Human beings are intensely relational and the desire for pleasant interactions with others is a fundamental human motive.  In the social sciences, these “others” are generally presumed to be humans.  Yet, we may ask, are human relationships limited to same species interactions, or are humans likely to have social, moral, and emotional interactions with other kinds of entities?  Do animals, plants, objects, or heavenly bodies (both material and immaterial) count as “others”?  Can non-human entities be persons?  In the study presented here, we demonstrate that “person” is a superordinate social category that differs from the biological category “human,” and may include a variety of entities including animals, God, angels, robots, or the deceased. 

In view of past research on culture differences, we surveyed over 1,000 culturally diverse college students to ascertain to what extent, and according to what criteria, people attribute personhood to non-human entities.  The tendency to attribute personhood to non-humans varied by entity as well as by cultural and religious group. Native Americans were more likely to personify God and animals; Christians and Mormons were likely to personify God but not animals; Agnostics were relatively likely to personify animals but not God, while respondents from the Middle East were unlikely to personify either God or animals.  Perceived communicative capability was the best predictor of attributing personhood to God and belief in an animal spirit was a key determinant of personhood for animals.

Our social relations are also influenced by our cognitive style.  Previous psychological studies have shown that holistic cognitive styles differ from analytical styles in many ways, including whatgets noticed, the strategies used in categorization, and the kinds of information that are deemed relevant.  Holistic thinkers tend to see the whole rather than the parts and are more socio-centric than ego-centric.  The analytical mind, on the other hand, gives more decisional weight to differences and linear, causal relationships.  Additionally, belief in God as a purposeful agent is associated with rule-based, stable, and hierarchical categorization strategies.  Ongoing studies in our lab focus on the influence of cognitive and relational styles in the attribution of personhood to non-human entities.    

We have found that interpersonal relationships do, indeed, extend beyond the confines of human affairs.  Moreover, how we relate with non-human others is centrally determined by two psychological processes: first, how we categorize and classify both human and non-human others, and second, how we construe our “self” in relation to those others.  We contend that the personification of non-human entities is inextricably linked to these processes as they are influenced, in turn, by membership in one’s religious or cultural group.