Identity Selection and the Social Construction of Birthdays.

Brett W Pelham,Tracy Dehart,William Von Hippel,Curtis D Hardin,H Anna Han,Mitsuru Shimizu

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.693776

Abstract

We argue that rather than being a wholly random event, birthdays are sometimes selected by parents. We further argue that such effects have changed over time and are the result of important psychological processes. Long ago, U.S. American parents greatly overclaimed holidays as their children's birthdays. These effects were larger for more important holidays, and they grew smaller as births moved to hospitals and became officially documented. These effects were exaggerated for ethnic groups that deeply valued specific holidays. Parents also overclaimed well-liked calendar days and avoided disliked calendar days as their children's birthdays. However, after birthday selection effects virtually disappeared in the 1950s and 1960s, they reappeared after the emergence of labor induction and planned cesarean birth. For example, there are many fewer modern U.S. births than would be expected on Christmas Day. In addition, modern parents appear to use birth medicalization to avoid undesirable birthdays (Friday the 13th). We argue that basking in reflect glory, ethnic identity processes, and superstitions such as magical thinking all play a role in birthday selection effects. Discussion focuses on the power of social identity in day-to-day judgment and decision-making.

Highlights

In the United States today, about 98% of births take place at hospitals
Do the birth depression effects observed in Virginia and Nevada apply to the United States as a whole? Do they occur because of artificial induction of labor? The data in Figure 8 suggest that the answer to both questions is yes
Do the patterns of planned vs. unplanned cesarean births parallel those for induced vs. non-induced vaginal births? Recall that it was possible to address this question because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) separates cesarean births into those in which (a) there was a trial of labor and (b) the cesarean birth was planned in advance

Summary

Introduction

The exact timing of such births is very carefully documented. In 1900, virtually all U.S births took place at home, often without any formal medical supervision (MacDorman et al, 2012, 2014). For many U.S parents in 1900, getting a birth certificate took time. This meant that there was some wiggle room in the assignment of children’s dates of birth. Parents might wish to claim a positive social identity for their child—or avoid a birthday associated with tragedy. Any such birthday selection effects might have decreased over time, as births became better documented. The goals of the current paper are to (a) examine birthday selection effects (including how they have changed over time) and (b) examine some of the likely drivers of such effects

Objectives

Results

Conclusion