Timing conception to produce the best baseball player possible
I can't imagine many people actually attempt to time their child's conception for this reason, but Greg Spira's article from Slate.com reports there is a statistically significant number of US-born professional baseball players who were born in the month of August. It just so happens that the age-cutoff for almost all non-school affiliated baseball leagues in the US was July 31 for over 55 years.
The theory goes like this: 12 months can make a huge difference in the development of 11 and 12 year old kids. Because of this, the kids on the older side of the cutoff (Aug, Sep, Oct) tend to perform better on average. Due to this, the older kids have more confidence, more desire, and are generally given more opportunities to succeed in the game. This all leads to more US-born pro baseball players born in the month of August. Other countries didn't have a uniform cutoff date, so the effect is not present for them.
When I first read the article, I couldn't help but think this was just another example of people making numbers and studies fit into a story, where causation isn't really present. I despise local news "teasers" that take one medical study and make them sound like the truth. "How can eating broccoli help you organize your closet? ....find out tonight at eleven!"
After doing a bit of research, however, I discovered there is an entire field of study devoted to this effect. Social scientists call it the relative age effect. Now just because social scientists have studied this effect doesn't mean that all of their conclusions are true. It does, however, lead to more data and more conclusions for people like me to mull over. What I discovered is that there are many theories of the application of the relative age effect including other sports (hockey and soccer), self-esteem, academic achievement, and even suicide.
So in the end, this post is not so much a rant as it is a revelation. Instead of ranting about how the media always quickly jumps to conclusions based on limited data, I've had a bit of a revelation and have been exposed to a new field of study.
The theory goes like this: 12 months can make a huge difference in the development of 11 and 12 year old kids. Because of this, the kids on the older side of the cutoff (Aug, Sep, Oct) tend to perform better on average. Due to this, the older kids have more confidence, more desire, and are generally given more opportunities to succeed in the game. This all leads to more US-born pro baseball players born in the month of August. Other countries didn't have a uniform cutoff date, so the effect is not present for them.
When I first read the article, I couldn't help but think this was just another example of people making numbers and studies fit into a story, where causation isn't really present. I despise local news "teasers" that take one medical study and make them sound like the truth. "How can eating broccoli help you organize your closet? ....find out tonight at eleven!"
After doing a bit of research, however, I discovered there is an entire field of study devoted to this effect. Social scientists call it the relative age effect. Now just because social scientists have studied this effect doesn't mean that all of their conclusions are true. It does, however, lead to more data and more conclusions for people like me to mull over. What I discovered is that there are many theories of the application of the relative age effect including other sports (hockey and soccer), self-esteem, academic achievement, and even suicide.
So in the end, this post is not so much a rant as it is a revelation. Instead of ranting about how the media always quickly jumps to conclusions based on limited data, I've had a bit of a revelation and have been exposed to a new field of study.
Comments