash, if you will...

My turn my turn!!

I'm six years older than my sister. I graduated a year early, she had to take summer classes to graduate on time. I could ace math classes without going to class. She had to get special help to finish Basic Math with a C-. She still uses a Calculator to figure out change, while I can do square roots in my head.

She's the manager at my old store while I'm still getting in trouble for arguing with my bosses about how stupid they are. I'm so much better than--- wait, that doesn't work out right....

/She's manager because no one else wanted the store after I left.
//Sent her and my mother this article. My mother laughed.
///The stories I could tell of her idiocy...

I'm almost exactly a year younger than my brother. He's a bright guy, and pretty successful... but even he will tell you that I'm smarter than he is. (He even admitted as much in the foreword of his third book.)

We have a sister who is 9 years younger than I am, and she's off-the-charts brilliant. But she's a trainwreck in terms of her personal life.

I'm gonna jump on the correlation != causation train here.

However, the correlation does not surprise me in the least. Not many rocket scientists squeeze 'em out every year.

MountainClimber: Guess that explains all those Mormon families I've met. 10 kids all 10 months apart.
/We joke about one guy's poor wife - never had a period or an orgasm the past 15 years.

Surprising, since the vast majority of women won't get pregnant while breastfeeding (about as effective as the pill for the first six months).

My sister is three years younger and was always a more well-rounded student.

So the article is saying that by having subsequent kids x-number of years apart, the preceding, existing kid(s) get smarter? Or that the follow-up kid is smarter if x is bigger?

1st option makes no sense; 2nd option is, in my limited experience, not supported by evidence.

T.rex: Having been born 13 months after my older brother, who is a genius, and i'm a genius, i was concerned about this article, but after reading it, its not about being 'smart'... its about doing well in scholastics....

I have no problem admitting that i underachieved in school.
just don't tell me that i'm not a genius.

To your parents, you're a genius, to your brother, you're a genius, but to a genius, you're no genius

/grab your sausage

sotua: T.rex: Having been born 13 months after my older brother, who is a genius, and i'm a genius, i was concerned about this article, but after reading it, its not about being 'smart'... its about doing well in scholastics....

I have no problem admitting that i underachieved in school.
just don't tell me that i'm not a genius.

To your parents, you're a genius, to your brother, you're a genius, but to a genius, you're no genius

/grab your sausage

Perhaps you didn't read the part where i already said i'm a genius. And if i'm a genius, then that means i'm a genius to a genius. Case closed.