The DOI matches its Crossref record; 32 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conceptualizing a Nonnatural Entity: Anthropomorphism in God Concepts
Open accessAbstract
We investigate the problem of how nonnatural entities are represented by examining university students' concepts of God, both professed theological beliefs and concepts used in comprehension of narratives. In three story processing tasks, subjects often used an anthropomorphic God concept that is inconsistent with stated theological beliefs; and drastically distorted the narratives without any awareness of doing so. By heightening subjects' awareness of their theological beliefs, we were able to manipulate the degree of anthropomorphization. This tendency to anthropomorphize may be generalizable to other agents. God (and possibly other agents) is unintentionally anthropomorphized in some contexts, perhaps as a means of representing poorly understood nonnatural entities.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In a similar fashion, minds never free themselves entirely from their mortal coil: the dead continue to be imagined as possessing ethereal bodies resembling those they ' possessed ' in life, as well as being subject to the sorts of physical limitations typically imposed by bodies. 39”
From Body and Mind in Early China: An Integrated Humanities–Science Approach (2013) · cites this paper as Barrett 1996
In the citing paper
“In a similar fashion, minds never free themselves entirely from their mortal coil: the dead continue to be imagined as possessing ethereal bodies resembling those they ' possessed ' in life, as well as being subject to the sorts of physical limitations typically imposed by bodies. 39”
From Body and Mind in Early China: An Integrated Humanities–Science Approach (2013) · cites this paper as Barrett and Keil 1996
Citations
Cites
Nagel, T. (1974) · The Philosophical Review · doi:10.2307/2183914 · Cited by 7,440
(1927) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,656
Mental leaps: analogy in creative thought
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.32-6192 · Cited by 1,607
Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity In Cognition And Culture
Hirschfeld, L. A., & Gelman, S. A. (1994) · Cited by 1,363
Structured Imagination: the Role of Category Structure in Exemplar Generation
Ward, T. B. (1994) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1994.1010 · Cited by 828 · cited 1×
“Similarly, the results of these studies could be understood as a case of structured imagination ( Ward, 1994; 1995 ).”
Result(1993) · Cited by 775
The modularity of thought and the epidemiology of representations
Sperber, D. (1994) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511752902.003 · Cited by 695
Domain-specific knowledge and conceptual change
Carey, S. E., & Spelke, E. S. (1994) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511752902.008 · Cited by 675
The Naturalness of Religious Ideas: A Cognitive Theory of Religion
Barrett, J. L., & Boyer, P. (1996) · Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion · doi:10.2307/1386422 · Cited by 541
Self-citationH., M. T. (1992) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 525
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–200 of 768
Supernaturalizing Social Life: Religion and the Evolution of Human Cooperation
Rossano, M. J. (2007) · Human Nature · doi:10.1007/s12110-007-9002-4 · Cited by 80
What Does God Know? Supernatural Agents’ Access to Socially Strategic and Non‐Strategic Information
Purzycki, B. G., Finkel, D. N., Shaver, J. H., Wales, N., Cohen, A. B., & Sosis, R. H. (2012) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01242.x · Cited by 80
“Chagnon (1996) reports that the Yanomamö believe in a spirit who directs those who were generous in life to the sky, and those who were not to ‘‘a place of fire’’ (pp.”
BackgroundShtulman, A. (2008) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.5.1123 · Cited by 76
The roots of scientific reasoning: infancy, modularity and the art of tracking
Carruthers, P. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.005 · Cited by 77
Behavioral Objects: The Rise of the Evocative Machines
Levillain, F., & Zibetti, E. (2017) · Journal of Human-Robot Interaction · doi:10.5898/jhri.6.1.levillain · Cited by 81
“Paradigmatic cases include, for instance, children' propensity for animism (Piaget, 1929), someone patting his computer to encourage the execution of a software, or the explanation of a natural phenomenon with the recourse of intentional entities (Barrett & Keil, 1996; Bering, 2012).”
BackgroundScience as Structured Imagination
Cruz, H. D., & Smedt, J. D. (2010) · The Journal of Creative Behavior · doi:10.1002/j.2162-6057.2010.tb01324.x · Cited by 72
“Barrett and Keil (1996) found that Christian believers have difficulties representing their god consistently as an omniscient, omnipresent being: they intuitively distort stories about him to fit expectations they have of normal people, such as that he can only attend to one event at the same time.”
BackgroundReligion’s Profound Influences on Psychology
Cohen, A. B. (2015) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721414553265 · Cited by 79
“One great example of this is that Barrett and Keil (1996) found that religious people implicitly ascribe human limitations to God without explicitly being aware of it. When presented with a story about God simultaneously answering prayers from multiple people, participants explicitly report that this is sensible becau…”
BackgroundLane, J. D., & Harris, P. L. (2014) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691613518078 · Cited by 78
“In several studies, U.S. adults, most of whom identified as Christian, were told hypothetical stories about God ( J. L. Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundReligious People and Paranormal Believers
Aarnio, K., & Lindeman, M. (2007) · Journal of Individual Differences · doi:10.1027/1614-0001.28.1.1 · Cited by 71
Counterintuitiveness as the hallmark of religiosity
Pyysiäinen, I., Lindeman, M., & Honkela, T. (2003) · Religion · doi:10.1016/j.religion.2003.09.001 · Cited by 71
“The human-like form is only secondary (see Barrett and Keil, 1996; Barrett, 1998, 2001; Barrett et al., 2001; Boyer, 1996c; Guthrie, 1993).”
BackgroundThe accessibility of religious beliefs
Cohen, A. B., Shariff, A., & Hill, P. C. (2008) · Journal of Research in Personality · doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2008.06.001 · Cited by 75
“For example, Barrett and Keil (1996) found that religious people implicitly ascribe human limitations to God, without explicitly being aware of it.”
BackgroundThe role of religious context in children's differentiation between God's mind and human minds
Richert, R. A., Saide, A. R., Lesage, K. A., & Shaman, N. J. (2016) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjdp.12160 · Cited by 69
Cognitive and Emotional Processes in the Cultural Transmission of Natural and Nonnatural Beliefs
Ara Norenzayan, A., & Scott Atran, B. (2003) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410608994-14 · Cited by 69
Religious and Spiritual Development throughout the Life Span
Oser, F. K., Scarlett, W. G., & Bucher, A. A. (2007) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0117 · Cited by 67
The behavioral ecology of religion: the benefits and costs of one evolutionary approach
Sosis, R. H., & Bulbulia, J. A. (2011) · Religion · doi:10.1080/0048721x.2011.604514 · Cited by 67
“Behavioral data are particularly important for the study of religion because many experimental studies have shown significant differences between online and offline religious cognition (Barrett and Keil 1996 ), suggesting that responses to surveys and interviews may not accurately reflect the religious beliefs and pra…”
BackgroundRadical Interpretation in Religion
(2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906 · Cited by 63
The Singularity and Machine Ethics
Muehlhauser, L., & Helm, L. (2012) · The frontiers collection · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32560-1_6 · Cited by 64
Are Artworks More Like People Than Artifacts? Individual Concepts and Their Extensions
Newman, G. E., Bartels, D. M., & Smith, R. (2014) · Topics in Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/tops.12111 · Cited by 62
Is God just a big person? Children's conceptions of God across cultures and religious traditions
Nyhof, M., & Johnson, C. N. (2017) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjdp.12173 · Cited by 61
“Adultswho espouseGod’s otherness in theory nonetheless continue to make concrete inferences in practice (Barrett, 1999; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Slone, 2004).”
BackgroundReligion, synchrony, and cooperation
Cohen, E. E. A., Mundry, R., & Kirschner, S. (2013) · Religion Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2012.741075 · Cited by 61
Disbelief in belief: On the cognitive status of supernatural beliefs
Boudry, M., & Coyne, J. A. (2016) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2015.1110852 · Cited by 64
“…between what people profess to believe when given time for deliberation, and what they seem to believe in so-called “online” cognition (i.e., in actual religious practice), is called “theological correctness” (Barrett, 1999; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Boyer, 2001; Purzycki, 2013; Slone, 2004).”
BackgroundMcCauley, R. N. (2020) · Zygon® · doi:10.1111/zygo.12573 · Cited by 63
Avoiding the Tyranny of Morphology; or, Why Compare?
Bynum, C. W. (2014) · History of Religions · doi:10.1086/675366 · Cited by 58
Boyer, P. (2019) · Religion Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2019.1678518 · Cited by 59
“That is true, in particular, because of the phenomenon of “theological correctness” (Barrett, 1998; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Slone, 2004).”
BackgroundHearing Voices and Other Matters of the Mind
McCauley, R. N., & Graham, G. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190091149.001.0001 · Cited by 70
Anthropomorphic God Concepts Engender Moral Judgment
Morewedge, C. K., & Clear, M. E. (2008) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.182 · Cited by 57
“Recollections and descriptions of God’s behavior portray an entity subject to many physical constraints that affect human beings (Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundMethodRadical interpretation and pragmatism: Davidson, Rorty, and Brandom on truth
Stout, J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906.004 · Cited by 57
U.S. Citizens’ Representations of God and Support for Sustainability Policies
Johnson, K. A., Liu, R. L., Minton, E. A., Bartholomew, D. E., Peterson, M., Cohen, A. B., & Kees, J. (2017) · Journal of Public Policy & Marketing · doi:10.1509/jppm.16.108 · Cited by 56
Subjective selection and the evolution of complex culture
Singh, M. (2022) · Evolutionary Anthropology Issues News and Reviews · doi:10.1002/evan.21948 · Cited by 62
Cruz, H. D. (2006) · Evolution and Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.02.001 · Cited by 56
An Angry Volcano? Reminders of Death and Anthropomorphizing Nature
Ara Norenzayan, A., Hansen, I. G., & Cady, J. (2008) · Social Cognition · doi:10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.190 · Cited by 54
“There is evidence that the devout implicitly anthropomorphize God even when this tendency runs counter to stated theological beliefs among monotheists ( Barrett & Keil, 1996 ).”
BackgroundWhite, C. J. M., & Norenzayan, A. (2019) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/bs.aesp.2019.03.001 · Cited by 54
Young, M. J., Morris, M. W., Burrus, J. T., Krishnan, L., & Regmi, M. P. (2011) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/0022022110381123 · Cited by 54
“Barrett and Keil (1996) found that people’s judgments about God follow from concrete conceptions of person rather than abstract theological beliefs.”
BackgroundA creative destruction approach to replication: Implicit work and sex morality across cultures
Tierney, W., Hardy, J. H., Ebersole, C. R., Viganola, D., Clemente, E. G., Gordon, M., Hoogeveen, S., Haaf, J. M., Dreber, A., Johannesson, M., et al. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104060 · Cited by 54
“This experiment adapted a false memory paradigm from cognitive psychology (Barrett & Keil, 1996) to examine the tacit inferences drawn about social targets.”
MethodBulbulia, J. A. (2012) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198568308.013.0043 · Cited by 51
Evans, E. M., & Lane, J. D. (2011) · Human Development · doi:10.1159/000329130 · Cited by 49
“…Lane et al., in press; Makris & Pnevmatikos, 2007], and even adults overattribute psychological constraints to God in their everyday reasoning [Barrett & Keil, 1996], we suspect that the capacity to conceptualize a truly omniscient God may not emerge until the end of the elementary school…”
BackgroundThe Evolution of Gods’ Minds in the Tyva Republic
Purzycki, B. G. (2016) · Current Anthropology · doi:10.1086/685729 · Cited by 54
“…in order to make sense of them, religion stems from this ancestral trait insofar as we seek to explain the mysterious or potentially dangerous in terms of an agent (or agents) who often possesses powers beyond our own (Barrett 2004; Barrett and Keil 1996; Dennett 1971, 1987; Guthrie 1980, 1995).”
BackgroundThe faces of God in America: Revealing religious diversity across people and politics
Jackson, J. C., Hester, N., & Gray, K. J. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0198745 · Cited by 50
The Permanence of Mental Objects: Testing Magical Thinking on Perceived and Imaginary Realities.
Subbotsky, E. V. (2005) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.2.301 · Cited by 49
“…applied anthropomorphic constraints on the imagined psychological characteristics of God (like the ability to concentrate only on one object at a time) despite the fact that they ascribed to God omnipotent properties that would necessarily be free of such constraints (Barrett and Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundBoyer, P. (2000) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515080050128123 · Cited by 49
Soliman, T. M., Johnson, K. A., & Song, H. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691615606373 · Cited by 50
“This was equally true for both Christian and Hindu participants (Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundAttributes of God: Conceptual Foundations of a Foundational Belief
Shtulman, A., & Lindeman, M. (2015) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12253 · Cited by 53
“These conclusions are based on an influential study by Barrett and Keil (1996), in which participants’ God concepts were assessed both directly, with specific questions about God’s extraordinary properties, and indirectly, with a story-recall task. The authors found a discrepancy in participants’ reasoning across the…”
BackgroundInfluentialArgumentation and the diffusion of counter-intuitive beliefs.
Claidière, N., Trouche, E., & Mercier, H. (2017) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000323 · Cited by 47
Extending the Testimony Problem: Evaluating the Truth, Scope, and Source of Cultural Information
Bergstrom, B., Moehlmann, B., & Boyer, P. (2006) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00888.x · Cited by 47
“At the same time, supernatural agents are tacitly construed as standard intentional agents, whose perceptual and thought processes are essentially similar to those of humans (Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundCausal maps and Bayes nets: a cognitive and computational account of theory-formation
Alison Gopnik, C., & Glymour, C. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.007 · Cited by 45
Why Evolved Cognition Matters to Understanding Cultural Cognitive Variations
Boyer, P. (2010) · Interdisciplinary Science Reviews · doi:10.1179/030801810x12772143410449 · Cited by 45
Islam, Ethnicity, and Conflict in Ethiopia
Østebø, T. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108884839 · Cited by 45
Religious reflexivity and transmissive frequency
Whitehouse, H. (2007) · Social Anthropology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8676.2002.tb00048.x · Cited by 45
Barrett, J. L., Newman, R. M., & Richert, R. A. (2003) · Journal of Cognition and Culture · doi:10.1163/156853703321598590 · Cited by 45
Self-citationDoes Poor Understanding of Physical World Predict Religious and Paranormal Beliefs?
Lindeman, M., & Svedholm‐Häkkinen, A. M. (2016) · Applied Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1002/acp.3248 · Cited by 54
“…supernatural believers’ tendency to ascribe human characteristics to non-human phenomena is widely acknowledged (see the aforementioned studies, see also Barrett & Keil, 1996; Boyer, 1996; Guthrie, 1993), theoretical and empirical work has focused only on biased social information processing.”
“The Chinese believe in spirits”: belief and believing in the study of religion
Bell, C. M. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906.008 · Cited by 45
Human evolution and the cognitive basis of science
Mithen, S. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.003 · Cited by 45
God is great, God is good: Teaching god concepts in Turkish Islamic sermons
Gibbon, J. (2008) · Poetics · doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2008.06.009 · Cited by 43
Fundamental social motives and the varieties of religious experience
Johnson, K. A., Li, Y. J., & Cohen, A. B. (2014) · Religion Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2014.918684 · Cited by 42
“Changes in the religiosity of individuals have been charted over a lifetime (McCullough, Enders, Brion, & Jain, 2005; Rizzuto, 1979), observed even within a single day (Barrett & Keil, 1996), or seen momentarily in response to persuasive arguments (Shariff, Cohen, & Norenzayan, 2008).”
BackgroundNeuroscientific Prediction and the Intrusion of Intuitive Metaphysics
Rosé, D., Buckwalter, W., & Nichols, S. (2015) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12310 · Cited by 41
“A powerful demonstration of filling in comes from the cognitive science of religion, in which the intuitive views that people hold about human agency influence their comprehension of stories (e.g., Boyer, 1994; Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
Approaching an understanding of omniscience from the preschool years to early adulthood.
Lane, J. D., Wellman, H. M., & Evans, E. M. (2014) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0037715 · Cited by 46
“A seminal study with college students sheds light on how adults cognitively represent such a mind (Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
InfluentialReligious reflexivity and transmissive frequency
Whitehouse, H. (2002) · Social Anthropology · doi:10.1017/s0964028202000071 · Cited by 42
“…god is everywhere at all times (because this information has been explicitly transmitted in religious discourse) but, whenever such processing of god-concepts has to be fast and efficient, people actually represent god as having to deal with people’s problems one at a time (Barrett and Keil 1996).”
BackgroundCognitive Pathways to Belief in Karma and Belief in God
White, C., Willard, A. K., Baimel, A., & Norenzayan, A. (2021) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12935 · Cited by 47
In the name of…: Legitimate interactants in the dialogue of prayer
Cerulo, K. A., & Barra, A. K. C. (2008) · Poetics · doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2008.06.010 · Cited by 40
Blancke, S., De Smedt, J., De Cruz, H., Boudry, M., & Braeckman, J. (2012) · Science & Education · doi:10.1007/s11191-011-9402-z · Cited by 39
“Barrett and Keil (1996) found that people who subscribe to complex and highly counterintuitive theological theses (e.g., God is ubiquitous) are still caught reasoning about God in everyday situations as if he were a physically and psychologically constrained agent, albeit one with superhuman powers.”
BackgroundCore Intuitions About Persons Coexist and Interfere With Acquired Christian Beliefs About God
Barlev, M., Mermelstein, S., & German, T. C. (2016) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12435 · Cited by 41
Are religious beliefs counter-intuitive?
Bloch, M. E. F. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906.010 · Cited by 37
Cognitive Science of Religion and the Study of Theological Concepts
Cruz, H. D. (2013) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-013-9168-9 · Cited by 39
“Barrett and Keil (1996) demonstrated that theologically correct beliefs get distorted in online reasoning tasks, when believers have to infer what God would do or know in concrete situations.”
BackgroundEmotions and epistemic evaluations
Hookway, C. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.014 · Cited by 38
ADVANTAGES OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCES, UPLOADS, AND DIGITAL MINDS
Sotala, K. (2012) · International Journal of Machine Consciousness · doi:10.1142/s1793843012400161 · Cited by 39
“This tendency persists even if humans are explicitly instructed to act otherwise (Barrett and Keil 1996).”
BackgroundWhither the Roots? Achieving Conceptual Depth in Psychology of Religion
Hill, P. C., & Gibson, N. J. S. (2008) · Archive for the Psychology of Religion · doi:10.1163/157361208x316944 · Cited by 37
“…into why people make automatic attributions to God’s character rather than to his powers for failing to prevent a tsunami (Exline & Rose, 2005; cf. Barrett & Keil, 1996) would enrich our understanding both of anger toward God and of how and when people use concepts such as omnipotence and…”
BackgroundSchjoedt, U., Sørensen, J. F., Nielbo, K. L., Xygalatas, D., Mitkidis, P., & Bulbulia, J. A. (2013) · Religion Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2012.745447 · Cited by 38
Nearer My God to Thee: Self–God Overlap and Believers' Relationships with God
Hodges, S. D., Sharp, C. A., Gibson, N. J. S., & Tipsord, J. M. (2012) · Self and Identity · doi:10.1080/15298868.2012.674212 · Cited by 36
“However, there is evidence that believers' framework for viewing their relationship with God is borrowed from their relationships with other humans (Barrett & Keil, 1996 ; Tremlin, 2006 ).”
BackgroundMind and Spirit: a comparative theory about representation of mind and the experience of spirit
Luhrmann, T. M. (2020) · Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute · doi:10.1111/1467-9655.13238 · Cited by 36
Johnson, R. D., Marakas, G. M., & Palmer, J. W. (2006) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/01449290600959104 · Cited by 36
“Although the tendency to anthropomorphize is natural (Barrett and Keil 1996 ) and not unique to computing technology (Black 1962 ), there is a stronger risk for computing technology that individuals cease to view the relationship between humans and computers as metaphorical, but instead treat the relationship as liter…”
BackgroundNg, B. K. L., & Gervais, W. M. (2016) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316161579.015 · Cited by 36
The Sociology of Prayer: Dimensions and Mechanisms
Froese, P., & Jones, R. (2021) · Social Sciences · doi:10.3390/socsci10010015 · Cited by 46
Levin, D. T., Killingsworth, S. S., Saylor, M. M., Gordon, S. M., & Kawamura, K. (2012) · Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/07370024.2012.697007 · Cited by 35
“This approach is common in both the adult and developmental concept literatures (e.g., see Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundCognitive consequences and constraints on reasoning about ritual
Legare, C. H., & Herrmann, P. A. (2013) · Religion, Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2012.736710 · Cited by 24
Bentall, R. P. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-97202-2_3 · Cited by 34
“…propositions follow particular themes, for example, in the case of religion, that natural events are under the control of unseen intentional agents (Barrett & Keil, 1996; Bering, 2011) to whom we may be accountable to in an afterlife (Solomon, Greenberg, & Pyszczynski, 2015) or, in the case of…”
BackgroundDimensional Structure of and Variation in Anthropomorphic Concepts of God
Shaman, N. J., Saide, A. R., & Richert, R. A. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01425 · Cited by 32
Wilson, R. A. (2004) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511807381 · Cited by 134
For a Social Psychology of Prayer
Sharp, S. (2012) · Sociology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2012.00476.x · Cited by 32
Currie, G., & Jureidini, J. N. (2004) · Mind & Language · doi:10.1111/j.0268-1064.2004.00266.x · Cited by 32
Attribute centrality and imaginative thought
Ward, T. B., Dodds, R. A., Saunders, K. N., & Sifonis, C. M. (2000) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03211839 · Cited by 33
Artificial intelligence psychological anthropomorphism: scale development and validation
Shen, P., Zhang, F., Fan, X., & Liu, F. (2024) · Service Industries Journal · doi:10.1080/02642069.2024.2366970 · Cited by 31
“Measuring AI anthropomorphism involves making direct inquiries about humanlike levels (Kiesler & Goetz, 2002), employing implicit measures (Barrett & Keil, 1996), and using multiple-item scales (e.g. Chin et al., 2005).”
Thinking about thinking: the mind's porosity and the presence of the gods
Luhrmann, T. M. (2020) · Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute · doi:10.1111/1467-9655.13246 · Cited by 31
Boyer, P. (2022) · Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute · doi:10.1111/1467-9655.13826 · Cited by 31
Blessings, strength, and guidance: Prayer frames in a hospital prayer book
Cadge, W., & Daglian, M. (2008) · Poetics · doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2008.06.011 · Cited by 30
Toward a Cognitive Ecology of Religious Concepts
Purzycki, B. G. (2012) · Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion · doi:10.1558/jcsr.v1i1.99 · Cited by 30
Cognitive aspects of religious ontologies: how brain processes constrain religious concepts
Boyer, P. (1999) · Scripta Instituti Donneriani Aboensis · doi:10.30674/scripta.67243 · Cited by 30
Development and validation of a social robot anthropomorphism scale (SRA) in a french sample
David, D., Hayotte, M., Thérouanne, P., d’Arripe-Longueville, F., & Milhabet, I. (2022) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102802 · Cited by 29
The Belief in Magic in the Age of Science
Subbotsky, E. V. (2014) · SAGE Open · doi:10.1177/2158244014521433 · Cited by 31
“…some of which (such as understanding goal-directedness and making mentalist attributions) may be hardwired by evolution (Atran, 2002; Barrett, 2001; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Bering, 2006a, 2006b; Bloom, 2002; Bloom & Weisberg, 2007; Boyer, 1994, 2001; Boyer & Bergstrom, 2008; Hood, 2009; McKay &…”
CHAPTER 2 American Moral Exceptionalism
Uhlmann, E. L., Poehlman, T. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.003.002 · Cited by 29
Heiphetz, L., Lane, J. D., Waytz, A. G., & Young, L. (2018) · British Journal of Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjdp.12231 · Cited by 28
“In areas where religious teaching provides clear guidance, participants – especially adults –may report ‘theologically correct’ ideas that differ from their implicit representations (Barrett, 1999; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Slone, 2004).”
BackgroundChapter 11. Measurement Issues in God Image Research and Practice
Gibson, N. J. S. (2007) · Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health · doi:10.1300/j515v09n03_11 · Cited by 28
“Barrett and colleagues used a technique that involved experimental participants listening to a story and subsequently being asked to recall whether information was featured in the story (Barrett, 1998; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Barrett & VanOrman, 1996).”
Explaining Christian Origins and Early Judaism
(2008) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/ej.9789004163294.i-328 · Cited by 28
God: A Brief History with a Cognitive Explanation of the Concept
Pyysiäinen, I. (2005) · Temenos - Nordic Journal for the Study of Religion · doi:10.33356/temenos.4803 · Cited by 28
“My point here is that the two types of cognitive processes seem to support two very different kinds of god concepts (see Barrett and Keil 1996; Barrett 2004).”
BackgroundTwo paradigms for religious representation: The physicist and the playground (a reply to Levy)
Leeuwen, N. V. (2017) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2017.03.021 · Cited by 30
“This intuitive byproduct view of religious representations is supported by anthropological fieldwork (Boyer, 2001), experimental psychology (Atran & Norenzayan 2004; Barrett & Keil, 1996), and empirically based theory (McCauley, 2011).”
MethodPrayer in America: A Detailed Analysis of the Various Dimensions of Prayer
Froese, P., & Uecker, J. E. (2022) · Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion · doi:10.1111/jssr.12810 · Cited by 31
Examining Religious and Spiritual Development During Childhood and Adolescence
Boyatzis, C. J. (2009) · International handbooks of religion and education · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9018-9_4 · Cited by 26
Barlev, M., Mermelstein, S., & German, T. C. (2018) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-017-1421-6 · Cited by 26
Cognitive Science and the Naturalness of Religion
McCauley, R. N., & Cohen, E. E. A. (2010) · Philosophy Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1747-9991.2010.00326.x · Cited by 26
Evoked culture, ritualization and religious rituals
Liénard, P., & Lawson, E. T. (2008) · Religion · doi:10.1016/j.religion.2008.01.004 · Cited by 26
“Examining religious traditions around the globe, we find many situations in which people indulge in ritual actions with loose specifications of religious entities rather than participating in complex theological speculation (Barrett and Keil, 1996; Slone, 2004).”
BackgroundUnderstanding the role of cognition in science: theScience as Categoryframework
Dunbar, K. N. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.009 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Barrett, J. L., & Keil, F. C.
- Affiliations
- Cornell University (US)
- Venue
- Cognitive Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1996-12
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 219-247
- ISSN
- 0010-0285 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2166757416
- Cited by
- 769
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 84 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 25 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 7.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Cognitive Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Oxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01-HD23922, R01HD023922)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Language, Metaphor, and Cognition
- Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
- Keywords
- anthropomorphism, concept of God, theological beliefs, narrative comprehension
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Cognition, Concept Formation, Culture, Humans, Mental Recall, Religion and Psychology, Metaphor, Intuition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
