ANTROPOMORFİZM: KAVRAMIN TARİHİ, TEORİLER VE TÜKETİCİ DAVRANIŞLARI BAĞLAMINDA BİR LİTERATÜR İNCELEMESİ

Yıl 2022, , 580 - 613, 31.12.2022

Fatih Sonmez , Sima Nart

https://doi.org/10.54282/inijoss.1121405

Cited By: 1

Öz

Antropomorfizm insana has özelliklerin insan dışı varlıklara atfedilmesi olgusudur. Bu çalışma antropomorfizm olgusunun kavramsallaşma sürecini, olgunun gündelik hayattaki yaygınlığını, olguyu açıklamaya çalışan teorileri ve tüketici davranışları bağlamında yürütülen ampirik antropomorfizm araştırmalarının bulgularını incelemektedir. Bu amaçla, öncelikle antropomorfizm olgusunun ve kavramının geçmişine yönelik bir araştırma yapılmış, olguya açıklama getirmeye çalışan teoriler eleştirel bir yaklaşımla sunulmuş ve daha sonra tüketici davranışları bağlamında antropomorfizm ile ilgili 2020 yılı başına kadar yapılmış olan ampirik araştırmaların bulguları özetlenerek nitel bir değerlendirmede bulunulmuştur. Tüketici davranışları literatüründeki ampirik araştırmaların sonuçları bir bütün olarak değerlendirildiğinde, firmaların ürün ve markalarını antropomorfize etmelerinin, tüketicilerce hoş karşılanmayan davranışlara (fiyat yükseltme, yanıltıcı reklam, gizlilik ihlâli, adaletsizlik vb.) girişmedikleri sürece, daha çok dikkat çekme, daha sıcak algılanma, daha çok beğenilme, daha çok güvenilme, daha hatırlanır olma, daha yüksek satın alma niyeti vs. gibi olumlu sonuçlara yol açtığı görülmüştür. Tüketiciler açısından bakıldığında ise, antropomorfik ürün ve markaların tüketicilerin birtakım psikolojik ihtiyaçlarını (aidiyet, kontrol, etkisellik vb.) karşılayabildiği fakat bireysel ve durumsal farklılıklara bağlı olarak bazı durumlarda da olumsuz sonuçlara yol açabildiği görülmüştür. Sonuç olarak, antropomorfizmin firmalar için genellikle olumlu çıktılar sunduğu, tüketiciler üzerinde ise koşullu etkilere sahip olduğu fakat son yıllarda davranışsal araştırmalardaki tekrarlama kriziyle gündeme gelen kaygılardan dolayı literatürdeki bulguların tekrarlanma çalışmalarıyla desteklenmedikleri sürece ihtiyatla ele alınmaları gerektiği kanaatine varılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Antropomorfizm, Marka antropomorfizmi, Ürün antropomorfizmi, Tüketici davranışları

ANTHROPOMORPHISM: HISTORY OF THE CONCEPT, THEORIES, AND A LITERATURE REVIEW IN THE CONSUMER BEHAVIOR CONTEXT

Öz

Anthropomorphism is the phenomenon of attributing human qualities to non-human entities. This study examines the historical process of the conceptualization of anthropomorphism, its prevalence in daily life, the theories that try to explain the phenomenon, and the findings of empirical anthropomorphism research conducted in the context of consumer behavior. To this end, the history of both the phenomenon and the concept of anthropomorphism was investigated, theories that try to provide an explanation to the phenomenon were presented in a critical approach, and the findings of empirical research conducted until the beginning of 2020 on anthropomorphism in the context of consumer behavior were summarized and evaluated in a qualitative manner. When the results of the empirical research in the consumer behavior literature were evaluated as a whole, it was observed that firms' anthropomorphizing of their products and brands leads to positive consequences such as attracting more attention, being perceived as warmer, being liked more, being trusted more, being more memorable, higher consumer willingness to buy, etc., unless they engage in behaviors that are deemed unfavorable by consumers (e.g., raising prices, false advertising, privacy violations, injustice). As for the consumers, it was found that anthropomorphic products and brands can meet consumers' particular psychological needs (e.g., belongingness, control, effectance) but may also lead to negative consequences in some cases depending on the individual and situational differences. As a result, it was concluded that anthropomorphism generally has positive outcomes for companies and conditional effects on consumers, but given the concerns that have come to the fore with the replication crisis in behavioral research in recent years, the findings in the literature should be treated with caution unless they are supported by replication studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Anthropomorphism, Brand anthropomorphism, Product anthropomorphism, Consumer behavior

Kaynakça

• Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of brand personality. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(3), 347-356.
• Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2007). Is that car smiling at me? Schema congruity as a basis for evaluating anthropomorphized products. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 468-479.
• Aggarwal, P., & McGill, A. L. (2012). When brands seem human, do humans act like brands? Automatic behavioral priming effects of brand anthropomorphism. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(2), 307–323.
• Awad, N., & Youn, N. (2018). You reflect me: Narcissistic consumers prefer anthropomorphized arrogant brands. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(4), 540-554.
• Barrett, J., & Johnson, A. H. (2003). The role of control in attributing intentional agency to inanimate objects. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 3(3), 208–217.
• Bartz, J. A., Tchalova, K., & Fenerci, C. (2016). Reminders of social connection can attenuate anthropomorphism: A replication and extension of Epley, Akalis, Waytz, and Cacioppo (2008). Psychological Science, 27(12), 1644–1650.
• Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529.
• Bonatti, L., Frot, E., Zangl, R., & Mehler, J. (2002). The human first hypothesis: Identification of conspecifics and individuation of objects in the young infant. Cognitive Psychology, 44(4), 388-426.
• Brown, C. M., Hengy, S. M., & McConnell, A. R. (2016). Thinking about cats or dogs provides relief from social rejection. Anthrozoös, 29(1), 47-58.
• Brown, D. E. (1991). Human universals. McGraw-Hill.
• Burgess, A. M., Graves, L. M., & Frost, R. O. (2018). My possessions need me: Anthropomorphism and hoarding. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 59(3), 340-348.
• Burghardt, G. M. (1991). Cognitive ethology and critical an¬thropomorphism: A snake with two heads and hognose snakes that play dead. İçinde C. A. Ristau (Ed.), Cognitive ethology: The minds of other animals: Essays in honor of Donald R. Griffin (ss. 53–90). Law¬rence Erlbaum Associates.
• Byrne, J., Grace, M., & Hanley, P. (2009). Children's anthropomorphic and anthropocentric ideas about micro-organisms: Educational research. Journal of Biological Education, 44(1), 37-43.
• Caporael, L. R. (1986). Anthropomorphism and mechanomorphism: Two faces of the human machine. Computers in Human Behavior, 2(3), 215-234.
• Caporael, L. R., & Heyes, C. M. (1997). Why anthropomorphize? Folk psychology and other stories. İçinde R. W. Mitchell, N. S. Thompson, & H. L. Miles (Eds.), Anthropomorphism, anecdotes, and animals (ss. 59–76). State University of New York Press.
• Chambers, E. (1753). A supplement to Mr. Chambers's cyclopædia: or, Universal dictionary of arts and sciences, in two volumes, (Vol. 1). London: printed for W. Innys and others. https://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/HistSciTech/HistSciTech-idx?id=HistSciTech.CycloSupple01
• Chan, E. Y. (2020). Political conservatism and anthropomorphism: An investigation. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(3), 515-524.
• Chandler, J., & Schwarz, N. (2010). Use does not wear ragged the fabric of friendship: Thinking of objects as alive makes people less willing to replace them. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20(2), 138–145.
• Chang, Y., Li, Y., Yan, J., & Kumar, V. (2019). Getting more likes: The impact of narrative person and brand image on customer–brand interactions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(6), 1027-1045.
• Chen, F., Chen, R. P., & Yang, L. (2020). When sadness comes alive, will it be less painful? The effects of anthropomorphic thinking on sadness regulation and consumption. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(2), 277-295.
• Chen, F., Sengupta, J., & Adaval, R. (2018). Does endowing a product with life make one feel more alive? The effect of product anthropomorphism on consumer vitality. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(4), 503–513.
• Chen, K.-J. (2017). Humanizing brands: An examination of the psychological process of anthropomorphism and its effects on consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Management, 5(2), 2333–6099.
• Chen, R. P., Wan, E. W., & Levy, E. (2017). The effect of social exclusion on consumer preference for anthropomorphized brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(1), 23-34.
• Conard, N. J. (2003). Palaeolithic ivory sculptures from southwestern Germany and the origins of figurative art. Nature, 426(6968), 830-832.
• Connell, P. M. (2013). The Role of Baseline Physical Similarity to Humans in Consumer Responses to Anthropomorphic Animal Images. Psychology & Marketing, 30(6), 461–468.
• Cooremans, K., & Geuens, M. (2019). Same but different: Using anthropomorphism in the battle against food waste. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 38(2), 232-245.
• Dalton R. (2003). Lion man takes pride of place as oldest statue. Nature, 425(6953), 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/425007a. https://www.nature.com/news/2003/030901/full/news030901-6.html
• De Bondt, C., Van Kerckhove, A., & Geuens, M. (2018). Look at that body! How anthropomorphic package shapes systematically appeal to consumers. International Journal of Advertising, 37(5), 698-717.
• De Schonen, S., Mancini, J., & Liegeois, F. (1998). About functional cortical specialization: The development of face recognition. İçinde F. Simion & G. Butterworth (Eds.), The development of sensory, motor and cognitive capacities in early infancy: From perception to cognition (p. 103–120). Psychology Press/Erlbaum (UK) Taylor & Francis.
• De Visser, E. J., Monfort, S. S., McKendrick, R., Smith, M. A., McKnight, P. E., Krueger, F., & Parasuraman, R. (2016). Almost human: Anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(3), 331-349.
• Delbaere, M., McQuarrie, E. F., & Phillips, B. J. (2011). Personification in advertising: Using a visual metaphor to trigger anthropomorphism. Journal of Advertising, 40(1), 121–130.
• Easterbrook, M. A., Kisilevsky, B. S., Hains, S. M. J., & Muir, D. W. (1999). Faceness or complexity: Evidence from newborn visual tracking of facelike stimuli. Infant Behavior and Development, 22(1), 17-35.
• Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection through inferential reproduction: Loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds. Psychological Science, 19(2), 114-120.
• Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: a three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864.
• Eyssel, F., Kuchenbrandt, D., & Bobinger, S. (2011, March). Effects of anticipated human-robot interaction and predictability of robot behavior on perceptions of anthropomorphism. İçinde Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction (ss. 61–68).
• Eyssel, F., & Reich, N. (2013, March). Loneliness makes the heart grow fonder (of robots)—On the effects of loneliness on psychological anthropomorphism. İçinde 2013 8th acm/ieee international conference on human-robot interaction (hri) (ss. 121–122). IEEE.
• Fan, A., Wu, L. (Laurie), & Mattila, A. S. (2016). Does anthropomorphism influence customers’ switching intentions in the self-service technology failure context? Journal of Services Marketing, 30(7), 713–723.
• Fodor, J. A. (1983). The modularity of mind. MIT press.
• Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343-373.
• Fritsch, C. T. (2015). Anti-anthropomorphism in the Greek Pentateuch. Princeton University Press.
• Gazzola, V., Rizzolatti, G., Wicker, B., & Keysers, C. (2007). The anthropomorphic brain: The mirror neuron system responds to human and robotic actions. Neuroimage, 35(4), 1674-1684.
• Guido, G., Pichierri, M., Pino, G., & Nataraajan, R. (2019). Effects of face images and face pareidolia on consumers’ responses to print advertising: An empirical investigation. Journal of Advertising Research, 59(2), 219–231.
• Guthrie, S. (1980). A cognitive theory of religion. Current Anthropology 21(2), 181-203.
• Guthrie, S. (1995). Faces in the clouds: A new theory of religion. Oxford University Press.
• Haan, M. D., Pascalis, O., & Johnson, M. H. (2002). Specialization of neural mechanisms underlying face recognition in human infants. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(2), 199-209.
• Hadi, R., & Valenzuela, A. (2014). A meaningful embrace: Contingent effects of embodied cues of affection. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(4), 520–532.
• Hadjikhani, N., Kveraga, K., Naik, P., & Ahlfors, S. P. (2009). Early (N170) activation of face-specific cortex by face-like objects. Neuroreport, 20(4), 403.
• Harris, L. T., & Fiske, S. T. (2008). The brooms in Fantasia: Neural correlates of anthropomorphizing objects. Social Cognition, 26(2), 210-223.
• Hart, P. M., Jones, S. R., & Royne, M. B. (2013). The human lens: How anthropomorphic reasoning varies by product complexity and enhances personal value. Journal of Marketing Management, 29(1–2), 105–121.
• Hart, P., & Royne, M. B. (2017). Being human: How anthropomorphic presentations can enhance advertising effectiveness. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 38(2), 129–145.
• Herak, I., Kervyn, N., & Thomson, M. (2020). Pairing people with products: Anthropomorphizing the object, dehumanizing the person. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(1), 125–139.
• Hume, D. (1957). The natural history of religion. Stanford University Press. (Orijinal yayın tarihi, 1757).
• Hur, J. D., Koo, M., & Hofmann, W. (2015). When temptations come alive: How anthropomorphism undermines self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(2), 340–358.
• Kamewari, K., Kato, M., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hiraki, K. (2005). Six-and-a-half-month-old children positively attribute goals to human action and to humanoid-robot motion. Cognitive Development, 20(2), 303-320.
• Keaveney, S. M., Herrmann, A., Befurt, R., & Landwehr, J. R. (2012). The eyes have it: How a car's face influences consumer categorization and evaluation of product line extensions. Psychology & Marketing, 29(1), 36-51.
• Kennedy, J. S. (1992). The new anthropomorphism. Cambridge University Press.
• Ketron, S., & Naletelich, K. (2019). Victim or beggar? Anthropomorphic messengers and the savior effect in consumer sustainability behavior. Journal of Business Research, 96, 73-84.
• Kim, H. C., & Kramer, T. (2015). Do materialists prefer the “brand-as-servant”? The interactive effect of anthropomorphized brand roles and materialism on consumer responses. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(2), 284–299.
• Kim, H. Y., & Mcgill, A. L. (2018). Minions for the rich? Financial status changes how consumers see products with anthropomorphic features. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(2), 429–450.
• Kim, S., Chen, R. P., & Zhang, K. (2016). Anthropomorphized helpers undermine autonomy and enjoyment in computer games. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2), 282–302.
• Kim, S., & McGill, A. L. (2011). Gaming with mr. slot or gaming the slot machine? Power, anthropomorphism, and risk perception. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(1), 94–107.
• Kim, T., Sung, Y., & Moon, J. H. (2020). Effects of brand anthropomorphism on consumer-brand relationships on social networking site fan pages: The mediating role of social presence. Telematics and Informatics, 51, 101406.
• Klein, R. A., Cook, C. L., Ebersole, C. R., Vitiello, C., Nosek, B. A., Chartier, C. R., ... & Ratliff, K. (2019, December 11). Many Labs 4: Failure to replicate mortality salience effect with and without original author involvement. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vef2c.
• Klein, R. A., Ratliff, K. A., Vianello, M., Adams Jr, R. B., Bahník, Š., Bernstein, M. J., ... & Cemalcilar, Z. (2014). Investigating variation in replicability: A “Many Labs” Replication Project. Social psychology.
• Klein, R. A., Vianello, M., Hasselman, F., Adams, B. G., Adams Jr, R. B., Alper, S., ... & Batra, R. (2018). Many Labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443–490.
• Koo, M., Oh, H., & Patrick, V. M. (2019). From oldie to goldie: Humanizing old produce enhances its appeal. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 4(4), 337–351.
• Kühn, S., Brick, T. R., Müller, B. C., & Gallinat, J. (2014). Is this car looking at you? How anthropomorphism predicts fusiform face area activation when seeing cars. Plos One, 9(12), e113885.
• Kwak, H., Puzakova, M., & Rocereto, J. F. (2015). Better not smile at the price: The differential role of brand anthropomorphization on perceived price fairness. Journal of Marketing, 79(4), 56–76.
• Kwak, H., Puzakova, M., & Rocereto, J. F. (2017). When brand anthropomorphism alters perceptions of justice: The moderating role of self-construal. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 34(4), 851–871.
• Kwok, C., Grisham, J. R., & Norberg, M. M. (2018). Object attachment: Humanness increases sentimental and instrumental values. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 7(4), 1132-1142.
• Laksmidewi, D., Susianto, H., & Afiff, A. Z. (2017). Anthropomorphism in advertising: The effect of anthropomorphic product demonstration on consumer purchase intention. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 22(1), 1–25.
• Landwehr, J. R., McGill, A. L., & Herrmann, A. (2011). It’s got the look: The effect of friendly and aggressive “facial” expressions on product liking and sales. Journal of Marketing, 75(3), 132–146.
• Lesher, J. H. (2001). Xenophanes of Colophon: fragments: A text and translation with a commentary. University of Toronto Press.
• Letheren, K., Martin, B. A., & Jin, H. S. (2017). Effects of personification and anthropomorphic tendency on destination attitude and travel intentions. Tourism Management, 62, 65-75.
• Lin, C. H., & Huang, Y. (2018). How self-construals affect responses to anthropomorphic brands, with a focus on the three-factor relationship between the brand, the gift-giver and the recipient. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(NOV), 1–17.
• Liu, T., Geng, L., Ye, L., & Zhou, K. (2019). “Mother Nature” enhances connectedness to nature and pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 61, 37-45.
• Long, C., Yoon, S., & Friedman, M. (2015). How lonely consumers relate to brands: Insights from psychological and marketing research. İçinde S. Fournier, M. Breazaele, & J. Avery (Eds.), Strong brands, strong relationships (ss. 95–105). New York, NY: Routledge.
• Ludwig, N. N., Hecht, E. E., King, T. Z., Revill, K. P., Moore, M., Fink, S. E., & Robins, D. L. (2020). A novel social attribution paradigm: The dynamic interacting shape clips (DISC). Brain and cognition, 138, 105507.
• MacInnis, D. J., & Folkes, V. S. (2017). Humanizing brands: When brands seem to be like me, part of me, and in a relationship with me. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 27(3), 355–374.
• Maeng, A., & Aggarwal, P. (2018). Facing dominance: Anthropomorphism and the effect of product face ratio on consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(5), 1104–1122.
• May, F., & Monga, A. (2014). When time has a will of its own, the powerless don’t have the will to wait: Anthropomorphism of time can decrease patience. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), 924–942.
• Miesler, L. (2012). Product choice and anthropomorphic designs: Do consumption goals shape innate preferences for human-like forms? Design Journal, 15(3), 373–392.
• Mithen, S. J. (1996). The prehistory of the mind: A search for the origins of art, religion and science. Thames & Hudson
• Morton, J., & Johnson, M. H. (1991). CONSPEC and CONLERN: A two-process theory of infant face recognition. Psychological Review, 98(2), 164–181.
• Mourey, J. A., Olson, J. G., & Yoon, C. (2017). Products as pals: Engaging with anthropomorphic products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 414–431.
• Museum Ulm. Der löwenmensch: Geschichte, Magie, Mythos. http://www.loewenmensch.de/index.html
• Newman, G. E. (2018). Bringing narratives to life: Animism, totems, and intangible value. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(4), 514–526.
• Newton, F. J., Newton, J. D., & Wong, J. (2017). This is your stomach speaking: Anthropomorphized health messages reduce portion size preferences among the powerless. Journal of Business Research, 75, 229-239.
• Niemyjska, A., & Drat-Ruszczak, K. (2013). When there is nobody, angels begin to fly: Supernatural imagery elicited by a loss of social connection. Social Cognition, 31(1), 57–71.
• Niu, D., Terken, J., & Eggen, B. (2018). Anthropomorphizing information to enhance trust in autonomous vehicles. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 28(6), 352–359.
• Open Science Collaboration. (2012). An open, large-scale, collaborative effort to estimate the reproducibility of psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 657–660.
• Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716.
• Orth, U. R., Cornwell, T. B., Ohlhoff, J., & Naber, C. (2017). Seeing faces: The role of brand visual processing and social connection in brand liking. European Journal of Social Psychology, 47(3), 348-361.
• Palermo, R., & Rhodes, G. (2007). Are you always on my mind? A review of how face perception and attention interact. Neuropsychologia, 45(1), 75–92.
• Pecock, R. (1860). The repressor of over much blaming of the clergy. Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cme/AHB1325.0001.001
• Piaget, J. (1929). The child’s conception of the world. Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich.
• Puzakova, M., & Aggarwal, P. (2018). Brands as rivals: Consumer pursuit of distinctiveness and the role of brand anthropomorphism. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(4), 869–888.
• Puzakova, M., & Kwak, H. (2017). Should anthropomorphized brands engage customers? The impact of social crowding on brand preferences. Journal of Marketing, 81(6), 99–115.
• Puzakova, M., Kwak, H., & Rocereto, J. F. (2013). When humanizing brands goes wrong: The detrimental effect of brand anthropomorphization amid product wrongdoings. Journal of Marketing, 77(3), 81–100.
• Puzakova, M., Rocereto, J. F., & Kwak, H. (2013). Ads are watching me: A view from the interplay between anthropomorphism and customisation. International Journal of Advertising, 32(4), 513–538.
• Rauschnabel, P. A., & Ahuvia, A. C. (2014). You’re so lovable: Anthropomorphism and brand love. Journal of Brand Management, 21(5), 372–395.
• Reavey, B., Puzakova, M., Larsen Andras, T., & Kwak, H. (2018). The multidimensionality of anthropomorphism in advertising: The moderating roles of cognitive busyness and assertive language. International Journal of Advertising, 37(3), 440-462.
• Riva, P., Sacchi, S., & Brambilla, M. (2015). Humanizing machines: Anthropomorphization of slot machines increases gambling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21(4), 313.
• Romero, M., & Craig, A. W. (2017). Costly curves: How human-like shapes can increase spending. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(1), 80-98.
• Severson, R. L., & Lemm, K. M. (2016). Kids see human too: Adapting an individual differences measure of anthropomorphism for a child sample. Journal of Cognition and Development, 17(1), 122–141.
• Shin, H. I., & Kim, J. (2020). My computer is more thoughtful than you: Loneliness, anthropomorphism and dehumanization. Current Psychology, 39(2), 445–453.
• Simion, F., Leo, I., Turati, C., Valenza, E., & Dalla Barba, B. (2007). How face specialization emerges in the first months of life. Progress in Brain Research, 164, 169–185.
• Stern, D. (1992). Imitatio hominis: Anthropomorphism and the character (s) of God in Rabbinic literature. Prooftexts, 12(2), 151–174.
• Tam, K. P., Lee, S. L., & Chao, M. M. (2013). Saving Mr. Nature: Anthropomorphism enhances connectedness to and protectiveness toward nature. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(3), 514-521.
• Touré-Tillery, M., & McGill, A. L. (2015). Who or what to believe: Trust and the differential persuasiveness of human and anthropomorphized messengers. Journal of Marketing, 79(4), 94–110.
• Treagust, D. F., & Harrison, A. G. (2000). In search of explanatory frameworks: An analysis of Richard Feynman's lecture'Atoms in motion'. International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1157–1170.
• Triantos, A., Plakoyiannaki, E., Outra, E., & Petridis, N. (2016). Anthropomorphic packaging: is there life on “Mars”? European Journal of Marketing, 50(1–2), 260–275.
• Tuškej, U., & Podnar, K. (2018). Consumers’ identification with corporate brands: Brand prestige, anthropomorphism and engagement in social media. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 27(1), 3–17.
• Van Esch, P., Arli, D., Gheshlaghi, M. H., Andonopoulos, V., von der Heidt, T., & Northey, G. (2019). Anthropomorphism and augmented reality in the retail environment. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49(March), 35–42.
• Vidal, D. (2007). Anthropomorphism or sub‐anthropomorphism? An anthropological approach to gods and robots. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 13(4), 917–933.
• Wan, J. (2018). Paying the doughboy: The effect of time and money mind-sets on preference for anthropomorphized products. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(4), 466-476.
• Wan, E. W., Chen, R. P., & Jin, L. (2017). Judging a book by its cover? The effect of anthropomorphism on product attribute processing and consumer preference. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(6), 1008–1030.
• Wang, F., & Basso, F. (2019). “Animals are friends, not food”: Anthropomorphism leads to less favorable attitudes toward meat consumption by inducing feelings of anticipatory guilt. Appetite, 138(February), 153–173.
• Waytz, A., Heafner, J., & Epley, N. (2014). The mind in the machine: Anthropomorphism increases trust in an autonomous vehicle. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 52, 113–117.
• Waytz, A., Morewedge, C. K., Epley, N., Monteleone, G., Gao, J. H., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2010). Making sense by making sentient: effectance motivation increases anthropomorphism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(3), 410.
• White, R. W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, 66(5), 297.
• Williams, W. (2002). Aspects of the creed of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal: a study of Anthropomorphism in early Islamic discourse. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 34(3), 441-463.
• Windhager, S., Hutzler, F., Carbon, C. C., Oberzaucher, E., Schaefer, K., Thorstensen, T., ... & Grammer, K. (2010). Laying eyes on headlights: Eye movements suggest facial features in cars. Collegium Antropologicum, 34(3), 1075-1080.
• Yuan, L. (Ivy), & Dennis, A. R. (2019). Acting like humans? Anthropomorphism and consumer’s willingness to pay in electronic commerce. Journal of Management Information Systems, 36(2), 450–477.
• Zhang, M., Li, L., Ye, Y., Qin, K., & Zhong, J. (2020). The effect of brand anthropomorphism, brand distinctiveness, and warmth on brand attitude: A mediated moderation model. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 19(5), 523-536.
• Zhang, Z., & Patrick, V. M. (2018). Call me Rollie! The role of brand nicknames in shaping consumer-brand relationships. Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 3(2), 147–162.
• Zhu, H., Wong, N., & Huang, M. (2019). Does relationship matter? How social distance influences perceptions of responsibility on anthropomorphized environmental objects and conservation intentions. Journal of Business Research, 95, 62-70.
• Zohar, A., & Ginossar, S. (1998). Lifting the taboo regarding teleology and anthropomorphism in biology education—heretical suggestions. Science Education, 82(6), 679-697.