The art of thinking · 6 · Judgment, action and error
Anthropomorphism
Also known as: Anthropomorphization, Attribution of mind, ELIZA effect
German: Anthropomorphismus
In psychology, anthropomorphism is the attribution of human characteristics, mental states, emotions or intentions to non-human entities such as animals, objects, machines and AI systems.
- Cognitive psychology
- Judgment
In one sentence
Anthropomorphism is the attribution of human traits, minds and intentions to non-human entities, from pets to chatbots (Epley, Waytz and Cacioppo, 2007).
Example
A user thanks a chatbot, apologizes to it and says it “seemed hurt” by a question. The attribution tells us about the user's perception, not about what happens in the system.
Explained in context
Context cards connect this term with others to answer one question. Also in British English and German.
What the research shows
Epley, Waytz and Cacioppo (2007) explain anthropomorphism with three factors: people draw on what they know about humans to make sense of other agents (elicited agent knowledge), they anthropomorphize more when they want to understand and predict an agent (effectance motivation), and more when they lack social connection (sociality motivation). Language-producing systems invite the attribution strongly: as early as the 1960s, users of Joseph Weizenbaum's ELIZA program confided in a simple pattern-matching script. In a survey of US adults, Colombatto and Fleming (2024) found that a majority attributed at least some possibility of phenomenal consciousness to ChatGPT, and that those who used it more often attributed more.
Evidence status
That people readily attribute minds to machines, and that human-like cues such as a name, a voice, first-person speech and emotional wording increase the attribution, is well documented. How much an attribution reflects belief rather than a way of speaking varies between people and situations. An attribution is a finding about the observers; it is not evidence for or against consciousness in the system.
How it applies
- Wording invites or avoids it: First-person emotional language (“I'm happy to help”, “I feel”) in interfaces, product texts and documentation increases anthropomorphic reading. Describe what a function does (“The assistant generates an answer from the manual”) where the attribution would mislead.
- Mark the kind of statement: Keep apart what the provider designed (a persona, a tone of voice), what the system generated (a self-report) and what research found. A model's statement about its feelings is generated output.
- Users' mental models: Anthropomorphism shapes the mental model users form of a system, for example that it remembers, understands or cares. Documentation that corrects such models has to name the actual behavior.
External references
How to read this pool
Entries, context cards and transitional topics
The art of thinking explains ways of thinking — where a method comes from, what it asks of you and how it was adapted later. You meet four kinds of content here, each with its own job:
- Glossary entry
- Defines one concept or method of thinking: its origin, an example and how it relates to neighboring ideas. “X vs. Y” sections set two methods side by side.
- Context card of the art of thinking
- A short, self-contained answer to one question about a way of thinking — its lineage, its steps, its limits. These cards are listed on The art of thinking only.
- Transitional topicBridges both pools
- A context card that bridges both pools: it shows how a way of thinking was adapted into documentation, analysis or quality practice. It sits with the reference context cards and is marked as transitional wherever it appears.
- Reference entry or context card
- Belongs to the Glossary & Norms Space on regulation, norms and engineering. Entries here link to one only where a method is also an established tool of documentation or quality work, such as the five whys or a user’s mental model.