4.0 Article

The Influence of Anthropomorphism on Giving Personal Names to Objects

Journal

ADVANCES IN COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages 33-37

Publisher

UNIV ECONOMICS & HUMAN SCIENCES WARSAW
DOI: 10.5709/acp-0314-1

Keywords

personification; anthropomorphism; proper names

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found a significant relationship between giving specific names to objects and object personification, but object personification was not a prerequisite for name giving. Approximately 40% of participants who gave personal names to objects did not attribute psychological characteristics to those objects.
Some people give a proper name to an owned individual object, such as a car or a computer. The study examined whether giving a proper name to a specific object is associated with object personification, and more specifically, whether object personification is a prerequisite to name giving. The latter question was assessed by asking 130 participants whether, in their adult life, they had ever given a personal name to an object, and if so, whether they had attributed psychological characteristics to that named object. The general relationship between personal name giving and personification was assessed by evaluating whether the scores from a questionnaire on anthropomorphism differed in participants who reported having given a specific name to at least one personal object, compared with those who reported not doing so (Mann-Whitney's U test). Results showed that the scores from the questionnaire on anthropomorphism were significantly higher for participants who had given specific names to objects than for participants who had not done so. However, object personification was not found to be a prerequisite to name giving. Indeed, about 40 percent of people who reported giving personal names to objects did not attribute psychological qualities to these objects.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available