Name-popularity "deflation" (update with 2009 data)

General Name Discussion
1

It’s been mentioned that the percentage of babies given the most popular names has decreased quite a bit in recent years/decades. I took a look at the SSA stats for the past 50 years starting with 2008 and going back at five-year intervals, and here’s the figures (the first is the % of boys given the #1 name, the second is the % of boys given a top 10 name, the third is the % of girls given the #1 name, and the fourth is the % of girls given a top 10 name):

2008: 1.0355, 8.8369, 0.9043, 7.7373
2003: 1.4104, 11.0793, 1.2819, 8.7605
1998: 1.8066, 13.8308, 1.3513, 10.1697
1993: 2.4010, 15.8574, 1.7753, 12.1713
1988: 3.2053, 20.4629, 2.6810, 16.0101
1983: 3.6506, 22.8547, 3.0382, 16.9196
1978: 3.9308, 23.6805, 3.4268, 15.4187
1973: 4.2049, 25.6009, 4.0192, 16.5657
1968: 4.6184, 27.7316, 2.8974, 15.4870
1963: 4.0569, 28.2835, 2.8189, 15.5768
1958: 4.2029, 29.5869, 2.7046, 18.0924

As you can see for the most part each figure got smaller with each successive five-year interval (with one exception for boys and three exceptions for girls, and all of those exceptions were in 1983 or earlier).

2

Another related question that’s been asked: Are people becoming more adventurous with boys’ names than in the past? [name]Just[/name] by glimpsing at the stats you can see that is true, but the girl’s percentages have been falling as well. What I did is divided the % of girls given a top 10 name by the % of boys given a top 10 name for each of the years I provided stats for in the OP (the farther the figure is from 1 the more difference in popularity between the genders):

2008: 1.1421
2003: 1.2647
1998: 1.3600
1993: 1.3029
1988: 1.2781
1983: 1.3508
1978: 1.5358
1973: 1.5454
1968: 1.7906
1963: 1.8157
1958: 1.6353

As you can see back in the 50s and 60s parents were quite a bit more adventurous with girls than boys. In the 70s and 80s the popularity balance between boys and girls became more equal, although if you look at the stats in the OP that is mainly because the popularity deflation for girls leveled off during those years (which is when the three regressions in the stats I mentioned before for girls happened) while it continued to fall for boys. The gender gap widened again a bit in the 90s, but in the 00s it decreased to a record low. So, it looks like [name]Pam[/name] and [name]Linda[/name]‘s hypothesis on parents becoming more creative with their boys’ names in recent years is correct (even in comparison with the deflation on the girl side).

I also computed a similar set of stats using only the percentages for the #1 names, but they have a higher range of variation due to the individual names occupying the #1 spot (for example [name]Jennifer[/name] in 1973 and 1978 had a higher % of births than [name]Lisa[/name] had in 1968).

In fact (based on stats I’ve seen from sites as babycenter.com however accurate or not) I’m going to make a prediction about the 2009 list: [name]Isabella[/name] will be #1 for girls (largely thanks to Twilight). Why I mentioned that is because I think [name]Isabella[/name] in 2009 will have a higher % of births than [name]Emma[/name] did in 2008 and possibly by a fairly large margin over the #2 name (like [name]Jennifer[/name] did in some years in the 70s). In fact given the current trends we may have a rarity: The boy/girl ratio for the #1 name by percentage may be less than (or very close to) 1 for 2009 (although still greater than 1 for the more stable top-10 percentages). For your interest here are the #1 name boy/girl ratios for the years mentioned before:

2008: 1.1451
2003: 1.1002
1998: 1.3369
1993: 1.3524
1988: 1.1956
1983: 1.2016
1978: 1.1471
1973: 1.0462
1963: 1.5940
1963: 1.4392
1958: 1.5540

As you can see in 1973 (due the the extraordinarily high popularity of [name]Jennifer[/name]) the boy/girl ratio was unusually small then.

3

One word about how I compute all these figures: I use percentages and not number of births to avoid entering changing birthrates and population sizes into the equation (since those are beyond the scope of this thread). If I were to use absolute numbers within a given year for the gender comparisons, that will tilt the figures a bit into being higher for boys (but that would be due to a slightly higher number of boys than girls being born each year in modern times, which is another out-of-scope issue).

4

Interesting stats! I am fairly certain that the hypothesis that people are becoming more creative in their boy naming is correct. I am hearing much wider vaieties of names used on little boys than I did the past. I am in my mid to late 40’s and have always had an interest in names and naming trends. I definitely think parents of today are being more name creative with their sons than in the past.

5

Oh, wow. All those percentages broke my brain a little, haha. x)

Very interesting stats, though! I’m really glad parents of boys are climbing out from under the rocks; as much as I love the classics (and I really, really do) I think the names you choose for your kids can sometimes reflect the values you want to impress upon them, which in turn leaves a little less room for self-discovery and creative thinking…oh blah, I’m at it again. Shut me up!

This is some very thorough research, and I commend you on it even if I can’t understand most of it. :wink:

6

What I find interesting is that the decline of top names only got significant in the 70s. I would’ve thought it came earlier.

7

I took my analysis back another 30 years to 1928, going in five-year intervals like I did before. For the figures below for each year, the first is the % of boys given the #1 name, the second is the % of boys given a top 10 name, the third is the % of girls given the #1 name, the fourth is the % of girls given a top 10 name, and the fifth is the ratio of boys to girls given a top 10 name by percentage.

1953: 4.3059, 32.7368, 3.3352, 22.5283, 1.4531
1948: 4.9697, 33.3731, 5.5203, 24.8829, 1.3412
1943: 5.5183, 33.4867, 4.6098, 23.7482, 1.4101
1938: 5.4806, 32.6624, 4.9244, 22.4852, 1.4526
1933: 5.3140, 32.4857, 5.3052, 22.0061, 1.4762
1928: 5.3177, 32.1819, 5.5949, 21.5768, 1.4915

As you can see there was not much change in percentages either way throughout this period (in comparison to later on). The gender differences in percentages of popular names were somewhat lower during this time than in the late 50s and 60s (when it peaked); it appears that parents started diversifying their girls’ choices before they started to do the same for boys a decade or two later (during which time the girls’ “deflation” leveled off).

8

Not surprised in the least by those findings in your latest post, namefan! It seems like a lot of kids from my generation have grandmas and great-grandmas with more similar names than grandmas and their daughters/our moms. A sign of the times, it appears to be.

9

[name]How[/name] much of this deflation is due to spelling variations?

10

Wow, nice job. I am a name fan as well as a math geek, so this is right up my alley! I have thought about this stuff before but never done any calcualtions, thanks for doing all the hard work.

I have definetly noticed a greater variety of names in my life. My dad was born in 1933, his name is [name]William[/name] nn [name]Bill[/name]. He also has about 5 friends that he went to high school with that are also named [name]Bill[/name]. When I went to school there sure were a lot of Jennifers, but nothing like [name]Marys[/name] in the past. Now people are so freaked out by having common or duplicate names that I rarely hear the same name twice on little kids.

The SSA data has not always been available to the masses like it is now. When did that start? [name]Do[/name] you think that the availablily of the SSA list has had an effect on the variety of names? I think that it has, but would be interesting to see where it fits into the statistics. [name]Do[/name] you think that popularty deflation will end and reverse a little at any point? I think it might for boys at some point, but girls will still become more varied for quite a while.

11

In response to your last question, it might level off again after awhile; as for the gender differences if anything I think the boys will continue to fall more since people seem to be getting more comfortable with being “adventurous” with things like names for their sons (in other words I think the boy/girl ratio will probably stay about the same or decrease over the next several years, but I’m not sure whether the other figures will continue to fall, stay the same, or possibly go up).

12

Here’s a copy-and-paste of the data from 2009 (compared to 2008) that I mentioned in the 2009 SSA list blog post:

More girls were given the #1 name, [name]Isabella[/name], than boys the #1 name, [name]Jacob[/name].

The percentage of boys given a top 10 name went down (from 8.8369% to 8.5859%), but the percentage of girls given a top 10 name actually went up (from 7.7373% to 7.8493%).

The boy/girl ratio of those given a top 10 name is at an all-time low of 1.0938. The boy/girl ratio of those given the #1 name is less than 1, at 0.9028.

As I previously did these figures are calculated based on percentages of births.

13

I agree with you about the deflation. But I’m not sure that people have gotten more creative. It would be interesting to look at the data and compare the [name]Kayla[/name]/[name]Kaylee[/name]/Kylees and the [name]Lily[/name]/[name]Leila[/name]/[name]Lillian[/name]/[name]Lilas[/name]. And then there’s the [name]Aidan[/name]/[name]Brayden[/name]/[name]Cayden[/name]/Jaydens…