Skip Navigation


American Law and Economics Review Advance Access originally published online on August 4, 2009
American Law and Economics Review 2009 11(1):112-133; doi:10.1093/aler/ahp008
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
11/1/112    most recent
ahp008v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Coffey, B.
Right arrow Articles by McLaughlin, P. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Law and Economics Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Do Masculine Names Help Female Lawyers Become Judges? Evidence from South Carolina

Bentley Coffey

John E. Walker, Department of Economics, Clemson University

Patrick A. McLaughlin

Mercatus Center at George Mason University

Send correspondence to: Bentley Coffey, Cadmus Group, South Carolina Office, 3231 Wilmot Ave, Columbia, SC 29205, Tel: 864.640.3258; E-mail: bentleygcoffey{at}gmail.com


  Abstract

This paper provides the first empirical test of the Portia Hypothesis: Females with masculine monikers are more successful in legal careers. Utilizing South Carolina microdata, we look for correlation between an individual's advancement to a judgeship and his/her name's masculinity, which we construct from the joint empirical distribution of names and gender in the state's entire population of registered voters. We find robust evidence that nominally masculine females are favored over other females. Hence, our results support the Portia Hypothesis.

We are grateful to Sewell Consultancy for generously providing voter registration data from their impressive data product VICTOR. Kathleen Warthen aided our work with institutional knowledge, ongoing support, and initial insight. Helpful suggestions were provided both by seminar participants at Clemson and an anonymous referee. Nick Laurence provided excellent research assistance, particularly in collecting data on sitting judges. Any errors are solely our own.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.