Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Rich lavish most love on first child

This article shows the findings of a research published for academics from the anthropology department of UCL (University College London) about the disproportionate attention and care that the modern couples give to their first biorn in comparison with their minor children. The researchers support that this fact is culturally ingrained 'cause it can come from the class tradition of primogeniture (something very important in royal family and aristocracy). Another find is that the extra attention to oldest child is more pronounced in rich families than in poorer families.

The study was applied to 14.000 british families (!!) to examine how much time and attention gave each of their children and the results were clear: oldest children were receiving more attention and care of their parents. This situation creates the called one “later-born disadvantage”, 'cause extra care may lead to greater success in later life for older childrens, in decline of their siblings.

This findings were very clear for rich families, though one finds the same trend in poorer families, it is much weaker. The anthropologist explain this fact because "there are so few resources it is harder to give one child much more time, love or possessions than another".

The link for this article is:

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article5733620.ece

2 comments:

  1. The article you have chosen is exciting. It is an issue that demonstrates the potential of anthropological sciences in studying the behavior of human families. However, such a study would be interesting in poor families

    Greetings!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very nice, Maia.

    Just a suggestion. Don´t write down "´cause". Academic writing is formal.

    Also, worry about parallel construction. The word is "findings"

    This construction is not right. "The study was applied to 14.000 british families (!!) to examine how much time and attention gave each of their children and the results were clear.." Can you try to correct it?
    Finally, you say, "the anthropologist explainS"

    You get 2 points.

    Paula

    ReplyDelete