Литература использованная в 14 главе
14. What Parents Can Do
1. Lykken, 1995.
2. Lykken, 1995, p. 82.
3. Denrell & Le Mens, 2007, offer a novel theory of social influence that
explains how parents influence their children’s choice of a profession or their
leisure-time activities. People who are in close contact often have similar
attitudes toward such things, not because they influence each others’ attitudes
directly, but because their close association has a direct effect on "the
activities and objects an individual gets exposed to” (p. 398). For example, let’s
say that B is the parent of A. "If B influences the activities A will sample, it
is not necessary that A identifies with B, that A wants to comply with B, or
that A regards the opinions of B as informative for social influence to occur” (p.
399). Thus, if B is a physician, A will "sample” more activities or objects
associated with the medical profession.
4. There is evidence from one twin study (Waller & Shaver, 1994) that
children may learn at home their attitudes toward romantic love. However, a twin
study of divorce (McGue & Lykken, 1992, discussed in Chapter 13) yielded
contradictory results: twins’ experience of their parents’ marriage does not
appear to affect the success or failure of their own marriages. With regard to
parenting behaviors, a study of adult adoptees (Rowe, 2002) showed that people
evidently do not learn how to be a parent by observing the parents who brought
them up.
5. Serbin, Powlishta, &Gulko, 1993.
6. I now have a better explanation for within-group differences of this kind
(Harris, 2006a).
7. Heckathorn, 1992.
8. Reduces competition between siblings: Sulloway, 1996. Parents occupy
family niches: Tesser, 1988.
9. For an update on the controversy over birth order, see Chapter 4 of No Two
Alike (Harris, 2006a).
10. Thornton, 1995, pp. 3-4, 43.
11. Mathews, 1988, p. 217.
12. Thornton, 1995; Moore, 1996.
13. Gottfried, Gottfried, Bathurst, & Guerin, 1994; Winner, 1996.
14. Winner, 1996, 1997.
15. Ladd, Profilet, & Hart, 1992.
16. A higher proportion of smart kids: Rutter, 1983. Less likely to get into
trouble, more likely to be rejected: Kupersmidt, Griesler, DeRosier, Patterson,
& Davis, 1995.
17. Quoted in Norman, 1995, p. 66.
18. Hartocollis, 1998.
19. Now called the Intel Science Talent Search.
20. As mentioned in Chapter 8, children who lack normal contacts with peers—due,
for example, to chronic illness—run an elevated risk of social and psychological
maladjustment (Ireys et al., 1994; Pless & Nolan, 1991).
21. Brody, 1997, p. F7; Clark, 1995, p. 1970.
22. Baumeister, Campbell, Krueger, & Vohs, 2003, p. 1. See also Dawes, 1994,
pp. 9-10.
23. Violence: Baumeister, Smart, & Boden, 1996, p. 5. Risky behavior: Smith,
Gerrard, & Gibbons, 1997.
24. Zervas & Sherman, 1994.
25. Rovee-Collier, 1993.
26. Poison the relationship between siblings: Brody & Stoneman, 1994. Least
favored children in adulthood: Bedford, 1992.
27. Anders & Taylor, 1994.
28. Bruer, 1997.
29. IQ correlations in adult adoptees: Plomin, Fulker, Corley, & DeFries,
1997. No scientific basis: Bruer, 1997.
30. L. J. Miller (1997, September 10), Einstein and IQ (a Netnews website
posting in sci.psychology.misc).
31. Lancy, 2008; Rogoff, Mistry, Goncii, & Mosier, 1993.
32. Reich, 1997, pp. 10-11.
33. Edwards, 1992.
34. Jenkins, Rasbash, Sc O’Connor, 2003; McHale, Crouter, McGuire, &
Updegraff, 1995; Lancy, 2008.
35. Goodall, 1986, p. 282.
36. Watson, 1928, pp. 69, 70.