Psychologists often test hypotheses by constructing vignettes depicting people engaging in behavior and displaying characteristics designed to operationalize specific variables. People described in these vignettes are typically given names, but names have a variety of connotations that could lead to unwanted variance between conditions of an experiment and in other ways have implications for the results of a study. An up-to-date source of information to help guide the selection of names would be useful for researchers. Participants from four different regions of the United States rated a large sample of names in terms of perceived age, warmth, and competence. The full set of names is presented, along with some simple demonstration studies concretely illustrating the implications of name choice.
AndersonT.SchmittP. R. (1990). Unique first names in male and female psychiatric inpatients. The Journal of Social Psychology, 130, 835-837. doi:10.1080/00224545.1990.9924638
2.
BertrandM.MullainathanS. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. The American Economic Review, 94, 991-1013.
3.
BodenhausenG. V.WyerR. S. (1985). Effects of stereotypes in decision making and information-processing strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 267-282. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.48.2.267
4.
BrownE. R.DiekmanA. B. (2013). Differential effects of female and male candidates on system justification: Can cracks in the glass ceiling foster complacency?European Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 299-306.
5.
BruningJ. L.HusaF. T. (1972). Given names and stereotyping. Developmental Psychology, 7(1), 91. doi:10.1037/h0032861
6.
BuchananB.BruningJ. L. (1971). Connotative meanings of first names and nicknames on three dimensions. Journal of Social Psychology, 85, 143-144.
7.
ChonodyJ. M. (2016). Positive and negative ageism: The role of benevolent and hostile sexism. Journal of Women and Social Work, 31, 207-218.
8.
ChristopherA. N. (1998). The psychology of names: An empirical reexamination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1173-1195. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1998.tb01673.x
9.
CohenJ.CohenP.WestS. G.AikenL. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
CronbachL. J.GleserG. C.NandaH.RajaratnamN. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements. New York, NY: Wiley.
11.
DionK.BerscheidE.WalsterE. (1972). What is beautiful is good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24, 285-290. doi:10.1037/h0033731
12.
EaglyA. H.MladinicA.OttoS. (1991). Are women evaluated more favorably than men? An analysis of attitudes, beliefs, and emotions. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 15, 203-216. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.1991.tb00792.x
13.
EvansS. C.RobertsM. C.KeeleyJ. W.BlossomJ. B.AmaroC. M.GarciaA. M.. . . ReedG. M. (2015). Vignette methodologies for studying clinicians’ decision-making: Validity, utility, and application in ICD-11 field studies. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 15, 160-170. doi:10.1016/j.ijchp.2014.12.001
14.
FiskeS. T. (2017). Prejudices in cultural contexts: Shared stereotypes (gender, age) versus variable stereotypes (race, ethnicity, religion). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 791-799. doi:10.1177/1745691617708204
15.
FiskeS. T.CuddyA. C.GlickP. (2007). Universal dimensions of social cognition: Warmth and competence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 77-83. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
16.
GaddisS. M. (2015). Discrimination in the credential society: An audit study of race and college selectivity in the labor market. Social Forces, 93, 1451-1479.
17.
GaddisS. M. (2017). Racial/ethnic perceptions from Hispanic names: Selecting names to test for discrimination. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 3, 1-11. doi:10.1177/2378023117737193
18.
GarwoodS. G.SulzerJ. L.LevineD. W.CoxL.KaplanV. (1983). Should Henrietta be punished or rewarded? The effects of name desirability on responsibility attribution and sanction assignment. Names, 31, 318-333.
19.
GerhardsteinK. R.AndersonV. N. (2010). There’s more than meets the eye: Facial appearance and evaluations of transsexual people. Sex Roles, 62, 361-373. doi:10.1007/s11199-010-9746-x
20.
GreitemeyerT. (2009). Stereotypes of singles: Are singles what we think?European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 368-383.
21.
HarariH.McDavidJ. W. (1973). Name stereotypes and teachers’ expectations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 222-225. doi:10.1037/h0034978
22.
HigginsE. T.RholesW. S.JonesC. R. (1977). Category accessibility and impression formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 141-154. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(77)80007-3
23.
HughesR. (1998). Considering the vignette technique and its application to a study of drug injecting and HIV risk and safer behaviour. Sociology of Health & Illness, 20, 381-400.
24.
ImhoffR.KochA. (2017). How orthogonal are the Big Two of social perception? On the curvilinear relation between agency and communion. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 122-137. doi:10.1177/1745691616657334
25.
JoubertC. E. (1993). Personal names as a psychological variable. Psychological Reports, 73(3, Pt. 2), 1123-1145.
26.
JoubertC. E. (1994). Relation of name frequency to the perception of social class in given names. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79(1, Pt. 2), 623-626. doi:10.2466/pms.1994.79.1.623
27.
JuddC. M.James-HawkinsL.YzerbytV.KashimaY. (2005). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 899-913. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.899
28.
KaplanM. F. (1974). Context-induced shifts in personality trait evaluation: A comment on the evaluative halo effect and meaning change interpretations. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 891-895. doi:10.1037/h0037274
29.
KasofJ. (1993). Sex bias in the naming of stimulus persons. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 140-163.
30.
KennyD. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
31.
LawsonE. D. (1984). Personal names: 100 years of social science contributions. Names, 32, 45-73.
Mueller-JohnsonK.TogliaM. P.SweeneyC. D.CeciS. J. (2007). The perceived credibility of older adults as witnesses and its relation to ageism. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 25, 355-375. doi:10.1002/bsl.765
34.
NelsonT. D. (2005). Ageism: Prejudice against our feared future self. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 207-221. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00402.x
35.
NewmanL. S.DuffK. J.BaumeisterR. F. (1997). A new look at defensive projection: Thought suppression, accessibility, and biased person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 980-1001. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.980
36.
NorthM. S.FiskeS. T. (2012). An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 982-997. doi:10.1037/a0027843
37.
O’DellL.CrafterS.de AbreuG.ClineT. (2012). The problem of interpretation in vignette methodology in research with young people. Qualitative Research, 12, 702-714. doi:10.1177/1468794112439003
38.
O’SullivanC. S.ChenA.MohapatraS.SigelmanL.LewisE. (1988). Voting in ignorance: The politics of smooth-sounding names. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 18, 1094-1106. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1988.tb01195.x
39.
PagerD. (2007). The use of field experiments for studies of employment discrimination: Contributions, critiques, and directions for the future. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 609, 104-133.
40.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2001). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
41.
RaykovT.MarcoulidesG. A. (2010). Introduction to psychometric theory. New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
RosenbergS.NelsonC.VivekananthanP. S. (1968). A multidimensional approach to the structure of personality impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 283-294.
43.
RosetteA. S.TostL. P. (2010). Agentic women and communal leadership: How role prescriptions confer advantage to top women leaders. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 221-235.
44.
RuthigJ. C.HolfeldB. (2016). Positive thinking and social perceptions of a male vs. female peer’s cancer experience. Journal of Social Psychology, 156, 154-167.
45.
SchneiderM. C. (2014). The effects of gender-bending on candidate evaluations. Journal of Women Politics & Policy, 35, 55-77.
46.
SheppardD. (1963). Characteristics associated with Christian names. British Journal of Psychology, 54, 167-174. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1963.tb00872.x
47.
SlepianM. L.GalinskyA. D. (2016). The voiced pronunciation of initial phonemes predicts the gender of names. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 509-527. doi:10.1037/pspa0000041
48.
SnyderM.UranowitzS. W. (1978). Reconstructing the past: Some cognitive consequences of person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 941-950. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.36.9.941
49.
SrullT. K.WyerR. S. (1979). The role of category accessibility in the interpretation of information about persons: Some determinants and implications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1660-1672. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1660
50.
SuitnerC.MaassA. (2008). The role of valence in perception of agency and communion. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1073-1082. doi:10.1002/ejsp.525
51.
ThorndikeE. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 4, 25-29. doi:10.1037/h0071663
52.
TopolinskiS.MaschmannI. T.PecherD.WinkielmanP. (2014). Oral approach–avoidance: Affective consequences of muscular articulation dynamics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 885-896. doi:10.1037/a0036477
53.
UhlmannE. L.ZhuL. (2014). Acts, persons, and intuitions: Person-centered cues and gut reactions to harmless transgressions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 279-285.
54.
Van BavelJ. J.Mende-SiedleckiP.BradyW. J.ReineroD. A. (2016). Contextual sensitivity in scientific reproducibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113, 6454-6459.
55.
WeineE. R.KimN. S.LincolnA. K. (2016). Understanding lay assessments of alcohol use disorder: Need for treatment and associated stigma. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 51, 98-105. doi:10.1093/alcalc/agv069
56.
WojciszkeB.AbeleA. E. (2008). The primacy of communion over agency and its reversals in evaluations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 1139-1147. doi:10.1002/ejsp.549
57.
YoungR. K.KennedyA. H.NewhouseA.BrowneP.ThiessenD. (1993). The effects of names on perception of intelligence, popularity, and competence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1770-1788. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1993.tb01065.x
58.
ZwebnerY.SellierA.RosenfeldN.GoldenbergJ.MayoR. (2017). We look like our names: The manifestation of name stereotypes in facial appearance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 527-554. doi:10.1037/pspa0000076
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
