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 201–300 of 768
Minds of gods and human cognitive constraints: socio-ecological context shapes belief
McNamara, R. A., & Purzycki, B. G. (2019) · Religion Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2019.1678510 · Cited by 28
Do Cultural Misbeliefs Cause Costly Behavior?
Mercier, H., & Altay, S. (2022) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009001021.014 · Cited by 25
The Experimental Investigation of Religious CognitionPreprint
Gibson, N. J. S. (2018) · doi:10.31237/osf.io/mxwfc · Cited by 25
Guthrie, S. E. (2016) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199397747.013.6 · Cited by 24
Ichino, A. (2024) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198872221.003.0005 · Cited by 24
Social Interaction: Do Non‐humans Count?
Cerulo, K. A. (2011) · Sociology Compass · doi:10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00404.x · Cited by 26
Dein, S. L., & Pargäment, K. I. (2012) · Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic · doi:10.1521/bumc.2012.76.3.235 · Cited by 24
Bradley, P. (2019) · Ai & Society · doi:10.1007/s00146-019-00890-2 · Cited by 20
“Studies have shown that even in simulations where the participants clearly understand an AI is not human, they will assign it human qualities like empathy and reasoning (Barrett 1996).”
BackgroundDevelopment and validation of a new measure of travel destination personality
Kovačić, S., Jovanović, T. S., & Dinić, B. M. (2019) · Psihologija · doi:10.2298/psi190423016k · Cited by 23
The influence of prior belief on scientific thinking
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2002) · The Cognitive Basis of Science · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.011 · Cited by 22
Friendly Artificial Intelligence
Yudkowsky, E. (2012) · The frontiers collection · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32560-1_10 · Cited by 22
Wlodarski, R., & Pearce, E. (2016) · Human Nature · doi:10.1007/s12110-016-9256-9 · Cited by 22
“In support of this supposition, research has suggested that religious and nonreligious people tend to anthropomorphize God during real-time inferential processing of information (Barrett and Keil 1996), and that a relationship exists between schizotypal thinking and an extrinsic religious orientation (Maltby and Day 2…”
BackgroundBortolotti, L. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-97202-2 · Cited by 25
Atran, S. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.004 · Cited by 23
Faucher, L., Mallon, R., Nazer, D. K., Nichols, S., Ruby, A., Stich, S., & Weinberg, J. M. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.019 · Cited by 22
Science without grammar: scientific reasoning in severe agrammatic aphasia
Varley, R. A. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.006 · Cited by 23
Introduction: what makes science possible?
Carruthers, P., Stich, S., & Siegal, M. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.002 · Cited by 21
Avatars in Pain: Visible Harm Enhances Mind Perception in Humans and Robots
Świderska, A., & Küster, D. (2018) · Perception · doi:10.1177/0301006618809919 · Cited by 24
“…Received: 30 January 2018; accepted: 5 October 2018 Humans are naturally inclined to attribute a variety of human characteristics to an array of nonhuman and nonliving entities, such as pets, gods, and natural forces, to name but a few (e.g., Barrett & Keil, 1996; Gosling, Kwan, & John, 2003).”
BackgroundReligion, Evolution, and the Basis of Institutions: The Institutional Cognition Model of Religion
Wood, C. P., & Shaver, J. H. (2018) · Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture · doi:10.26613/esic.2.2.89 · Cited by 22
What is Counterintuitive? Religious Cognition and Natural Expectation
Russell, Y. I., & Gobet, F. R. (2013) · Review of Philosophy and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s13164-013-0160-5 · Cited by 22
“Subsequent empirical studies have supported this idea in adults and children (Atran and Norenzayan 2004; Barrett 2007b; Barrett and Keil 1996; Barrett and Richert 2003).”
BackgroundIs Religion What We Want? Motivation and the Cultural Transmission of Religious Representations
Nichols, S. (2004) · Journal of Cognition and Culture · doi:10.1163/1568537041725079 · Cited by 21
Anthropomorphism and Intentionality Improve Memory for Events
Baker, L. J., Hymel, A. M., & Levin, D. T. (2016) · Discourse Processes · doi:10.1080/0163853x.2016.1223517 · Cited by 22
“Humans are intimately aware of their own goals and motivations, and thus individuals may attribute human characteristics when no other information is available (e.g., Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundIntelligence and Intelligibility
Lloyd, G. E. R. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198854593.001.0001 · Cited by 20
Intuitions and Arguments: Cognitive Foundations of Argumentation in Natural Theology
Cruz, H. D., & Smedt, J. D. (2017) · European Journal for Philosophy of Religion · doi:10.24204/ejpr.v9i2.1934 · Cited by 21
Cultural politics and the question of the existence of God
Rorty, R. M. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906.005 · Cited by 21
Concepts about the capabilities of computers and robots
Levin, D. T., Killingsworth, S. S., & Saylor, M. M. (2008) · ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1145/1349822.1349831 · Cited by 20
“Accordingly, one might predict that adults would presume that any intelligent artifact should be capable of having the same beliefs, desires, and goals as people, or, if they do make a distinction between computers and people, that some simple cues such as the anthropomorphic form of humanoid…”
BackgroundIn Mysterious Ways: On petitionary prayer and subtle forms of supernatural causation
Boudry, M., & Smedt, J. D. (2011) · Religion · doi:10.1080/0048721x.2011.600464 · Cited by 19
“One interesting finding that has emerged from this cognitive research is that people use different versions of the same religious concept under different cognitive load demands (Barrett 1999 ; Barrett and Keil 1996 ).”
BackgroundSaving belief: on the new materialism in religious studies
Godlove, T. F. J. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906.003 · Cited by 20
You don't read a myth for information
Penner, H. H. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906.012 · Cited by 20
Hong, J. (2021) · Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies · doi:10.1002/hbe2.292 · Cited by 20
Mishra, R., & Mehta, R. (2023) · Appetite · doi:10.1016/j.appet.2023.107035 · Cited by 19
The use of critical speech acts in Psychology and Chemistry research papers
Fagan, A., & Martín, P. A. M. (2004) · Dialnet (Universidad de la Rioja) · Cited by 19
PALEY'S iPOD: THE COGNITIVE BASIS OF THE DESIGN ARGUMENT WITHIN NATURAL THEOLOGY
Cruz, H. D., & Smedt, J. D. (2010) · Zygon® · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2010.01120.x · Cited by 19
One God but three concepts: Complexity in Christians’ representations of God.
Sharp, C. A., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gibson, N. J. S. (2015) · Psychology of Religion and Spirituality · doi:10.1037/rel0000053 · Cited by 19
“…happens in the world and in one’s life (e.g., Barrett & Zahl, 2013; Spilka & Schmidt, 1983; Weeks & Lupfer, 2000; Welton, Adkins, Ingle, & Dixon, 1996), and how people represent theological constructions of God in their everyday reasoning (e.g., Barrett, 2011; Barrett & Keil, 1996), to name a few.”
BackgroundMethodUhlmann, E. L., Poehlman, T. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2008) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-373694-9.00004-0 · Cited by 20
Considering the Rationality of African Ritual Behavior
Mort, J. G. (2006) · ScholarWorks - WMU (Western Michigan University) · Cited by 18
The natural foundations of religion
Collier, M. (2014) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2012.740004 · Cited by 3
“They have also conducted laboratory experiments which reveal that those who officially believe that anthropomorphism is ‘‘theologically incorrect’’ nevertheless engage in this type of reasoning when performing on-line tasks (Barrett & Keil, 1996, p. 242).”
Are Hindu representations of the divine prototypically structured?
Fincham, F. D., May, R. W., & Kamble, S. V. (2018) · Psychology of Religion and Spirituality · doi:10.1037/rel0000166 · Cited by 20
Implicit measures of anthropomorphism: affective priming and recognition of apparent animal emotions
Dacey, M., & Coane, J. H. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1149444 · Cited by 19
“Anthropomorphism of spiritual entities plays an important role in the psychology of religion (Barrett and Keil, 1996; Shaman et al., 2018).”
BackgroundThe cognitive science of souls: Clarifications and extensions of the evolutionary model
Bering, J. M. (2006) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x06499106 · Cited by 15
The Anthrozoomorphic Identity: Furry Fandom Members’ Connections to Nonhuman Animals
Roberts, S. E., Plante, C. N., Gerbasi, K. C., & Reysen, S. (2015) · Anthrozoös · doi:10.1080/08927936.2015.1069993 · Cited by 18
“Since spiritual associations with animals often involve their anthropomorphization (e.g., Barrett and Keil 1996), we predicted that furries’ felt spiritual connections to animals should correlate similarly with their anthropomorphic perceptions of animals.”
Religion as a “mobile army of metaphors”
Frankenberry, N. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613906.013 · Cited by 17
The nature and varieties of felt presence experiences: A reply to Nielsen
Cheyne, J. A., & Girard, T. A. (2007) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2007.02.003 · Cited by 17
Evolutionary explanations for religion: An interdisciplinary critical review
Lindenfors, P., & Svensson, J. (2021) · Research Ideas and Outcomes · doi:10.3897/rio.7.e66132 · Cited by 16
“…based on the dual system differentiation between fast, intuitive thinking necessary for managing everyday life and slow reflective thinking (Barrett and Keil 1996, Barrett 1998, Tremlin 2005). c.) Social organisation Questions concerning how religion relates to social organisation,…”
BackgroundEnhancing service quality in the insurance industry with AI-powered humanoid chatbots
Patil, K. P., Kulkarni, M. S., & Hudnurkar, M. (2024) · The TQM Journal · doi:10.1108/tqm-11-2023-0354 · Cited by 20
Beyond fakers and fanatics: A reply
Leeuwen, N. V. (2016) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2016.1141400 · Cited by 16
“Similar to imaginings, credences about God’s omnipresence, for example, don’t generally guide inferences about how described situations unfold, even for stories including a divine agent (Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundFurther Distinctions between Magic, Reality, Religion, and Fiction
Boyer, P. (1997) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.1997.tb01976.x · Cited by 16
Cognitive and Evolutionary Approaches to Religion
Mccauley, R. N. (2016) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118657775.ch32 · Cited by 16
Coelho, C. M., Zsido, A. N., Suttiwan, P., & Clasen, M. (2021) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.06.036 · Cited by 16
Strohminger, N., & Jordan, M. R. (2022) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105068 · Cited by 15
The Cognitive Foundations of Reincarnation
White, C. (2016) · Method & Theory in the Study of Religion · doi:10.1163/15700682-12341381 · Cited by 13
Cognitive Predispositions and Cultural Transmission
Boyer, P. (2009) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511626999.018 · Cited by 16
The nature and functions of religion and spirituality in children.
Boyatzis, C. J. (2012) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/14045-027 · Cited by 15
Establishing Personal Identity in Reincarnation: Minds and Bodies Reconsidered
White, C. (2015) · Journal of Cognition and Culture · doi:10.1163/15685373-12342158 · Cited by 14
“…between people’s explicitly stated beliefs and how they reason ‘on-line’ are explained by the fact that humans are cognitive misers and in certain contexts will revert to intuitive representations for agents generally (Fiske and Taylor, 1991; Barrett and Keil, 1996; Pyysiäinen, 2004).”
BackgroundLearning that there is life after death
Harris, P. L., & Astuti, R. (2006) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x06369105 · Cited by 16
Ybarra, O., Keller, M. C., Chan, E., Garcia, S. M., Sanchez-Burks, J., Morrison, K., & Baron, A. (2010) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550610370214 · Cited by 9
“People even try to predict the ‘‘behavior’’ of moving geometric figures (Heider & Simmel, 1944), the weather, coin tosses, and crops (e.g., Barrett & Keil, 1996; Guthrie, 1993).”
BackgroundCappellen, P. V., Clapp, A. R., & Algoe, S. B. (2023) · The Journal of Positive Psychology · doi:10.1080/17439760.2023.2190928 · Cited by 15
“…one hand, across religions, god is often represented as a social agent with many of the same psychological properties as humans (e.g. think and feel) and with whom one can have a personal relationship (Barrett & Keil, 1996; Granqvist et al., 2010; Heiphetz et al., 2016; Shtulman & Lindeman, 2016).”
BackgroundOrigins and Evolution of Religion from a Darwinian Point of View: Synthesis of Different Theories
Bourrat, P. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-9014-7_36 · Cited by 14
“For example, Barrett and Keil ( 1996 ) have shown that when students who claim not to have an anthropomorphic understanding of God, were asked to answer very quickly to questions about its supernatural powers, they were shaping their answer anthropomorphically.”
Teach us to pray: The cognitive power of domain violations
Wuthnow, R. J. (2008) · Poetics · doi:10.1016/j.poetic.2008.06.003 · Cited by 14
Why minds create gods: Devotion, deception, death, and arational decision making
Atran, S., & Norenzayan, A. (2004) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x04470174 · Cited by 13
Seeing through Spirits: Superimposition, Cognition, and The Phantom Carriage
Gomar, C. (2016) · Film History · Cited by 13
HOW TO CONFUSE ORGANISMS WITH MOUSETRAPS: MACHINE METAPHORS AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN
Recker, D. A. (2010) · Zygon® · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2010.01119.x · Cited by 13
Richert, R. A., Weisman, K., Lesage, K. A., Ghossainy, M. E., Reyes‐Jaquez, B., Corriveau, K. H., & Developing Belief Network (2022) · Advances in child development and behavior · doi:10.1016/bs.acdb.2021.11.002 · Cited by 16
Uncanny sociocultural categories
Schoenherr, J. R., & Burleigh, T. J. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01456 · Cited by 13
“…might help to explain the origin of mythological creatures (Mayor, 2001; Kaplan, 2012), along with responses such as fear and anxiety (also see Asma, 2009), the mechanisms that support the retention of these creatures in the modern mind requires further explanation (e.g., Barrett and Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundAnthropomorphizing without Social Cues Requires the Basolateral Amygdala
Waytz, A. G., Cacioppo, J. T., Hurlemann, R., Castelli, F., Adolphs, R., & Paul, L. K. (2018) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn_a_01365 · Cited by 16
Lesage, K. A., & Richert, R. A. (2021) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2021.101034 · Cited by 13
“…in supernatural causality (Legare, Evans, Rosengren, & Harris, 2012; Woolley et al., 2011), and their concepts of God’s abilities and limitations (Barrett & Keil, 1996; Heiphetz, Lane, Waytz, & Young, 2016; Nyhof & Johnson, 2017; Richert, Saide, Lesage, & Shaman, 2017; Shtulman & Lindeman,…”
Theistic Percepts in Other Species: Can Chimpanzees Represent the Minds of Non-Natural Agents?
Bering, J. M. (2001) · Journal of Cognition and Culture · doi:10.1163/156853701316931371 · Cited by 13
“…such as ancestor and theistic worship, interphenomenalistic dialogue (e.g., prayer), and ‘First Cause’ theorizing, might be dependent upon shared cognitive universals (e.g., J. Barrett & Keil 1996; Boyer 1994, 1999; Guthrie 1993; Hinde 1999; Lawson & McCauley 1990; for review see J. Barrett 2000).”
BackgroundSERBIAN ADAPTATION OF THE BRAND PERSONALITY SCALE (BPS): AN APPLICATION TO TOURISM DESTINATIONS
Jovanović, T. S., Božić, S., Dinić, B. M., & Majstorović, N. (2017) · Primenjena psihologija · doi:10.19090/pp.2017.1.37-61 · Cited by 13
“Anthropomorphism is present in everyday life, culture, and religion (Barrett & Keil, 1996; Guthrie, 1997).”
BackgroundAn Evidential Argument for Theism from the Cognitive Science of Religion
Braddock, M. C. (2018) · New approaches to the scientific study of religion · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-90239-5_10 · Cited by 12
Anthropomorphizing religious advertising: The moderating role of political ideology
van Esch, P., Cui, Y. G., Arli, D. I., & Hutchins, J. (2022) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21739 · Cited by 15
Svensson, J. (2014) · Numen · doi:10.1163/15685276-12341343 · Cited by 12
Keil, F. C., & Newman, G. E. (2015) · Mind & Language · doi:10.1111/mila.12074 · Cited by 12
“For example, even adults who consciously profess having a completely omnipotent view of God, nonetheless tend to understand narratives involving God in ways that have distinctly human cognitive constraints (Barrett and Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundSelf-citationBarlev, M., Mermelstein, S., Cohen, A. S., & German, T. C. (2019) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12784 · Cited by 13
“Bloom (2005) is here building on the suggestion that representations of extraordinary beings are initially formed by co-opting the person concept (e.g., Barrett, 1998, 1999; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Boyer, 2001).”
BackgroundAUTHORS' RESPONSE: "The Many Frontiers of Spiritual Modeling"
Oman, D., & Thoresen, C. E. (2003) · International Journal for the Psychology of Religion · doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr1303_04 · Cited by 12
“For example, data from Barrett and colleagues suggested that in both Western and Eastern contexts, despite discrepancies with formal theological concepts, views of how divine beings actually act are transmitted through traditional narratives (Barrett, 1999; Barrett & Keil, 1996).”
BackgroundPreaching and Christianisation: Communication, Cognition, and Audience Reception
Sandwell, I. (2019) · BRILL eBooks · doi:10.1163/9789004390041_005 · Cited by 12
Lightner, A. D., & Hagen, E. H. (2022) · Human Nature · doi:10.1007/s12110-022-09437-9 · Cited by 13
“This is a strong claim, and it is inconsistent with an empirical literature suggesting that supernatural concepts are continuous with, and not separate from, the output of our intuitive theories (Barlev et al., 2017; Barrett & Keil, 1996; ojalehto mays et al., 2020).”
BackgroundResultAl-Issa, R. S., Krauss, S. E., Roslan, S. B., & Abdullah, H. B. (2021) · Religions · doi:10.3390/rel12111026 · Cited by 11
On Faith and the Fear of Fatality
Jong, J. (2014) · Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion · doi:10.1558/jcsr.v1i2.193 · Cited by 11
“Indeed, recent research on religious cognition also highlights just such a decoupling of reflective beliefs from implicit beliefs (e.g., Barrett and Keil 1996; Bering 2002; Uhlmann, Poehlman and Bargh 2008).”
BackgroundGeertz, A. W. (2014) · Numen · doi:10.1163/15685276-12341319 · Cited by 11
Upal, M. A. (2011) · Mind & Society · doi:10.1007/s11299-011-0083-8 · Cited by 11
“Some cognitive scientists of religion 85 (Barrett and Keil 1996; Barrett 1997, 1999; Slone 2004) have responded by 86 suggesting that this is because believers hold two different (''theologically correct'' 87 and ''intuitive'') conceptualizations of God and that only the intuitive conceptu- 88…”
BackgroundHow Schrödinger’s Cat Became a Zombie
Asprem, E. (2016) · Method & Theory in the Study of Religion · doi:10.1163/15700682-12341373 · Cited by 11
Lloyd, G. E. R. (2020) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198854593.003.0004 · Cited by 11
Assessing Spirituality on Two Dimensions: Closeness to God and Focal Orientation
Sharp, C. A., & Johnson, K. A. (2019) · International Journal for the Psychology of Religion · doi:10.1080/10508619.2019.1633853 · Cited by 11
“Research shows that people tend to anthropomorphize these supernatural others (Barrett & Keil, 1996) and relate to them in ways that are similar to how people relate to human beings (Barrett, 2004; Orsi, 2004).”
BackgroundWeisman, K., Ghossainy, M. E., Williams, A. J., Payir, A., Lesage, K. A., Reyes‐Jaquez, B., Amin, T. G., Anggoro, F. K., Burdett, E., Chen, E. E., et al. (2024) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0292755 · Cited by 14
Algorithm Delegation: How Embedded AI Facilitates Agency Transference in Medical Services
Wagner, R., Pinto, D. C., Hildebrand, D. F. N., Pacheco, N. A., Dhillon, G. S., & Herter, M. M. (2025) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.70016 · Cited by 10
Children’s Beliefs about Miracles
Woolley, J. D., & Dunham, J. A. (2017) · Journal of Cognition and Culture · doi:10.1163/15685373-12342192 · Cited by 10
Theories of God: Explanatory coherence in religious cognition
Shtulman, A., & Rattner, M. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0209758 · Cited by 10
Unurlu, Ç. (2020) · International Journal of Tourism Research · doi:10.1002/jtr.2431 · Cited by 10
Beliefs about Origins and Eternal Life: How Easy Is Formal Religious Theory Development?
Kelemen, D., Emmons, N. A., Brown, S. A., & Gallik, C. (2021) · Journal of Cognition and Development · doi:10.1080/15248372.2021.1909031 · Cited by 7
“…(i.e. God should be able to answer all prayers simultaneously); see e.g., Barrett, 2012; Bering, 2012; Bloom, 2005; Boyer, 1994; Kelemen, 2004; Rottman & Kelemen, 2012 on byproduct proposals; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Bering, 2006; Heiphetz, Lane, Waytz, & Young, 2018, on theological correctness).”
(2014) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315795263 · Cited by 10
Vers une psychologie de la pratique rituelle ?
Houseman, M. (2004) · Critique · doi:10.3917/criti.680.0102 · Cited by 10
White, C. (2016) · Religion Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2015.1014061 · Cited by 12
“Such discrepancies have been observed in people’s reasoning about other supernatural agent concepts, such as gods (Barrett, 1999; Barrett & Keil, 1996; Slone, 2007), and are explained by the fact that humans are cognitive misers and in certain contexts will revert to intuitive representations for…”
BackgroundDeity Representation: A Prototype Approach
May, R. W., & Fincham, F. D. (2018) · Archive for the Psychology of Religion · doi:10.1163/15736121-12341361 · Cited by 10
“…for the Psychology of Religion 40 (2018) 258-286 more implicit, automatic ones to more clearly elicit decision making processes that access the underlying knowledge base of representations and are therefore less biased by social pressures and orthodoxy (Barrett & Keil, 1996; Cohen et al., 2008).”
BackgroundInfluentialSiegal, M. (2002) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511613517.017 · Cited by 10
(2011) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-6272 · Cited by 10
Tanton, T. (2023) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780192884589.001.0001 · Cited by 9
Believing is seeing: The link between paranormal beliefs and perceiving signal in noise
Seymour, K. J., Sterzer, P., & Soto, N. (2022) · Consciousness and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.concog.2022.103418 · Cited by 9
McCauley, R. N. (2013) · Religion Brain & Behavior · doi:10.1080/2153599x.2012.762938 · Cited by 9
“Because he underestimates the tenacity of our maturationally natural proclivities, Peterson questions the inevitability of theological incorrectness, the second of the final chapter’s surprising consequences (Barrett & Keil, 1996; Slone, 2004).”
InfluentialSeeing through Spirits: Superimposition, Cognition, and The Phantom Carriage
Tybjerg, C. (2016) · Film History · doi:10.2979/filmhistory.28.2.05 · Cited by 9
Cognitive Science and Ancient Israelite Religion: New Perspectives on Texts, Artifacts, and Culture
Maiden, B. E. (2020) · Cited by 9
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
