Relative Age Effects in Dutch Adolescents: Concurrent and Prospective Analyses

Abstract

The literature on relative age position effects is rather inconsistent. In this study we examined intra-classroom age position (or relative age) effects on Dutch adolescents’ school progress and performance (as rated by teachers), physical development, temperamental development (fear and frustration), and depressive symptoms, all adjusted for age at the time of measurement. Data were derived from three waves of Tracking Adolescents' Individuals Lives Survey (TRAILS) of 2230 Dutch adolescents (baseline mean age 11.1, SD = 0.6, 51% girls). Albeit relative age predicted school progress (grade retention ORs = 0.83 for each month, skipped grade OR = 1.47, both p<.001), our key observation is the absence of substantial developmental differences as a result of relative age position in Dutch adolescents with a normative school trajectory, in contrast to most literature. For adolescents who had repeated a grade inverse relative age effects were observed, in terms of physical development and school performance, as well as on depressive symptoms, favoring the relatively young. Cross-cultural differences in relative age effect may be partly explained by the decision threshold for grade retention.

Polygenic risk for schizophrenia and season of birth within the UK Biobank cohort

“…Although not a direct aim of our study, we also note that the absence of heritability effects on season of birth implies that other traits that exhibit relative age effects, for example personality traits, sporting ability, and general academic performance (Jeronimus et al 2015), are similarly unlikely to represent gene environment correlation; rather, as widely interpreted, they most likely result from differential levels of maturity in school and other cohort intakes. However, some cognitive phenotypes exhibit season of birth fluctuations beyond effects attributable simply to the timing of school intake.…”

“How Much is that Player in the Window? The One with the Early Birthday?” Relative Age Influences the Value of the Best Soccer Players, but Not the Best Businesspeople

“…While the division of children into age groups based on their birth-date has the well-meant intention to provide equal opportunities for participation and success, paradoxically this is not the case as there is a systematic exclusion of children born further away from the cutoff date (usually later in the year if the cutoff date is the 1st of January). Here, it is important to note that Relative Age Effects have also been found in the broader educational system (Pidgeon, 1965 ), albeit the pattern is not very consistent across studies (e.g., Jeronimus et al, 2015 for a recent investigation). Of further relevance, Matsubayashi and Ueda ( 2015 ) argued that relative younger students seem to take less desirable career paths that might be associated with poorer psychological health compared to students with a relative age advantage.…”

Teachers’ perceptions of behavioral problems in Dutch primary education pupils: The role of relative age

“…A growing number of studies suggest that in this signaling function the relatively ‘young behavior’ of early pupils gives them a much greater likelihood of being diagnosed with a disorder, including Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. This so-called ‘relative age effect’ [ 18 ] has also been demonstrated to increase the likelihood of pupils having special educational needs [ 8 , 19 ], be diagnosed with lower intelligence [ 20 ] and learning difficulties [ 21 ], attain lower physical education achievements [ 22 , 23 , 24 ], lower performance during the school career [ 25 , 26 ], and being bullied [ 27 ].…”