The present research proposes schema congruity as a theoretical basis for examining the effectiveness and consequences of product anthropomorphism. Results of two studies suggest that the ability of consumers to anthropomorphize a product and their consequent evaluation of that product depend on the extent to which that product is endowed with characteristics congruent with the proposed human schema. Furthermore, consumers' perception of the product as human mediates the influence of feature type on product evaluation. Results of a third study, however, show that the affective tag attached to the specific human schema moderates the evaluation but not the successful anthropomorphizing of the product.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

We propose that risk perceptions are systematically influenced by anthropomorphism. Anthropomorphism effects, however, are moderated by the individual’s feelings of social power. People with low power perceive higher risk in playing a slot machine (study 1) and in getting skin cancer (study 2) when the risk-bearing entities (the slot machine and skin cancer) are highly anthropomorphized. In contrast, those with high power perceive greater risk when the entities are less anthropomorphized. We hypothesize these effects occur because those with high (low) power perceived a greater (lesser) degree of control over the anthropomorphized entity. In study 3, we investigate the reverse effect that higher perceived risk may increase anthropomorphism for people with low power but decrease anthropomorphism for people with high power.

Consumers may consume the same products or services with different goals, for example, for their own pleasure—a hedonic goal—or to achieve some higher level purpose—a utilitarian goal. This article investigates whether this difference in goals influences satisfaction with an outcome that was either self-chosen or externally determined. In four experiments we manipulate consumption goals, controlling for the outcomes, the option valence, and whether the externally made choice was determined by an expert or at random. Results show that the outcome of a self-made choice is more satisfying than the outcome of an externally made choice when the goal is hedonic but not when it is utilitarian. We hypothesize that this effect results from the greater perceived personal causality associated with terminally motivated activities, such as hedonic choices, relative to instrumentally motivated activities, such as utilitarian choices, and provide evidence that supports this explanation over alternative accounts.

When designing their products, companies try to employ shapes that are both emotionally appealing and compatible with the brand's image. One way to accomplish these aims is to anthropomorphize a product's appearance. The current research investigates how people decode emotional "facial" expressions from product shapes and how this affects liking of the design, using three studies in the domain of cars and one in the domain of cellular phones. In accordance with theories on the perception of human faces, the first study shows that perception of friendliness is limited to the grille (mouth), while aggressiveness can be communicated with both grille and headlights (eyes). The next study examines the best-liked combination of these two emotional expressions and finds that consumers prefer the combination of an upturned (friendly) grille with slanted (aggressive) headlights. The authors further explain this finding on a process level by showing that this combination triggers a positive affective state of both high pleasure and arousal. The third study validates the results with automobile sales data, and a fourth study extends the findings to another product category.