Critique of unusually spelled names
Critique of Unusually spelled Names
"All findings consistently showed," writes Mehrabian and Piercy in their article published in the Journal of Social Psychology, "that people with unconventionally spelled names have less desirable characteristics then people with conventionally spelled names. In their article they argue that people who have names spelled in unconventional ways, such as Lynda instead of Linda, are more likely to fail in life and take on negative characteristics. The authors assume that parents who give their children unusually spelled names want to try to make them unique or special. However they do not take into account name trends or changing spelling to avoid confusion with other family members with the same name. These are just a few of the areas that are lacking in this article. The main points of the article appear sound, given the data, and over all the article is clear, lacks discussion of important areas, and has a poor method of gaining data.
This article is very persuading party due to the fact that it is laid out so clearly. It begins with a brief paragraph describing what areas portrayed in a name were taken into account followed by the end results of the study. This method grabs the readers attention and forces them to continue to read and delve deeper into the article. The basis for the study was that people with abnormal names were proven to be socially handicapped by previous studies. When Mehrabian and Piercy put the results from these studies into their own work it greatly helps to solidify their argument and keep the reason for doing their study clear. After stating their hypothesis they explain their method of research, and begin to show the mathematical equations that were used to prove their hypothesis. To the average reader this part of the article would be confusing, but as they were writing this for a college paper, their audience would have no trouble following the mathematical formulas used. Finally to tie up a few ends they address the issue of why parents would give their children unusually spelled names. Up to that point the paper was very clear and easy to follow, but when they began to answer a few questions as to why, they opened a flood gate to other questions, all of which they could not possibly answer.
If they had left out this last section of the paper as to why a parent would given their child unusually spelled names then their paper would have been very solid. But when they asked the question why it forces the reader to begin to ask their own "why" questions. Such as why do celebrities take on unusual or usually spelled names, because in all appearances this seems to aid them in their success and not hinder them as this study would portray. One large issue that should have been brought up is the practice of naming children after their parents or other members of their family. Parents do not always give their children unusually spelled names just to make them unique, sometimes it is just the opposite, to give them a name that was already in the family. Another issue that should have been addressed is name trends. Because names have come and gone in popularity throughout the history of the United States. This fact pulls very hard on the afore mentioned issue of naming your child after a relative. Because by the time the parent names the child it is very possible that relatives name is no longer in fashion, and yet it is the tradition of the household to keep the name in the family. Towards the very end of the article they bring in other nations and countries into the equation and point out that this unusually spelled name trend is prevalent mainly in America, but they do not even begin to give a good reason as to why this is. Therefore the article is strong when it is closely sticking to its topic, but when it begins to wander ever so slightly it opens up a flood of unanswered questions that distract the reader from the information being proven.
This whole article is based on the data that they received being accurate as applied to our nation. But they clearly state that they only used 50 people of each gender for their study. This is not enough to take the results of the study to seriously. But worse than that they only used college students for their study. This is a huge mistake, because college students only represent a small portion of our society. If they want their results to be accurate on a broader scale then they need to widen the source of people that they gather data from. Furthermore college students are often stressed with homework, and will not take the time to really put there best effort in filling out a form for another student. In addition to that they asked the students to not think of people with the same name as the one they where critiquing. Though they might have tried to make the students impartial to each name before seeing them, this is impossible. For when people hear the name of a person that they have never met before, and they know somebody else with that name already, then they immediately begin to make assumptions about that person based on the previous experiences that they have had with people with that name.
Parents give their children unusually spelled names for a plethora of reasons, many of which are not addressed in this article. However the article is clear and logical, and this goes very far in lending strength to their point. Also the article gives information from other studies that give further credibility to their research and conclusion. The population used in the study was not large or varied enough to give accurate data when compiled, and the method used was flawed in the way that it addressed the issue of pre-mature name judgements. This study has interesting conclusions, but when the source of the data is considered the conclusions should not be believed.
"All findings consistently showed," writes Mehrabian and Piercy in their article published in the Journal of Social Psychology, "that people with unconventionally spelled names have less desirable characteristics then people with conventionally spelled names. In their article they argue that people who have names spelled in unconventional ways, such as Lynda instead of Linda, are more likely to fail in life and take on negative characteristics. The authors assume that parents who give their children unusually spelled names want to try to make them unique or special. However they do not take into account name trends or changing spelling to avoid confusion with other family members with the same name. These are just a few of the areas that are lacking in this article. The main points of the article appear sound, given the data, and over all the article is clear, lacks discussion of important areas, and has a poor method of gaining data.
This article is very persuading party due to the fact that it is laid out so clearly. It begins with a brief paragraph describing what areas portrayed in a name were taken into account followed by the end results of the study. This method grabs the readers attention and forces them to continue to read and delve deeper into the article. The basis for the study was that people with abnormal names were proven to be socially handicapped by previous studies. When Mehrabian and Piercy put the results from these studies into their own work it greatly helps to solidify their argument and keep the reason for doing their study clear. After stating their hypothesis they explain their method of research, and begin to show the mathematical equations that were used to prove their hypothesis. To the average reader this part of the article would be confusing, but as they were writing this for a college paper, their audience would have no trouble following the mathematical formulas used. Finally to tie up a few ends they address the issue of why parents would give their children unusually spelled names. Up to that point the paper was very clear and easy to follow, but when they began to answer a few questions as to why, they opened a flood gate to other questions, all of which they could not possibly answer.
If they had left out this last section of the paper as to why a parent would given their child unusually spelled names then their paper would have been very solid. But when they asked the question why it forces the reader to begin to ask their own "why" questions. Such as why do celebrities take on unusual or usually spelled names, because in all appearances this seems to aid them in their success and not hinder them as this study would portray. One large issue that should have been brought up is the practice of naming children after their parents or other members of their family. Parents do not always give their children unusually spelled names just to make them unique, sometimes it is just the opposite, to give them a name that was already in the family. Another issue that should have been addressed is name trends. Because names have come and gone in popularity throughout the history of the United States. This fact pulls very hard on the afore mentioned issue of naming your child after a relative. Because by the time the parent names the child it is very possible that relatives name is no longer in fashion, and yet it is the tradition of the household to keep the name in the family. Towards the very end of the article they bring in other nations and countries into the equation and point out that this unusually spelled name trend is prevalent mainly in America, but they do not even begin to give a good reason as to why this is. Therefore the article is strong when it is closely sticking to its topic, but when it begins to wander ever so slightly it opens up a flood of unanswered questions that distract the reader from the information being proven.
This whole article is based on the data that they received being accurate as applied to our nation. But they clearly state that they only used 50 people of each gender for their study. This is not enough to take the results of the study to seriously. But worse than that they only used college students for their study. This is a huge mistake, because college students only represent a small portion of our society. If they want their results to be accurate on a broader scale then they need to widen the source of people that they gather data from. Furthermore college students are often stressed with homework, and will not take the time to really put there best effort in filling out a form for another student. In addition to that they asked the students to not think of people with the same name as the one they where critiquing. Though they might have tried to make the students impartial to each name before seeing them, this is impossible. For when people hear the name of a person that they have never met before, and they know somebody else with that name already, then they immediately begin to make assumptions about that person based on the previous experiences that they have had with people with that name.
Parents give their children unusually spelled names for a plethora of reasons, many of which are not addressed in this article. However the article is clear and logical, and this goes very far in lending strength to their point. Also the article gives information from other studies that give further credibility to their research and conclusion. The population used in the study was not large or varied enough to give accurate data when compiled, and the method used was flawed in the way that it addressed the issue of pre-mature name judgements. This study has interesting conclusions, but when the source of the data is considered the conclusions should not be believed.
Source...