Is that a human? Categorization (dis)fluency drives evaluations of agents ambiguous on human-likeness.

Evan W. Carr; Galit Hofree; Kayla Sheldon; Ayşe Pınar Saygın; Piotr Winkielman

doi:10.1037/xhp0000304

January 26, 2017Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & PerformanceOpen Access

Is that a human? Categorization (dis)fluency drives evaluations of agents ambiguous on human-likeness.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Key Points

Determine whether categorization disfluency drives evaluative conflict and discomfort when assessing agents with ambiguous human-likeness.
Assessed evaluative responses and cognitive conflict elicited by agents featuring ambiguous human-like characteristics.
Manipulated task-irrelevant visual ambiguity, such as background colors, to isolate top-down categorization fluency effects.
Categorization disfluency directly increases negative evaluations and feelings of discomfort toward ambiguous agents.
Irrelevant ambiguous features also modulate evaluative friction, supporting a top-down cognitive account of mixed-agent appraisal.

No abstract yet

We only have this paper's title and publication details.

Read it at the source

Ask about this paper

Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.

Implication

Experimental study demonstrates categorization disfluency impairs evaluations of human-ambiguous agents, highlighting top-down cognitive drivers of social discomfort.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Cite This Study

Carr et al. (2017) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1800ea3aabde875b133210 https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000304

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Share

Is that a human? Categorization (dis)fluency drives evaluations of agents ambiguous on human-likeness.

Key Points

No abstract yet

Ask about this paper

Implication

Discussion

Cite This Study

Is that a human? Categorization (dis)fluency drives evaluations of agents ambiguous on human-likeness.

Key Points

No abstract yet

Ask about this paper

Implication

Discussion

Cite This Study

Keep reading

Keep reading