At first glance I did not believe the article could be accurate for all first-born children. Knowing that I am smarter than my sister it was obvious that the article could encompass all cases. After reading the article it was clear that this experiment was misleading. The sole variable that birth order is correlated with the smarter child was not feasible. After only studying previous research and not performing and new experimentation to collect their own data, this experiment is no more reliable than the study it was based on. Zajone and Markus' theory is too general to be applicable in any real world environment. The average intellectual climate theory proves nothing. Making up arbitrary values to fit your data is only useful in math class where everything is abstract. As well as the fact that the data for the experiment was only surveyed males, which explains how it is not applicable to my sister and myself. Although Zajone and Markus claim that the study in which they took their data from (Belmont and Marolla), "for the most part, confirmed their data." This information cannot be completely accurate for reasons of only one variable, and oblivion to the opposite gender. Considering that there were neither statistics nor any proof about the correlation, it would be best to rely on facts, and not the authors' close-minded experiment. Zajone and Markus did not say that only birth order affects one's intellectual level, after all other factors lead to intelligence such as situation of the family, genetics, and how the parents raise their children. But regardless of that insight they chose to rely strictly on birth order as they tried to prove their hypothesis that the first-born is smarter.
             ...