Top baby names of 2011: Sophia, Jacob and... Briella?

The top baby names of 2011 are out, thanks to the US Social Security Administration. 'Sophia' has knocked 'Isabella' out of first place for girls and 'Jacob' leads the baby names list for boys. 'Briella', as in "Jerseylicious" star Briella Calafiore, made the biggest jump in popularity.

Vadim Ghirda/AP
The top baby names of 2011 are out, thanks to the US Social Security Administration. Sophia has knocked Isabella out of first place for girls and Jacob leads the list for boys. Briella, as in "Jerseylicious" star Briella Calafiore, made the biggest jump in popularity.

The results are in, and the new reigning champion for America’s most popular baby name is....  Sophia. 

And Jacob (again).

Take that Isabella.

Yes, parents-to-be desperately seeking guidance can breathe a sigh of relief: today the US Social Security Administration released its much awaited 2011 list of most popular baby names.

Isabella, which was the most popular girls name in 2009 and 2010, has dropped back down to number two. Emma, Olivia, and Ava make up the rest of the top five, closely tailed by Emily, Abigail, Madison, Mia, and Chloe.

On the boys’ side, Jacob, Mason, William, Jayden and Noah lead the pack, with Michael, Ethan, Alexander, Aiden and Daniel not far behind.

Most of these names have been lingering toward the top of the list for a while now. Jacob was No. 1 last year too. Mason, however, is a an upstart. He hadn’t even cracked the top 25 until 2010, when he sat at number 12.

The annual Social Security names list can also be seen as a kind of quiz on how well you know American pop culture.

In its press release about the most popular baby names (the best government press release I’ve seen in ages) the Social Security Administration acknowledges that some attribute Mason’s rapid rise to reality TV star Kourtney Kardashian’s son of the same name. But it also has some other explanations.

“We note, moreover, that Mason has been a regular top-five name in Wisconsin for many years, undoubtedly a tribute to strong-legged Green Bay Packer kicker Mason Crosby,” it says.

Pop culture definitely seems to be on minds of expectant parents. How else to attribute the huge jump in popularity this year of the girl's name Briella, to No. 497 in 2011 from 891 in 2010? (Think Briella Calafiore, the reality star hairdresser from “Jerseylicious.”)  Or, on the boys side, the rapid rise of the name Brantley?

From the Social Security Administration:

“There could be some controversy over Brantley – depending on whether you are a fan of college football or country music. Arguments could be made that the popularity of the name comes from John Brantley, the quarterback for perennial powerhouse The University of Florida, or from Brantley Gilbert the singer with the number one country hit ‘Country Must be Country Wide.’ If you like both football and country music, you’re a winner either way!”

You can find all of this info – and much, much more – through the searchable online Social Security Administration database of American baby names. (This, by the way, is an excellent site for endless procrastination.)

A mom or dad-to-be looking for inspiration can see how a name has changed in popularity (Carol, for instance, crept up to No. 4 in 1941 and has been dropping ever since), or check the most popular names for any given year or decade. (Hello, Jessica, Jennifer, and Amanda. That’s the 1980s, if you hadn’t guessed.) 

The agency’s website has lists of baby names going back as far as 1880, when Mary, Anna, Emily, Elizabeth and Minnie were the most popular girls’ names, and John, William, James, Charles and George led the boys.

As for the rumors that "Pippa" might soon be a top girls name, thanks to American moms' fascination with the little sister of Kate Middleton, Duchess of Cambridge? It doesn’t show up in the top 1,000. Neither does the full name, Philippa.

Kate, however, is No. 175.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.