JessicaRulestheUniverse.com

Why is it that we find “name-dropping” and related behaviors so unappealing in others? Similar to many other social behaviors, the phenomenon of name-dropping is one of those human foibles that is so routine and commonplace that scientists have almost completely overlooked it as a potentially fruitful topic of investigation. An exception to this was a study published earlier this year in the journal Social Influence. In this study, University of Zurich psychologists Carmen Lebherz, Klaus Jonas and Barbara Tomljenovic conducted a controlled experiment in which participants were introduced to a stranger who name-dropped to various degrees. The volunteers were then asked to rate this stranger on several key dimensions. . .Because the study took place in Zurich, the experimenters decided to use the name of a well-liked national figure, and Roger Federer fit the bill perfectly. . .

“So Then I Said to Roger Federer. . .”: The Tricky Business of Name-Dropping. Psychologists examine how name-dropping can backfire on those poor at the craft. Jesse Bering in Scientific American.

Butch alerted me to the Kuro5hin blog, Roger Federer Killed David Foster Wallace.

DFW was found dead on September 14, 2008. Two days earlier I’d name-checked him in my column about The Fed winning the US Open: “Tennis champions are not like most people. As the footnote happy novelist David Foster Wallace reminds us, they see in a different way. We see the tennis ball whizzing through the air, and Federer getting there before the ball does. How did he know it was going there? Is he psychic, or has he made a pact with the devil disguised as Vogue’s Anna Wintour?” Hmmm.

Kevin directed me to this ATP World Tour piece, Kramer “Most Significant Person In Tennis”. In my ignorance I thought they were referring to Kramer from Seinfeld, who in one episode became the oldest ballboy at the US Open.