Boys With Unpopular Names More Likely to Commit Crimes

1. mother theresa
   January 30th, 2009 at 8:53 pm

   So did they study a name/crime link with girls' names?
   Chauvinist pigs.

2. Jerse
   January 30th, 2009 at 8:56 pm

   I know a guy named Alec - but everyone just calls him Mugsy...

   Good guy though...

3. rucksackjack
   January 30th, 2009 at 9:52 pm

   Dude, Johnny Cash knew this 40 years ago.

4. Timmothy
   January 30th, 2009 at 9:53 pm

   Does anyone believe this crap?

5. violet
   January 30th, 2009 at 9:54 pm

   Oh my god: Hollywood has been spawning a future criminal syndicate. Pilot Inspektor? Suri Cruise? Kal-El, Scout, AUDIO SCIENCE...

6. Persephone
   January 30th, 2009 at 10:09 pm

   If you want to guarantee that your child ends up on death row, be sure his middle name is Wayne.

7. Johnny Cat
   January 30th, 2009 at 10:27 pm

   this is a crock. If you'd like something good, I have a crockpot of soup over here. Minestrone.

8. Steohawk
   January 31st, 2009 at 1:45 am

   According to one study conducted by the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, a decline in the number of pirates corresponds to the recent rise in global temperatures.

   In other words, correlation doesn't necessarily imply causality.

9. kevin
   January 31st, 2009 at 3:26 am

   It is more likely that parents that don't put much thought into their kid's names, don't put much thought into raising their kids.

10. DrChoy
    January 31st, 2009 at 9:16 am

    @7 Inversely if you wish you child to become a crime fighter make sure their last name is Wayne

11. red
    January 31st, 2009 at 9:50 am

    unpopular by who's standards? name trends change over the years.

12. Paulio
    January 31st, 2009 at 10:06 am

    I'm not sure if the study went into any depth or not about why the kids were named as such. A similar study was done in the book "Freakonomics" which I suggest everyone should read. It seems in reality that usually lower income, crime ridden, etc. areas of the country, have mothers that are more likely to give their kids obscure names. This does not imply that the name is what caused them to be criminals, but rather; where they come from. This study was geared toward the obscure black kids names that you hear so often, like "Juwan", "Guquanda", or whatever else you can come up with to make your baby "special".
    As steohawk said: "In other words, correlation doesn’t necessarily imply causality."

13. Paulio
    January 31st, 2009 at 10:08 am

    @kevin- exactly!

14. Chris
    January 31st, 2009 at 10:17 am

    Agree with Kevin, too.

    Also, the "traditional" names tend to be "Biblical" names, chosen by parents who might have been raised in Christianity or at least have some religious influence. Those parents are probably much more stable than the parents who just want to set a trend with an unusual name.

15. Steve M
    January 31st, 2009 at 10:30 am

    I have to go with Paulio and Kevin on this one. You can't just jump right out and call a study like this "a crock" or something like that. It is, in fact, based on hard facts and numbers. We have the names of people who have a criminal record. We have the names of people who don't have a criminal record. We have the names of babies born in the last X numbers of years, and can rank which ones were used the most. Therefore, we can correlate the names of the criminal and non-criminal citizens to the names on that baby name list. That's not a crock, and short of leafing through the research paper and examining the methodology, it's hard to say that the findings are invalid. However, as far as causation goes, saying someone with a different name was treated differently than their peers and therefore committed crimes is pushing it a little. Note they use the word "may" when describing that. It's just part of a bigger theory. I would guess it's much more likely that the people who give their kids "normal" (meaning: far more common on the list of recently named babies) names are much more likely to raise their kids in a "normal" (meaning: respectful, undramatic, legal) way than those parents who don't name their kids with a "normal" name. Since it is parents who give names to their kids, they must become part of the equation. Now, if all children were assigned names at random upon birth, then we'd have a whole new study on our hands.

16. just a guy
    January 31st, 2009 at 12:25 pm

    I hate things like this. Most logicians know the old axiom "Correlation does not imply causation." These kinds of 'studies' spread false information and false reinforce false thinking habits. :c

    At most, you can notice a trend or pattern, but there's so many other factors that could be playing into it, that it's illogical (by definition) to claim one causes the other. (and using the terms 'is more likely' is often read by the masses as meaning the same thing. Then again, media had been using thought-influeincing terminology for quite a long time. Just watch Fox news and see. Wait, I take that back, DONT watch it! D: ).

17. just a guy
    January 31st, 2009 at 12:26 pm

    oops, please ignore the second 'false' in that third sentence. -_-

18. GailW
    January 31st, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    Is the name "Adolf Hitler" on that list?

19. wok
    January 31st, 2009 at 7:17 pm

    We're looking at you, Adolf

20. JT
    February 1st, 2009 at 8:45 am

    yo man my name totally rocks "JT"
    agree with u kevin

21. DOJ
    February 1st, 2009 at 6:52 pm

    what if your name just rhymes with a euphemism for genitals?

22. The Boy Named Sue
    March 12th, 2009 at 10:22 pm

    I guess this study falls into the "Gee, I could have had a V8" catagory. Dads, name your son Bill, George, anything but Sue!

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT