Articles about names often note that, whether you like it or not, others will judge and stereotype your child by her name. Depending on the study cited, you’ll see that people generally consider:
Bertha a “fat” name, Brian “macho and dynamic,” Justin “vigorous,
Rebecca ” sweet,” April “sprightly,” Kevin “popular and virile”
Harvey “somewhat of a klutz,” Percy “is reportedly a “weak” name,
Whereas Eric is perceived as “very strong.”

In a 1963 study reported in the British Journal of Psychiatry, a British psychologist found that John is nearly always thought to be trustworthy, Robin young, and Tony sociable. Agnes and Matilda were considered unattractive, Ann passive. The most unusual name in this study-Grizelda-received the largest number of mixed ratings, a phenomenon the researcher chalked up to the fact that people probably had no views either way. When asked whether Grizelda was trustworthy, sociable, or kind, respondents jotted down “yes” “no” more or less at random. This finding suggests that unusual and rare names are less quickly stereotyped. In other words, a child with a distinctive name may be able to “write her own meanings” on her name more easily than a child given a common name people already have many preconceived notions about.

Other common girls’ names and their stereotypes (drawn from several different studies) include:

*Amanda - cultured
*Amy - active
*Angela - attractive and a bit willful
*Ann - ladylike and honest but rather plain
*Emily - a wallflower
*Jennifer - young but old - fashionable
*Jessica - beautiful and ambitious
*Katharine - determined, strong-willed,and pretty
*Lisa - popular but frail
*Margaret - trustworthy and kind but a bit dowdy
*Mary - womanly. Active, and wholesome
*Patricia - Plain - looking
*Vicky - very sexy and popular

Stereotypes for boys’ names include:

*Anthony - tall, thin, and elegant
*Benjamin - not to be trusted
*Charles - popular and masculine but not very athletic
*Christopher - intelligent and hardworking
*Cyril - old and unattractive
*David - good, strong,wise,serious,sociable,masculine
*Harold - weak, foolish, passive, and humorless
*Ian - young and honest but unaggressive
*James - an all -around winner
*Kevin - virile and quite popular
*Robert - shy and lacking in confidence
*William - honest but unattractive and unassertive

What can you make of these “results” and other stereotypes?

Some “experts” imply that giving your baby an unpopular name like Bertha or Harold may handicap your child for life. They argue that we tend to see ourselves as others see us, and so a name with negative connotations can hamper a child’s emotional development. Such warnings can be particularly angst-provoking for parents who take them seriously. Shouldn’t you be quiet concerned about saddling your child with a negatively stereotyped name? No. When naming your baby, there are several reasons not to take “findings” like those mentioned above too seriously.

For one thing, overly simplified stereotypes like these reveal only how a bunch of people viewed these names on average. When you look at the research more closely, you find that nearly every name had both advocates and detractors. In British Journal of Psychiatry study, for example, only 35 percent of the people polled though a boy named William would be good- looking, but those 35 percent did think he’d be handsome. (And let’s face it, anytime any of us has a trait, talent, or ability one in three people applauds, we’re doing pretty well.) Also, such stereotypes apply only to names in the abstract; once anyone actually meets bright- eyed, perky, adorable baby Wiliam, any preconceived negative ideas about his looks will no doubt instantly vanish. Also, name “images” change over time. Now that England has a cute Prince William, a lot more people will probably stereotype the name as “cute”.
Another reason not to take such findings too seriously is that stereotypes can vary considerably on some scores depending on how the name is spelled (suggesting these generalities about names are hardly set in stone). Intriguingly, 90 percent of those in a British study thought a girl named Ann would be young. But when an e was added, making the name Anne, the number who considered her young plunged to 78 percent. Would Lynda be rated as “feminine and energetic” as Linda has been? Would Caren, Karin, Karen, and Caryn each be stereotyped in exactly the same ways? If the findings of this study are any indication, probably not.

How people stereotype a name also depends on whether they perceive the bearer as upper-, middle-, or lower-class. Dr. Richard L. Zweigenhaft, a psychologist at Guilford College in Greensboro, North Carolina, asked his psychology students to judge a number of names, including Mckinley and Talmadge. Mckinley was generally rated as “upper- class,” “overconfident,” “intolerant,” and “cold” the picture of aristocratic insensitivity and aloofness. In contrast, Talmadge was considered “lower-class,” “bad,” “weak,” “stupid,” “uncertain,” “weak- willed,” “cowardly” in short, everything unpleasant. But the ratings changed dramatically, depending on whether the students thought the baby’s father was an unemployed laborer or a physician. If the father was a physician, the name Mckinley was rated as more “good,” whereas Talmadge was considered more “strong” and “strong-willed” than if the students believed the father was an unemployed laborer.

Also, name stereotyping studies rarely if ever take into account the effect of nicknames. How, for example would the stereotypes of Mckinley’s name change if all his friends called him Mack? Or what if Talmadge was often called just Tal?

As you can see, there are countless subtle variables to consider before you can say with any certainty that Harold is a “bad” name and James is a “good” one. In fact, so many variables contribute to stereotyping that it’s really not worth worrying too much about it. Certainly, if you read that a certain name Cyril, for example was rated very negatively by nearly everyone (as, unfortunately, Cyril was in one study), you might want to avoid that name or consider using a shorter version or alternative spelling, such as Cyrill or Cy. Generally, though, most names get such as mixed reviews that the findings are of more use to scientists who are trying to devise more name studies than they are to you as a parent. No scientist yet has ever found that calling a baby Cyril or any other name will doom him to an unhappy future or that calling a boy David will guarantee his future success.