Anthropomorphism

Anthropomorphism refers to the cognitive bias where humans attribute human-like characteristics, emotions, and intentions to non-human entities, whether they are animals, objects, or abstract concepts. This bias stems from our inherent need to understand and relate to entities around us, often using human traits as a means to interpret vague or minimal information.

How it works

This bias arises from our tendency to search for patterns and meaning, even in minimal data. When encountering unfamiliar or sparse stimuli, we unconsciously apply our human-centric perspective, filling in gaps with human-like qualities. This process not only aids in simplifying our environment but also establishes a sense of familiarity and predictability with non-human elements.

Examples

• People talking to their pets as if they understand or respond like humans.
• Naming and giving personalities to cars or digital assistants like Siri or Alexa.
• Assuming a storm is 'angry' or that the sun is 'smiling'.

Consequences

While anthropomorphism can be a beneficial tool for understanding and predicting behavior, it may lead to misinterpretations, overestimations of a non-human entity’s abilities, or creation of inaccurate narratives. In some cases, this can result in misguided decisions or emotional attachments to objects or systems incapable of reciprocation.

Counteracting

To mitigate anthropomorphism, it is essential to be aware of the tendency and consciously question whether human traits are genuinely applicable. Learning about the true nature and capabilities of non-human entities can reduce misinterpretations. Critical thinking and scientific skepticism can be applied to assess the validity of human-like attributes assigned to non-human entities.

Critiques

Critics argue that while anthropomorphism is a natural tendency, it may cloud objective analysis and promote emotional connections where they are unwarranted. This can result in a skewed perception, particularly in scientific and observational contexts, potentially compromising the clarity of research or operations by attributing intent or emotion inaccurately.

Fields of Impact

Also known as

Relevant Research

• On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism.

  Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007)

  Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886

• Who sees human? The stability and importance of individual differences in anthropomorphism.

  Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J. T., & Epley, N. (2010)

  Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(3), 219–232