7/27/2019 Cicirelli

1/8

Developmental sychology1975, Vol. 11, No. 6,749-756

Effec t s of Mother and Older Siblingon the Problem-Solving Behaviorof the YoungerChild

V I C T O R G .CICIRELLIPurdue Universi ty

The effects of aid from mother or older sibling on the child s problem-solv ingbehavior weredeterminedin relationto thesexesof the tw osiblingsand familysize.Subjects were120 first-gradechildrenwithathird-or fourth-grade sibling, half fromtwo-child famil ies and half from largerfam ilies ; the four possibles e x c om bi na t ionswere equal ly represented.Childrenworkedonpracticep r o b le m saloneorwereaidedby siblingormother prior totesting. Children with older brothers performed a swellalone as af ter aid by s ibl ing ormother, whereaschi ldren with older sisters showedm o r e advancedproblem so lv ing a f te r aid by sibling or mother p

7/27/2019 Cicirelli

2/8

750 VICT OR G . C I C I R E L L Itel l igence and a c h i e v e m e n t are widely ac -cepted(Altus, 1966; Anastasi , 1956; Belmont& Marolla, 1973; Breland, 1973, 1974a,1974b; Zajonc & Ma rkus , 1975), althoug hs t i l l d e b a t e d by some (Schooler , 1972,1973). When, inaddition, th e child'ssex andt ha t of his s ibl ing(s) and the age spacingbetween them are taken into account, theeffects are m ore com plex . Bo th Koc h (1954)and Schoonover (1959) reported tha t in thetwo-chi ld f ami ly , chi ld ren wi tham ale s ib l ingwere superior in IQ and achievemen t tochildren wi th a female s ibl ing. Rosenbergand Sut ton-Smi th (1964) conf irm ed thisf inding for college s t uden t s ' q u a n t i t a t i v eAmer i ca n Counci l on Educa t ion Psycho-logica l E x a m i n a t i o n ( A C E ) s c o re s , b u tfound tha t s tuden ts wi th a f em a le s ib l in ghad higher language scores than those witha male s ibl ing. For three-child famil ies ,Rosenberg and Sutton-Smith (1966) foundtha t qu an t i ta t iv e ACE scores w ere enhancedfor gir ls who had two brothers and for boysw ho had b o th a sister and a brother , whileCicirelli (1967) found lower school achieve-ment scores fors ixth-grade c hildren withtw obrothers. Effects of siblings were mostpr onounced for sibling age spacings of 2-4years (Koch, 1954). Cicirelli (1967) foundhigher achievement scores for s ix th-gradechildren who had asibling of likes excloseinage,and Rosenberg andSu tton-S m ith (1969)found this to be true for college girls, whereascollege boys scored higheron the ACEwhenthey ha d widelyspacedsiblings of either sex.This research makes i t evident that a child ' sabili ties and a ch i evemen t are inf luenced bythe sex and spacing of the siblingsw ho sur -r ound h i m .Sibling Interaction

There has been rela t ive ly l it t le direct s tudyof in teract ion between s ibl ings. Sutton-Smi th (1966) found in an in terview s tudythat children interact differently with theirsiblings than with their peers , while a la te rstudy (Sutton-Smith & Rosenberg, 1970)reported that tact ics used by older siblingsindealing with younger siblings depended onthe s ibl ing s truc ture. Sim ilar ly , Bigner (1974)found thatchildren's perceptions of siblingpower and funct ion depended on sibling

s t ruc ture var iables . Cicirel l i (1972) at-t empted to dem onstrate that sibling interac-t ion is an in t e r v en in g m echan ism b e tweensibling statu s and sibling achievement; he in-vest igated the effect of older siblings andnonsiblings of both sexes as teachers ofyo un g er chi ld reno n ac oncept l e arn ing task .Older sisters were significantly m ore effect ivethan o lder b ro thers as teachers ofy o u ng e rsiblings (while there was no dif ference ineffect iveness of older boys and girls asteachers of unre la te d y ounge r chi ld ren) ,andthey used a deduc t ive teaching method (ex-p l a i n i n g , d e s c r i b i n g , d e m o n s t r a t i n g , i l -lus t ra t ing) more than o ther g roups .

A second study (Cicirelli, 1973, 1974)in -ves t iga ted the behav iors of s ibl ing pairs ofdifferent ages and age spacing in teract ingo nan object s o r t i ng , task and related t hisbehavior to y ounge r s ib l ings ' subse quen tca tegor iza t ion and conceptua l s ty les .Chi ldren aided by s ibl ings on the prac t icetask made more g roups than chi ld ren whoworked alone, while those aided bys ibl ings4yea r s older m ade larger groups and leftf ewerobjects ungro upe d than those a ided by sib-lings 2 years older . In regard to conceptuals tyle , chi ld ren a ided by sisters 4 years o lderused a higher percentage of inferentialcategories than those in o ther groups.Children were found to bem ore l ikelyto ac-cept help f rom an older sister than from anolder brother and f rom a sibling 4 yearsolder than from a s ibl ing only 2 years older .(See also Cicirelli, 1975; Cicirelli, in press).Parent Child InteractionThe l i t e ra ture prov ides ev idence tha tparen ts g ive di f ferent t r e a t m e n t to childrenin different posi t ions in the fami ly . For ex-ample, Bossard and Boll (1960) describe thedis t inct role expectat ions for childrendepending on their posi t ion in the siblings tructure . In an in terv iew s tudy , Dean (Note1) reported that mothers perceived theirolder child di f ferent ly f rom the i r yo ungerchild of the same sex; in an observationals t u d y ,L asko (1954) no ted tha t m others wereless warm emotionally and m o re d e m a n d in gand coerc ive toward the i r f i r s t -born childthan toward their second. Cushna (Note 2)f ou nd tha t mo the r s of f i r s t -born infants had

7/27/2019 Cicirelli

3/8

EFFECTS OF M O T H E R AND OLDER SIBLING 75 1greater expectations for their behavior thandid m others o f la te r borns ; m others gave thef irs t-born infants more he lp and prompt ing ,a l thoughthey were m ore exacting in their de-m a n d s for girls than for boys . Gewir tz andGewirtz (1965) found tha t mothers of onlychi ldren in teracted w ith their in fan t s twiceasm u c h as did mo ther s of later-born infant s.In a laboratory s tudy , Hil ton (1967)foundtha t mo ther s of first-born children werem o r e likely to in terfere with and direct thebehavior of their first-born than theirsecond-born child . In another laboratorys t ud y , Rothbar t (1971) observed mothers ofchi ldren f rom two-child famil ies with sib-lings of the same sex as they interacted withtheir kindergarten-age child on achievementtasks. Rothbart ' s s tudy supported Hil ton,but fo und m ore specificallythatt hem other 'scritical in t rus iveness w as s trongly accen-tua ted toward the first-born girl, while thefirst-born boy and second-born girl weret rea ted m ore approv ing ly than the second-born boy .In an animal s tudy, Deets (1974) f ou ndtha t infant-m other interaction was a t -t enua ted for those monkeyfam il ieswher eanage-matepeer or twinw asrearedas a siblingwith the in fan t .Although none of thestudies citedherea t-tempted to rela te differing parent-child in-teract ions to child outcomes, theydo providesuppor t for the hypo thes i s tha t mothers in -t e rac t differently with children in differentpos i t ions in the family and tha t the later-born child receives less in teract ion and lessdirectparen ta linfluence .(Thiswouldtendtobecome more t rue as family size increased,fo r itwould becomem o re difficult tointeractwith a g r ea t e r n umb er o f chi ldren) . U nfor -tunately , these studies did not take intoac -count the sex of the child in relation to thesex of sibling (even Rothbar t ' s s tudy con-sidered only those children with same-sexsibl ings) . On the basis of the s tudies of sib-ling structure effects and of sibling-sibling in-teract ions, one would expect that sex of childand sex ofsibling would alsohave impor tan teffects on mother-child in teract ions.ProblemThe present study investigated the relativ eeffects of in terac t ion wi than older siblingor

mother on ayoungerchild's problem-solvingbehav ior and d e t e rmin ed how such effectsdepended on thesexesof the tw osiblings andfamily size.Pr ev ious sibling s tudies have suggestedthat older siblings, as well as the mother ,should have an effect on the younger child ' scognitive behavior. While the mother hasgreater age and experience as a basis for heraid to the child, the older sibling m ayunder-s tand the child's difficulties withtheproblemf rom a more s imilar perspective. I t washypothesized that the rela t ive influence ofthe older sibling would be greater as familysize increased and the mother had less t ime

fo r interaction with each child. On the basisof previous studies of sibling interact ion, itwas hypothesized that the older sister wouldhave a greater influence than an olderbrother when an older sibling aided thechild. Previous studies of mother-child in -teract ion are too l imited to lead tohypotheses about how the mo the r ' s effectm ight depend on sex of child and sex of sib-l ing; howe ve r , s ibling s tru ctu re s tudies andreasoning by analogy from studies ofsiblinginteract ion indicate that these var iablesshould beim por tan t inmother-childinterac-tion as well.Method

DesignA 3 X 2 X 2 X 2 factorial designw a sused,wi th threesibling structure factors (sex of child, sex of sibling,family s ize) and one t rea tm ent fac tor . On the f ami ly sizevar iab le , small families werethose with tw o childrenan d large famil ies were those wi th three o r morechildren (moda l family size w as four chi ldren) . They o u n g e r child of the s ibling pair was at f irst -grade level(6 years old) , while the older child was at third- orfourth-grade level (8 or 9 years old) ; thus ag e spacingbe tween the two siblings was f rom 2 to 3 years. Therewerethreetreatmentco nditions: In the alone condition,th e firs t-grade child carried out a problem-solving taskalone; in the sibcond i t ion , the child w as helped by theo lder s ibling;and in the m o the r cond it ion, thechi ldw ashelped by his mother . Depende nt var iables werem easures of the chi ld ' s per form ance on a second prob-l em-so lv ing task, obtained on trials at the end of the in-

teract ion session when mother and sibling were nolonger helping the child.Population an d Sampling

A population lis t of firs t-grade children with third- orfour th-grade s iblingsw as identified from school records

7/27/2019 Cicirelli

4/8

752 V I C T O R G . C I C I R E L L Iof tw o centra l Indiana school sys tems i nvo l v i ng a to t a lof 12e lem entaryschools.There were 154such siblingpai rs . These w ere div ided into two groups: chi ldrenf rom two-c hi ld fam i li e s and chi ldren f rom families ofthree or m ore chi ldren . Each of these two popula t iongroups w as subdi v i de d in to four subgroups: boys wi t holder brothers, boys with older sisters, girls with olderbrothers, an d girls with older sisters. A sample of 15subjects w as r a n d o m l y d r a w n f rom each of the sub-groups; 5 of the 15were ass igned to the a lon e t rea tm entcond i t ion , 5 were assigned to the sib condi tion, and 5were assigned to the mother condi t ion. There were12 0sibling pa i rs in all. Of these, 16pairs we re lost from th estudy for variousreasons (parent did not give permis-sion for s t u d y , 12 ; illness, 2; m o v e d , 2) ; these werereplacedw i th pa i rs f rom a rando m l y se le c te d ov e r sam-ple list for the appropria te popula t ion subgroups.Task

A problem -solv ing task desc r ibed by Olson (1966)w as u se d . The t a sk i nv o l v e d de t e rm i n i ngwhich one oftw o(or m ore ) a l te rna t ive pa t te rns di splayed to the childw as correct; that is , which pa t te rn corresponded to aprearrangedpatternofbulbs (which light whenpressed)on a "bu l b board tha t the chi ld could manipula te .The bulb board, cons t ruc ted of black Bake l i temater ia l , was 17.5 cm long, 13.5cm wide , and 7.0 cmhigh;25 red indicator l ights, .5 cm in diame te r , weres e ti n t o the top of the board in a 5 X 5 array. Next to eachlightw as asm allbutton(.5 cm indiameter),which whenpressed permitted the bulb to l ight i f i t was one of thepa t te rn bulbs . Swi tches on the back of the board con-t rolledeach of the bulbs indiv idual ly , so tha t b u lbs m ak-in g up the patte rn could be preset to l ight whe n pressed.A sampl e p rob l e m d i sp l ay s the following a l te rna t ivepa t terns to the child, with the pattern on the right the correct one:

pa t te rn would l ight . The chi ld was ins t ruc ted: "One ofthese pictures (pointing to pattern mode l s ) is the onet ha ts h o w swh ic h bu l bswill l ight . Yo urjob is to find outwhichp i c tu reis the r ight one . U se it sfew bulb pressesa sy ou can. A s soon as you are sure y ou kno w which pic -tu re is the r ight one , point to it." The m o t h e r o r oldersibl ing was ins t ruc te d: "You can watch as he / shet r ies to find out which pic ture i s the right one. I f yout h i nk he/she needs help, then tell h i m / h e r w h a t y out h i nk he/she should do."It wasfelt tha t th i s ta sk would prov idealoosely struc-t u r ed s i tua t ion where in the m other o r older s ibl ingcould give as l i t t l e or as m uc h guidanc e to the chi ld asdesired, depending on thepersonalities an d skillsof themother , older s ibl ing, and younger chi ld and the i rcharac te r i s t i c ways of inte rac t ing. Olson (1966) foundtha t pe rform anc e on th i s ta sk inc reased w i th age , so tha tthe older sibling should in general possess more ad-vanced problem -solv ing ski l ls as a bas i s of h is adv ice tothe younger sibl ing.Procedure

In the sib cond i tion, the f i rst-grade child and his oldersibling were brought into th e experimental room (asmal l room in the school , conta ining a table and cha i rs )and giventhe firs t set off ou r p rob l e m s , du r i ng wh i c hthein terac t ionbe tween the s ibl ings was recorded. W hen thet ask was comple ted, the older sibl ing w as d i sm i s se d .Then the younger chi ld was given the te s t se t of threeproblems.In the mothe r c ondi t i on , the f i r s t -gradechild and hismothe r we re g iven the firs t set of fourproblem s, follow-in g which the chi ld alone was given the test se t of threep r o b l e m s .In the alone condi tion, the f i rst-grade child wasbrought in to th e experimental room alone an d givenboth se ts of problems in succession.

Xo o o o o nd o o x o oo o o o o o o x o oo o o o o o o x o o

The child presses b ulbs on the bu lb board unt i l he is suretha t he can ident i fy the correct pattern. (Logical ly , onlyone bulb press isneeded to distinguish between the twoalternatives.) Thenumbe r ofactualbulbpressesneededfo r the chi ld to solve the p rob l e m de pe nds on thesophistication and efficiency of his i n f o r m a t i o n -gather ing and processing strategy.F ou r p rob l e ms of the same t y pe as the sampl eproblem were presented to the chi ld dur ingthe interac-tion orpracticepartof the exper imenta lsession,and anadd i t iona lthree problem s were presentedin the test partof the session. The child w asint roduced to the task bybeing show n the corresponde nce between a single pat-t e rn mode l and the bulb board. (The pa t te rn m ode lw asa d r a w i n gof the to p of thebulb board,of the same size,with th epattern bulbs shown incolor. It was displayedon a c l ipboard behind the bulb board.) F or eachprobl e m, the switches on the back of the bu l b boa rdwere se t so that only those bu l bs f o rmi ng the correct

Measuresof Problem SolvingEach bulb press m a d e by the child in solving eachproblem w asrecorded in sequence . Thet o t a l n u m b e ro fbu lb s pressed before reaching asolu t ion to thep rob l e mw as recorded, as well as the nu m be r of bu lb presses ineach of three categories: on-pattern redundant bulbs(bulbs common to both pa t te rn mode l s) , on-pa t te rn in-formative bulbs (bulbs that appear in onepattern butnot in another) , and of f -pa t t ern bulbs . T im e to reach asolu t ion was a l so recorded.To de t e rm i ne the chi ld ' s problem-solv ing s t ra tegy ,two judges assessed each sequence of bulb choices andthe re la t ive proport ions of the var ious types of b u l b schosen using Olson's (1966) criteria. The child wasjudged to have used a search strategy when the bulbspressed were apparent ly indepen dent of the pa t te rnmode l s prov ided, wi th of f -pa t t ern bulbs pressed wi th atl eas t a s grea t a f requenc y as on-pa t te rn bulbs ; the t im eper b ulb press was short , and re la t ive ly m any b ulbs werepressed. (Children using this strategy might also fail toreach a solution.) In the successive pattern-matchingstrategy, thebulb s pressed tended to bepa r t of the pa t -t e rn suggested by one or both of the models, but on-

7/27/2019 Cicirelli

5/8

E F F E C T S O F M O T H E R A N D O L D E RS I B L I N G 753p a t t e rn presses were no m o r e likely to be i n f o r m a t i vethan redundant . The child tries to trace out the entirep a t t e rn ;be c au sethee n t i r e pa t t e rnist e s t e d ,thechi ldre -quires a l ar ge n u m b e ro f t r i a l st o solu t ion but the t im erequired pe r b u l b is st i l l re lat ively small (a l thoughin-t e r m e d i a t e to the o the r two s t ra t e g i e s ) . I n theinformation-selection strategy, on-pa t t e rn i n forma t i v ebulbs are pressed earl ier and o f t e ne r than on-pa t t e rnr e d u n d a n t bu l bs ;the child r e qu i re srelat ively fe wtrialsto solution, but the t i me r e qu i re dpe r b u lb is rela t ivelylarge. Olson (1966)reported94 %agre e m e n t be twe e nin -dependent judges in classi fying strategies according tothesec r i te r ia .In th i s s tudy , search s t ra tegies were coded as 1;suc -cessivepa t te rn -m atchin g s t ra tegies w ere codedas 3; andin format ion-se lec t ion s t ra tegies were coded as 5. If agivenchild's perform ance could not be unambiguouslyassigned to a search or suc ce s s iv e pa t t e rn-ma tc h i ngs t ra tegy , i t was coded as 2, whi leif i t was not clearlyasuccessive p a t t e r n - m a t c h i n g or i n fo r m a t io n selections t ra tegy,i t was coded as 4. Thus the strate gy score rep re-sents th e degree of complexi ty of the problem-solvings t ra tegy used by the chi ld. There w as 95.3% agreem entbetween twoindep enden t judges inclassi fying strategieson a tota l of 360p rob le m s a c c ord i ng to the cri teriaf orclassifying and coding s t ra tegies .Each problem w as scored individually , an d scoreswere s u m m e d o v e r theth re e p rob l e m sin the test sessionto give total scores for each of the six measures. (Totalscores were a l so computed for the four p rob l e ms in thepractice sess ion. An e s t i ma t e of rel iabi l i ty for thesemeasures is given by the correlation between practiceand test session scores for the 40 subjects in the alonecondi t ion. These were ; re sponse t im e , .64 ; num be rofre sponses , .81; nu m be r of redundant re sponses , .62;n u m b e r of i n f o r m a t i ve re sponses , .65; num be r ofo f f -pattern responses, .79; strategy, .71.)

ResultsMeans and s tand ard dev ia tions for each ofthe m ea s ure sofproblem solvingon the threep r ob l ems of the test session are presented in

Table 1. The three problems took 104.5 secto solve,or a bou t 35 sec perp r o b le m , on theaverage . For the three problems, 36.5 bulbpresses were needed to reach a so lu t ion , orabout 12 bulb presses pe r problem. Ofthese , about 3 i n f o r m a t i v e , 7 r edunda n t ,and 2 off-pa t tern bulbs were pressed perproblem. The mean s t ra tegy score w as9.12,or approximately 3 per problem; this meanstha t m os t o f the ch i ldren were us ing the suc-cessive pattern-matching strategyto reach asolut ion to the problems . (The va r iabi l i tyw as sufficientlygreatto indicate thatsearchand in form a t ion-se lec t ion s t ra tegies we realso being used by asubstantial n u m b e r ofchi ldren. )A nanalys is of var iance was carried o ut for

Table 1: Means and Standard Dev iations ofProblem SolvingVariables N = 120Variable 8

Re sponse t i m e ( s e c )N u m b e r o fbu l bs p re s s e dN u m b e ro f redundan t bulbsN u m b e ro f i n f o rm a t i ve bu lbsN u m b e r o foff-pat ternb u l b sStrategy

M104.48

36.4921.429.635.759.12

SD55.4118.6710.807.0310.672.45

* Variables were m e a s u r e d o v e r th e three tes t problems.

each of the p r ob l em -s o l v ing va r ia b le s ; t he s e ,of course , werenot com p le t e l y i ndepende n t .1. Response t ime . There was a signif icantma in effect of sibling sex on the child'sr e sponse t ime , F(l, 96) = 4.06, p = .04.Children with older sisters had a longerr e s pons e t ime M = 114.77 sec) t hanchildren witholder brothers M = 94.20 sec).However , th i s effect was qualif ied by thesignificant interaction between sibling sexand the sex of the child,F(l, 96) = 5.46,p =.02. Am ong children with older brothers,girls M = 104,97 sec) had a longer resp ons et ime than boys M = 83.43 sec), whilea m o n gchi ldren w ith older s is ters , boys M=127.83 sec) had a longer response t ime thangirls M = 101.70 sec). Looking at this in-teract ion in another way, chi ldren wi thsame-sex s ibl ingshad shor te r r e sponse t imesthan chi ldren with opposi te-sex s ibl ings .2 . Number of bulbs p res sed . There was asignificant interact ion between sex of theolder s ibl ing and trea tment condi t ion, F 2,96) = 3.69, p = .03. Am ong c hi ldren with

older brothers , those w ho solved theproblems a lone pres sed fewer bulbs M =29.20) than those helped by the older s ibM = 39.35) or the mo the r M = 38.00).Am ong ch ildren wi tholdersisters,thosew hosolved the problem a lone used more bulbpresses M =43.60)thanthosehelped by theolder s ib M = 38.25) or the m o t h e r M =30.55).3 . N um be r o f r edund a n t bu lb s p re s s ed.Therewas a significant interaction betweensex of the childand sex of the older siblingintheir effect on n u m b e r of redundant bulbspressed, F l, 96) = 3.90,p = .05. Boy s w ithanoldersisterpressedm oreredundant bulbs M =22.50) than boy s wi th an older brothe rM = 18.53), while girls with anolder sister

7/27/2019 Cicirelli

6/8

754 VICTOR G . C I C I R E L L Ipressed fewer r edundan t bu lbs M - 20.57)than girlswi thanolder brothe r (M = 24.10).Looking at the interac t ion in ano the r way ,children w ith same-sex siblings pressed fewerredundant bulbs than ch i ldren wi th op-posi t e - sex s ib l ings .4 . Number of in format ive bulbs pressed .There were no s igni f ican t effects.5. N u m b e r of off-pat tern bulbs pressed.There was a signif icant interac t ion betweenthe sex of the older sibling and t rea tmentcondi t ion , F 2, 96) = 4.02,p = .02, in theireffect on the n u m b e r of of f -pa t t e rn bulbspressed. Children with older brothers pres-sed fewer of f -pa t t e rn bulbs af ter they hadwo rked alone (M = 3.05) than af ter theyhadbeen helped by older s ib (M = 3.65) or bym o t h e r (M = 7.65), while children w ith oldersis ters pressed more off-pat tern bulbs afterthey had worked alone (M = 11.45) thanaf ter they had been helped by older sib (M =5.80) or by mother (M = 2.85).6. Strategy. There was a s ignif icant in-terac t ion betwe en the sex of the older siblingand t reatment condit ion in their effect on the

. younger child's strategy score, F 2, 96) =3.71, p = .03. Children with older brothershad a sl ight ly more advanced st rategy a f t e rthey had worked a lone M = 9.60) than af terthey had been helped byolder sib (M = 9.30)or by mother(M= 9.20),w hile children wit holder sisters had less advanced strategiesaf ter they hadworked alone (M = 7.85) thanaf ter they had been helped by older sib M =8.40) or by mo the r (M = 10.35).Discussion

Themajor quest ion addressed by thes tudywas the relative effect of mother and oldersibling on the younger child 's problem-solving behavior. I t was hypothesized that achild who had been helped by mother or anolder sibling should perform better on thet e st p roblem s than achild w howorked a loneon the pract ice task.This hypothesis was only part ial ly borneout, since the effect of the t rea tment condi-t ion depended on the sex of the child's sib-l ing. Children with older sisters performed ina direc t ion that supported the hypothesis;however ,children with older brothers tendedtoper form bes t when they worked a lone dur-

in g the pract ice period. E ither children wit holder bro thers did not profi t from the he lpgiven to t he m , or older brothers andm o t he r sof children with older brothers gave adif ferent qua li ty of help than that given tochildren with older sis ters. This interac t ionbetween siblingsex and t r e a tmen t cond i t ionw as fo un d for number of bulb presses tosolution, n u m b e r o f off-pat tern bulbs , ands t ra t egy . Of these , number of bulb presses tosolution and stra tegy are the most crucialmeasures of p roblem solv ing on th is t ask ;thus th is f inding i s an impor tan t one .W h e n thechild wo rked aloneon the prac-tice task, those children with an olderb ro the r had higher strategy scores than thosechi ld ren with older sisters. This fits inw i thearl ier sibling structure studies (Koch, 1954;Rosenberg & Sutton-Smith, 1964, 1966;Schoonover, 1959) which suggested that anolder bro ther was som ehow s t im ula t ing tothe younger child's cognitive development .However, when children with older brotherswere helped by the older brother or by themo the r , t h ey showed no improvemen t ins t ra tegy over children who worked alone.Perhaps the child with an older brother hashad to learn to be independen t in order tocope with the power and s ib l ing r iva l ry ofthe older brother. This suggests that an olderbrother creates a si tuat ion for the youngerchild in which help on a task is unacc eptable ,in which workingon thetaskonone'sown ispreferable to doing the task better with help.In the caseof thechild withanolder sister,the helpof the sister orm o the r led to an im-p r o v e m e n t of problem solving. Since them other ty pically delegates responsibil i ty toan older sister in caring for the y oun ger child(Bossard & Boll , 1960; Mead & He y m an,1965), the two children have developed acus tomary re la t ionship where the y o u n g e rchild expects help from the older sister (andthe older sister expects to give it). Previousstudies (Cicirelli, 1972, 1974) have dem-ons t ra t ed t ha t o lde r s i s t e r s a re m o r eeffect ive teachers of younger siblings thanare older brothers. This s tudy indicates thatrecept iveness to help from older sis ters andindependence regarding help from olderbrothers are well-established characterist icsthat t ransfer to a si tuat ion in which the sib-ling is absent and the mother is offering help.

7/27/2019 Cicirelli

7/8

E F F E C T S O F M O T H E R A N D O L D E R S I B L I N G This is an i m p o r t a n t f inding because it in-dicates an indirect effect of sibling-sibling in -teract ions on the mother-child in t erac t ion .In o ther w ords, the effect ivene ss of them o t h e r in helping the child depends on thesibling s t ruc ture in the f a m i l y , that i s , the sexoftheolder sibling. This implies that siblings t ruc ture var i ab les should be t aken mo reseriously when s tudying mother-child in -teract ions.While there appears to be anincons i s t encybe tween the not ion that o lder brothers ares t i mu l a to r s of i n t e l l e c t ua l d eve l o pmen t o fyounger siblings and the evidence thatoldersi s ters are more effective he lpers o f youngersiblings, thiscan be easily reconciled:Underi n f o r m a l o r inc iden ta l l earn ing condi t ions ,the younger chi ld is s t i mu l a t ed by the c o m -pet i t i veness and r i v a l r y of an o lder b ro thert o l ea rn mo re t han f rom an older s i s ter , butin a m ore fo rm al t eaching s i tuat ion , they ou nge r chi ld will l earn more f rom an oldersister than from anolder brother becausesheexpects togive helpand they ounge r chi ldex -pects to receive i t .A secondary ques t ion o f the s tudy waswh e t h e r the chi ld ' s prob lem-so lv ing per fo r -man ce d epen d ed on the s ibl ing s t ructure ofthe f a m i l y . The re la t ionship o f the t rea tmen tconditions to sibling sex has already beendiscussed. In addi t ion, the sex of the chi ldhad an effect which depended on the sex ofthe s ib l ing , but whi ch w as i n d epen d en t o fw ho helped the chi ld in the pract ice session.Chi ldren w hose sibling was of the sam e sexhad a shor t er response t ime and pressedfewer redundant bulbs than children whoses ibl ing was of the opposi te sex. Thus thereappearsto be a tendency for children withasibling o f the sam e sex to press fo r a m orer a p id so lu t ion to aprob lem , whi l e there is as lower , more cau t ious approach by chi ld renw i th an opposi te-sex sibl ing. The com -petitivenessand sibling rivalry between pairsof b ro the r s has been no ted in ear l i e r workon siblings (Adams, 1968; Koch, 1960;Rosenberg & Sut ton-Smi th , 1969; Su t ton-S m i t h , 1969); the present analysis suggeststha t th i s m ay ex t en d in s o m e m e a s u r e topai r so f sisters as we l l. This is not surpr i s ingin v i ew of the more extensive in teract ionbetween same-sex sibl ings close in age in theday-to-day fami ly si tuation.

Fina l l y , the hypothesized effect o f f ami l ysize was no t borne ou t by the s tudy , fo r therew as no rela t ionship between fami ly size andthe chi ld ' s prob lem-so lv ing per fo rmance onthe t ask .Thi s s tudy has prov ided fur ther ev idenceof the effectsof the sibling structureon thechi ld ' s cogn i t ive func t ion ing .

R E F E R E NC E NOTES1. Dean, D. A. The relation of ordinal position toper-sonality in young children. Unpubl i she d mas t e r ' sthes i s , S ta te Univers i ty of Iowa, 1947.2. Cushna , G. Agencyandbirth orderdifferences in veryearly childhood. Paper presented a t the m ee t ing of the

A m e r i c a n Psychologica l .Association, N e w Y o r k ,September 1966.R E F E R E NC E S

A d a m s , B. N. Kinship in an urban setting. Chicago:M a r k h a m , 1968.Al tus ,W. D. B irth order an d i ts sequelae.Science, 1966,151,44-49.Anas tas i , A. Intel l igencea nd fami ly size.PsychologicalBulletin, 1956,S3 , 187-209.Ba y l ey , N ., & Schaefe r , E. S.Corre la t ions ofm a t e rn a land child behaviors with the development of me n ta labilities: Da ta f rom the Be rk e l e y G rowth S tudy .Monographs of the Society fo r Research in ChildDevelopment, 1964,29, 3-79.B e l m o n t , L., & Marol la , F. A. Bi r th order , family size,an d inte l l igence .Science, 1973, 182, 1096-1101.Bigner,J. J.Secondboms'discrimination ofsiblingroleconcepts . Developmental Psychology, 1974, 10 ,564-573.Bing, E . Effects of childrearing practices on develop-m e n t of dif ferent ia l cogni t i ve abil it i e s .ChildDeve lop-ment , 1960, 31, 321-338.Bossard, J. H. S. , & Boll , E. H. The sociologyo f childdevelopment (3rd ed.) . N ew York: Harper, 1960.Breland, H. M.B i r th o rde reffects: Areplyt oSchoole r .Psychological Bulletin, 1973,80 , 210-212.Breland,H. M.B i r th o rde r , familyc onf igura t ion ,v e r b a lachievement. Child Deve lopment , 1974, 45 , 1011-10 19 . (a )Breland, H. M.Bir th o rde r ,family size,a ndinte l ligence .Science, 1974, 184, 118. (b)Cicirelli, V. G. Sibling c ons t e l l a t ion , c re a t i v i t y , I.Q.and a c a d e m i c a c h ie v e m e n t .Child Deve lopment ,1967,38,481-490.Cicirelli, V. G. The effect ofsibl ing relationship sonc o n -cept learning of y o u n g c h i l d re n t augh t by chi ldteachers. Child Deve lopment , 1972, 43 , 282-287.Cicirelli, V. G. Effects of s ibl ing s t ruc ture and inte rac -t ion on chi ldren ' s ca tegoriza t ion s ty l e .Deve lopmentalPsychology, 1973,9, 132-139.Cicirelli, V. G. Re l a t i onsh i pofs ibl ing s t ruc tureand in-teraction to y ounge r s i b 's c onc e p tua l s t y le .Journalo fGenetic Psychology, 1974, 125, 37-49.Cicirelli, V. G. Sibling inf luence on thed e v e l o p m e n to fthe individual . In K. F. Riegel & J. A. Mecham

7/27/2019 Cicirelli

8/8

756 VICTOR G. CICIRELLI(Eds. ) , Th e developing Individual in a changing world(Vol. 3): Social andenvironmental issues.T he Hague:M o u t o n , 1975.Cicirelli,V . G. Sibl ings helping sibl ings. In L. V.Allen(Ed. ) , Inter-age interaction in children: Theory andresearch on the helping relationship. Madison: Univer-sity of Wisconsin Press, 1975, in press.Deets, A . Q. Age-mate or twin sibl ing: Effects onmonk e y age-mate interactions during infancy.Developmental Psychology, 1974, 10 ,913-928.Gewir tz ,J. L .,&Gewir tz ,H. B.St im ulus condi t ions , in -f a n t behav iors , and social learning in four Israel ichi ldrear ing env i ronments : A p re l i m i na ry r e por t il -lus t ra t ing differences i n e nv i ronme nt and be hav i orbe tween the only and the "younges t " chi ld. InB. M . Foss (Ed.) , Determinants o f infant behavior(Vol. 3). New York: Wiley, 1965.Hande l , G. Psychological study of whole families.Psychological Bulletin, 1965, 63 , 19-41.Hilton, I. D. Differences in the behavior of motherst o w a r d f irst- and later-born children. Journal of Per-sonality and Social Psychology, 1967, 7, 282-290.Irish, D. P. Sibling interaction: A neglected aspect infami ly life research. Social Forces, 1964,42 ,279-288.Koch, H. L. The relation ofp r i m a r y m e n ta l abilitiesinf ive- and six-year-olds to sex of child andcharac te r i s t i c sof hiss ibl ing.Child Development, 1954,25,209-223.K o c h , H. L. The relation ofcertain fo r m a l attributes ofsiblings to att i tudes held toward each other andtoward the i r parents . Monographs of the Society forResearch in Child Development. 1960,25, 1-124.Lask o , J. K. Parent behav ior toward f i r s t and secondchi ldren. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 1954, 49 ,97-137.M e a d , M ., &H e y m a n , K . The family . N e wYork: Mac-m i l l an , 1965.Minuchin , S ., Monta l v o , B ., G ue rne y , G . G., J r . ,R o s m a n , B .L ., & Schumer , F . Families of the slums:

An exploration of their structure and treatment. N ewYork: Basic Books, 1967.Olson, D. R. On conceptua l strategies. In J. S.Brune r ,R. R. Olver , & P . Greenfield (Eds.) , Studies incognitive growth. New York: Wiley, 1966.Rosenberg, B .G.,& Sut ton-Sm i th, B. The relationshipof ordinal posi t ions and sibl ingsexstatus tocogni t i veabilities. Psychonomic Science, 1964,/ ,81-82.Rosenberg, B .G., &Sutton-Smith, B .Sibling associa-t ion, fami ly size, an d cogni tive abi l i t ies. Journal o fGenetic Psychology, 1966, 109, 271-279.Rosenberg, B .G., & Sut ton-Smi th , B .Siblinga gespac-in g effects upon cogni t ion. Developmental Psychology,1969, /,661-668.Rothba r t , M. K. Bi r tho r d e r and m other-chi ld inte rac -t ion in an achievement s i tua t ion. Journal o f Per-sonality an d Social Psychology, 1971,/7, 113-120.Schooler, C . Birth order effects: N ot here, not now

Psychological Bulletin, 1972, 78, 161-175.Schooler, C . Birth order effects: A reply to Breland.Psychological Bulletin, 1973,80 , 213-214.Schoonover , S. M. The re lationship of intel l igence andac h i e v e me n t tob i r th order , sex of sibl ing,and age in-t e rva l . Journal of Educational Psychology, 1959, 50 ,143-146.Sut ton-Smi th , B. Role repl i ca t ion and reversa l in play .Merril l-Palmer Quarterly, 1966, 12 , 285-298.Su t ton-Smi th , B ., & Rosenberg, B. G. Model ing andreactive components of sibl ing interaction. In J . Hil l(Ed. ) , Child psychology (Vol. 3):M innesota Symposiaon Child Psychology. Minneapol i s : Univers i tyofM i n -nesota Press, 1969.Sut ton-Sm i th , B., & Rosenbe rg, B. G. The sibling.N ewYork: Hol t , Rinehar t & Winston, 1970.Zajonc , R . B.,&M a r k u s ,G. B.Birth order andintel lec-t u a l de v e l opme nt . Psychological Review, 1975, 82,74-88.

(Received February 24, 1975)