I think I am, but I might be wrong on that one too.
Given a pool of 10 people to hire from where 6 people are named Arnold and 4 are named shawn Shawn, wouldn't you expect that same relation to show in a specific profession? You can, of course, go ahead and compare those relations. So, if there only were 5 race car drivers in the world and 4 of them were named Arnold that would be noteworthy (as opposed to 60% of them, which is what you'd expect). Please let me know if I got something wrong.
---
Somebody just posted an article stating the numbers where actually correlated with the frequency they are used. I'm not sure how they did it though given that those numbers change over time.
I think their data is going the other direction. It is not 1.9% of Accountants are Arnolds. Its 1.9% of Arnolds are Accountants.
You would expect that the percent of each profession by name should be the same. So if there are 25 professions, then within any given name you should have 4% going to each professions. So 4% of Arnolds should be a profession, and 4% of Shawns should also have the same profession. That is not what the data shows though. Within any given name there is a tendency towards the professions the chart shows.
This definitely does not account for location, birthdays, etc. But it is still interesting.
I think I am, but I might be wrong on that one too.
Given a pool of 10 people to hire from where 6 people are named Arnold and 4 are named shawn Shawn, wouldn't you expect that same relation to show in a specific profession? You can, of course, go ahead and compare those relations. So, if there only were 5 race car drivers in the world and 4 of them were named Arnold that would be noteworthy (as opposed to 60% of them, which is what you'd expect). Please let me know if I got something wrong.
---
Somebody just posted an article stating the numbers where actually correlated with the frequency they are used. I'm not sure how they did it though given that those numbers change over time.