Fairly different followings I’d imagine: an animal rights activist, a tech consultant/blogger, a physicist, and a marketing guy in Singapore.
-
-
I do know indirectly via other polls that my followers are strongly STEM biased. So if that’s part of the explanation, it would apply at least in my case.pic.twitter.com/QMhXldb5tZ
Show this thread -
Note: the bigger the sibling-set, the stronger the left-tail clipping effect. If you have many siblings, like Brian, gap between oldest and youngest will be bigger. If you are oldest/middle and joined Twitter at ~22, almost no chance that 5+ years younger sibling will be here.
Show this thread -
And finally, to the extent twitter attracts a “type” independent of age, even in steady state there’s going to be tail clipping. If you’re 20 and joined today, older sibling is probably also on here, but younger one likely will not join. So it’s not a 1-time early adopter effect
Show this thread -
A reasonable null hypothesis is that there's no birth-order effect, and it's all artifact of tech cycles.
@tomguarriello pointed me to Judith Harris' Nurture Assumption as key ref here. I haven't read it. Just noting it here in case anyone wants to dig. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nurture_Assumption …Show this thread -
Of course, gotta also note usual caveats: absence of evidence is not evidence of evidence, can't prove a negative, replication crisis in social psych etc., but the unfoundedness of several specific birth-order effect hypotheses does call the general idea into question as well.
Show this thread -
Above my statistics pay grade, but clearly if you do a convolution of a moving unstable distribution like a series of intersecting adoption curves spaced 2-5 years apart, with a symmetric one like birth order, you should get an asymmetric result.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.