Kids See Human Too: Adapting an Individual Differences Measure of Anthropomorphism for a Child Sample

REFERENCES

• Byrne, B. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carifio, J., & Perla, R. J. (2007). Ten common misunderstandings, misconceptions, persistent myths and urban legends about Likert scales and Likert response formats and their antidotes. Journal of Social Sciences, 3, 106–116.
   Google Scholar
• Caruso, E. M., Waytz, A., & Epley, N. (2010). The intentional mind and the hot hand: Perceiving intentions makes streaks seem likely to continue. Cognition, 116, 149–153. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.04.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castelli, F., Happé, F., Frith, U., & Frith, C. D. (2000). Movement and mind: A functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. NeuroImage, 12, 314–325. doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0612
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cullen, H., Kanai, R., Bahrami, B., & Rees, G. (2013). Individual differences in anthropomorphic attributions and human brain structure. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 9, 1276–1280. doi:10.1093/scan/nst109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dubal, S., Foucher, A., Jouvent, R., & Nadel, J. (2011). Human brain spots emotion in non-humanoid robots. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 6, 90–97. doi:10.1093/scan/nsq019
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eyssel, F., & Kuchenbrandt, D. (2012). Social categorization of social robots: Anthropomorphism as a function of robot group membership. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 724–731. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02082.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gadermann, A. M., Guhn, M., & Zumbo, B. D. (2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 17(3), 1–13. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=17&n=3
   Google Scholar
• Ganea, P. A., Canfield, C. F., Simons-Ghafari, K., & Chou, T. (2014). Do cavies talk? The effect of anthropomorphic picture books on children’s knowledge about animals. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 283. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gazzola, V., Rizzolatti, G., Wicker, B., & Keysers, C. (2007). The anthropomorphic brain: The mirror neuron system responds to human and robotic actions. NeuroImage, 35, 1674–1684. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelman, S. A., Chesnick, R., & Waxman, S. R. (2005). Mother–child conversations about pictures and objects: Referring to categories and individuals. Child Development, 76, 1129–1143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamlin, J. K., Wynn, K., & Bloom, P. (2007). Social evaluation by preverbal infants. Nature, 450, 557–559. doi:10.1038/nature06288
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944). An experimental study of apparent behavior. American Journal of Psychology, 57, 243–259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holgado-Tello, F. P., Chacón-Moscoso, S., Barbero-García, I., & Vila-Abad, E. (2010). Polychoric versus Pearson correlations in exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of ordinal variables. Quality & Quantity, 44, 153–166. doi:10.1007/s11135-008-9190-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horowitz, A. (2012). ‘Wild minds—what animals really think’: A museum exhibit at the New York Hall of Science. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 15, 294–296. doi:10.1080/10888705.2012.683997
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, S. C., Dweck, C. S., & Chen, F. S. (2007). Evidence for infants’ internal working models of attachment. Psychological Science, 18, 501–502. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01929.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, P. H., Jr., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., Freier, N. G., Severson, R. L., Gill, B. T.,… Shen, S. (2012). ‘Robovie, you’ll have to go into the closet now’: Children’s social and moral relationships with a humanoid robot. Developmental Psychology, 48, 303–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahn, P. H., Jr., Severson, R. L., & Ruckert, J. H. (2009). The human relationship with nature and technological nature. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 37–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kushnir, T. (2012). Developing a concept of choice. In F. Xu & T. Kushnir (Eds.) (pp. 193–218), Advances in child development and behavior: Rational constructivism in cognitive development. Waltham, MA: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Meltzoff, A. N., Brooks, R., Shon, A. P., & Rao, R. P. (2010). ‘Social’ robots are psychological agents for infants: A test of gaze following. Neural Networks, 23, 966–972. doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2010.09.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 81–103. doi:10.1111/0022-4537.00153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savalei, V., & Bentler, P. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling. In R. Grover & M. Vriens (Eds.), The handbook of marketing research: Uses, misuses, and future advances (pp. 330–364). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Severson, R. L., & Carlson, S. M. (2010). Behaving as or behaving as if? Children’s conceptions of personified robots and the emergence of a new ontological category. Neural Networks, 23, 1099–1103. doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2010.08.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Severson, R. L., Li, H., & Lillard, A. (2015). Cultural contributions to anthropomorphic beliefs. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Philadelphia, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Timpano, K. R., & Shaw, A. M. (2013). Conferring humanness: The role of anthropomorphism in hoarding. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 383–388. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.10.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voss, K. E., Stem, D. E., & Fotopoulos, S. (2000). A comment on the relationship between coefficient alpha and scale characteristics. Marketing Letters, 11, 177–191.
   Google Scholar
• Washington State Department of Transportation. (2013). Alaskan Way Viaduct-Follow Bertha. Retrieved from http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Projects/Viaduct/About/FollowBertha
   Google Scholar
• Waytz, A., Cacioppo, J., & Epley, N. (2010). Who sees human? The stability and importance of individual differences in anthropomorphism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5, 219–232. doi:10.1037/a0020240
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West, S. G., Finch, J. F., & Curran, P. J. (1995). Structural equation models with nonnormal variables. Problems and remedies. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 56–75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wheatley, T., Weinberg, A., Looser, C., Moran, T., & Hajcak, G. (2011). Mind perception: Real but not artificial faces sustain neural activity beyond the N170/ VPP. PLoS One, 6, e17960. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017960
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Willard, A. K., & Norenzayan, A. (2013). Cognitive biases explain religious belief, paranormal belief, and belief in life’s purpose. Cognition, 129, 379–391. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodward, A. L. (1998). Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor’s reach. Cognition, 69, 1–34. doi:10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00058-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar