↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Parents Accidentally Substitute Similar Sounding Sibling Names More Often than Dissimilar Names

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
89 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Parents Accidentally Substitute Similar Sounding Sibling Names More Often than Dissimilar Names
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0084444
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zenzi M. Griffin, Thomas Wangerman

Abstract

When parents select similar sounding names for their children, do they set themselves up for more speech errors in the future? Questionnaire data from 334 respondents suggest that they do. Respondents whose names shared initial or final sounds with a sibling's reported that their parents accidentally called them by the sibling's name more often than those without such name overlap. Having a sibling of the same gender, similar appearance, or similar age was also associated with more frequent name substitutions. Almost all other name substitutions by parents involved other family members and over 5% of respondents reported a parent substituting the name of a pet, which suggests a strong role for social and situational cues in retrieving personal names for direct address. To the extent that retrieval cues are shared with other people or animals, other names become available and may substitute for the intended name, particularly when names sound similar.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 89 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Luxembourg 1 6%
Unknown 17 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Lecturer 2 11%
Other 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 4 22%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 39%
Linguistics 3 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Computer Science 2 11%
Neuroscience 2 11%
Other 2 11%