An interesting study found that the more unfamiliar a student's name is, the more likely it is that there will be poor academic performance and even psychological problems. The two professors believe that a rare name will have a negative psychological impact on its owner. Many of the significant effects on names on behavior are attributed to self-suggestion. However, what is the truth?
In 1948, two professors at Harvard University published a study of 3,300 newly graduated boys. The study explored the impact of student names on their academic performance. The results showed that the more the students' names were, the more likely they were to have poor academic performance or even psychological problems. The two professors believe that a rare name will have a negative psychological impact on its owner.
Since then, scholars have continued to study the “influence of names” and have repeatedly repeated the conclusions of the 1948 study. Some recent studies have shown that names can affect a person's admissions, career choices, address of residence, marriage partner, income level, stock selection, and job quality. The name even determines whether we will donate to the victims of the disaster - if our name is similar to the name of a typhoon, we are more likely to donate money to the relief fund after the hurricane.
Many of the significant effects on names on behavior are attributed to self-suggestion. We are generally attracted to people or things that are most similar to ourselves. The logic of this is that we value and recognize our names, so we prefer things that have something in common with our names.
However, this view may not be able to withstand further scrutiny. Uri Simonsohn, a psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, questioned many studies that claimed to have "self-suggestion", arguing that these studies were drawn through unreliable statistical analysis. "They are like a magician and they show you a trick." He said, "You will ask, I know that it is not true, but how did they get it out? Everything is in the way." Simonson pointed out Some studies have problems that are not known about the "base rate." "Base rate" refers to the frequency with which something (such as a name) appears throughout the population. He gave an example: People who think that Dan is probably more like a doctor may be more attractive, but we have to ponder: There are many doctors named Dan, is it just because the person named Dan is originally There are many people in other industries who call this name?
Some researchers are more cautious in assessing the name effect. In 1984, psychologist Debra Crisp and her colleagues found that a more common name was indeed more popular, but had no effect on one's academic achievement. In 2012, psychologists Hui Bai and Kathleen Briggs concluded that names at best have only a very limited impact on people's unconsciousness if any. Although a person's name unconsciously affects his or her thinking, it has little impact on people's decisions. Subsequent research has also questioned the link between name and longevity, career choice and success, place of residence and mate preference, academic achievement, and so on.
The economist David Figlio conducted a long-term longitudinal study from a school district in Florida from 1994 to 2001. He found that the child's name would have an impact on the teacher, which would be treated differently by the latter, which would eventually lead to differences in academic performance. In the study, Figlio controlled some variables and compared only the differences between siblings whose names had different national characteristics in the same family. His findings suggest that teachers whose names are associated with lower socioeconomic status or blacks have lower expectations for teachers and their performances are better than those with "high status" and "non-black" names.
Economists Steven Levitt and Roland Fryer have found that names have a relatively reliable correlation with the impression of socioeconomic status, and the impression of socioeconomic status will further affect a child's life. This study found similar findings to the 1948 study. But when Stephen and Rowland ruled out the background of the children's background, the "name effect" disappeared, indicating that the name itself is not the real cause of the "name effect."When we see a name, even if we don't know anything about it, we can't help but associate names with certain social characteristics and then impose those connections on the parties. However, such a connection is not on the surface. If it is rational enough, we should not only ask "what is in this name", but also ask "what is the name of the name, and what information it implies."