The following abstract was first published in The New England Journal of Big-Time Science in 2007.

- - -

The Effects Of Being Repeatedly Called “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong” On The Human Rage Response In Subjects Named Jeff.

Dr. Kenneth Lam, PhD., Dr. Phyllis Lam-Ellington, PhD, Dr. Burt Ellington, PhD.


Anecdotal observations made by the research team noted that the ceaseless harassment of 24-year-old lab assistant Jeffrey “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong” Samuels, during which he was repeatedly and exclusively referred to as “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong” over the course of several weeks, triggered an acute rage response in Samuels; further monitoring of Samuels could not be conducted after he was terminated for knocking head researcher Dr. Kenneth Lam unconscious with a four-foot-long Pyrex graduated cylinder as Lam was dancing on a laboratory table chanting “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong! Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong!” while several other scientists clapped in unison and cheered.


34 subjects named Jeff were confined to a controlled experimental setting and called “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong” repeatedly in high-pitched, mocking tones by researchers until rage was induced. In such cases where the subjects remained in control of their emotions for an extended period of time, more extreme variations of the taunt1 were applied at escalating rates of volume and repetition. If the rage response still could not be triggered, the subject would be denied water while the temperature of the room was gradually increased and a series of exceedingly graphic, free-form abusive remarks were made regarding the sexual promiscuity and general appearance of the subject’s mother or grandmother. Additionally, if the subject were momentarily left alone during the trial and began to fall asleep or suddenly lost consciousness,2 he would abruptly be awoken by a research assistant screaming “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong!” over a 400-decibel speaker system installed in the windowless room in which the subjects were detained. In trials where the desired result could still not be achieved, subjects were, over the course of several hours, repeatedly asked the question “what’s your name?” until the appropriate response of “my name is Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong” was obtained, with the strong implication having been made that responding in this manner was the only way the volunteer would be released from the experiment.

A control group of 11 subjects named Geoffrey (“Geoff”) were subjected to the same trials.


After being repeatedly called “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong,” every volunteer named Jeff invariably flew into an insane, frothing rage or otherwise became uncontrollably hysterical. Of the control group of subjects named Geoff, only 96% became enraged at being repeatedly referred to as “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong”—a notably lower percentage than the subjects named Jeff.3 Of the total number of subjects who volunteered for the experiment, 84% attempted to violently attack researchers and had to be subdued using a 50,000-volt TASER electroshock device, after which researchers, using their hands, manipulated the prostrate subjects’ mouths for several minutes while saying “Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong! My name is Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dong!” thus making it appear as though the incapacitated subject was mocking himself. 16% of subjects were eventually conditioned to retreat to the farthest corner of the room whenever a researcher entered, shutting their eyes tightly and covering their ears while attempting to make themselves appear as small as possible, until such time as the researcher left.


Jeffy-Weffy Ding-Dongs are stupid dumb diaper babies who can’t handle a little teasing.

- - -

1 E.g., “Jeffy-Weffy Ringle-Dingle Ding-Dong,” “Jeffy-Weffy Ram-A-Lama Ding-Dong Dummy,” “Dumbfuck,” “Jefster-Wefster Dingster-Dongster Dickface,” etc.

2 A small number of subjects ran full-speed at the large one-way observation mirror comprising the north wall of the trial room and were knocked unconscious.

3 Further research will be necessary to determine why the alternate spelling afforded the Geoff group some immunity to the taunting despite being phonetically identical.