Cited by 56Visual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesSocial Robot Interaction and HRIMedia Influence and Health

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The more human, the higher the performance? Examining the effects of anthropomorphism on learning with media.

Abstract

The inclusion of human-like shapes like arms or faces in rather abstract pictures triggers the tendency of anthropomorphism, which is defined as the attribution of human characteristics to nonhuman objects. Anthropomorphism-triggering features in digital learning materials were found to enhance the performance of students. However, the probability of how effective such anthropomorphic features are might be dependent on the degree of the elicited anthropomorphism. In this study, 3 experiments were conducted to examine if varying degrees of anthropomorphism (low vs. medium vs. high) differently affect the learning performance of students. Participants were taken from different class levels; ranging from Class 5 and 6 (Experiment 1) to Class 8 and 9 (Experiment 2), and Class 11 to 13 (Experiment 3). The instructional material covered the topic of blood cell types. Subjective measurements of cognitive load, aesthetics, intrinsic motivation, and valence were included. Results show that an increased degree of anthropomorphism led to significant differences in the learning, intrinsic motivation, and aesthetics scores. The learning results of the 3 experiments were additionally checked by a meta-analysis. On a descriptive level, only students in Class 8 and 9 profited the most from a high degree of anthropomorphism. While students in Class 5 and 6 suffered from a high cognitive load in the high anthropomorphism condition, students in Class 11 to 13 were not as strongly affected by anthropomorphism as the other students. Results are partly explained by differences in prior knowledge. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved)

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/edu0000273

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Still being checked.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Schneider, S., Häßler, A., Habermeyer, T., Beege, M., & Rey, G. D.
Affiliations
Chemnitz University of Technology (DE)
Venue
Journal of Educational Psychology
Published
2019-01
Volume
111
Issue
1
Pages
57-72
ISSN
  • 0022-0663 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2176
OpenAlex
W2794552013
Cited by
54
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Educational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • OPUS (Augsburg University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media Influence and Health
Keywords
anthropomorphism, learning performance, intrinsic motivation, cognitive load, aesthetic appeal, valence, prior knowledge, grade level differences, blood cell types, digital learning resources

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