RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Consumer behavior 4.0 in the era of digital.

Nipuni Hansika
(2231501)

CONTENT
 1. Introduction
2. Theoretical background
2.1 Anthropomorphism

2.2 Relationships in anthropomorphism

2.3 Social exclusion

3. Hypothesis
4. Model
5. Method
6. References

1.Introduction
Anthropomorphizing the environment is a useful way to increase personal motivation toward
conservation efforts. The normal person is relatively passive concerning pro-environmental
actions (Biel & Thogersen, 2007; Kalamas, Cleveland, & Laroche, 2014). Anthropomorphism is
becoming more popular as a method for environmental education and outreach related to
conservation. An essential means by which individuals make meaning of their encounters with
the non-human environment is known as anthropomorphism (Guthrie 1997; Mitchell 1997;
Lorimer 2007; Taylor 2011). An effective strategy for increasing individual motivation for
socially excluded people's conservation activities is to humanize the environment. (Tam, Lee, &
Chao, 2013; Ahn, Kim, & Aggarwal, 2014). The ordinary person is not very active in favor of
environmental causes (Biel & Thogersen, 2007; Kalamas, Cleveland, & Laroche, 2014). The
contribution of anthropology as a practical instrument for environmental education and outreach
has been called attention. Such inertia has prompted the investigations of contextual factors that
impact conservation behaviors such as social norms choice architecture, monetary rewards, and
service substitutions (Lebel & Lorek, 2008). researchers have also found how individual
motivation could influence conservation efforts, such as commitment and goal setting (McCalley
& Midden, 2002). Empathetic anthropomorphism has three features, prosocial, intelligent, and
able to suffer. Being connected with this e set of features can improve empathetic
anthropomorphism and conservation actions.

The advantage of anthropomorphism is driven by the fact that humanizing environmental objects
increase people's sense of connectedness toward them (Tam et al., 2013) thereby arousing
people's sense of guilt for being the cause of harm (Ahn et al., 2014 researchers aim to
anthropomorphize the environment to ordinary people and create people's feelings.However, our
sense of connectedness toward others could also be a function of our social distance from them
(Wong & Bagozzi, 2005). a reduction of social distance toward anthropomorphized
environmental objects anthropomorphized environmental object strengthens our sense of
connectedness. Creating a social conversation with anthropomorphized environmental objects
can influence the conservation intention of socially excluded people. The purpose of this study is
to determine if social exclusion may affect a person's desire to save the environment by
adjusting their social distance from anthropomorphized environmental items.

2. Theoretical background
2.1Anthropomorphism
Traditionally, anthropomorphism has been used to refer to the
overestimation/misattribution/inappropriate/ inaccurate attribution of uniquely/properly human
traits (Guthrie 1997). Because the notion of ‘‘human’’ is central to the concept of
anthropomorphism, it would stand that to fully understand what anthropomorphism means, one
must first understand what it means to be human as separate from all other entities (Emel 1995).
When marketers try to get customers to notice human characteristics in products or brands, they
are using anthropomorphism (Aggarwal & McGill, 2007). A product or brand could, for instance,
have a human-like character or logo, or it might be described in the first person (such as the
Coca-Cola bottle with a human-like shape or the M&M candies with a human-like character).
Anthropomorphism may affect how customers judge items, decide whether to keep them and
react emotionally to them (Aggarwal & McGill, 2007). Additionally, the intentions of customers
may impact the impacts of anthropomorphism. Researchers have found two primary consumer
motives that result in anthropomorphism's advantageous effects: effecting and social connection
(Kim & McGill, 2011). Simple anthropomorphism of products, meanwhile, is not always
beneficial. For instance, as was previously mentioned, Puzakova and Aggarwal (2018) discovered
that customers with active uniqueness motives may have fewer positive opinions toward a brand
when it is anthropomorphized than when it is not. This implies that anthropomorphism may have
detrimental impacts if a distinctiveness drive is present. As a result, the impacts of
anthropomorphism on consumers may vary depending on their motives. Distinctiveness
motivation may have different underlying mechanisms to effecting and social connection
motivations. Comparing the effects of product anthropomorphism under the uniqueness incentive
to those under the effecting and social connection motivations.

Individual definitions of what makes up a human attribution or attribute affect how

anthropomorphism is operationalized. Without this comprehension, it would appear inappropriate
to pass judgment on whether or not it is permissible to attribute human traits, as has been
recommended in conventional definitions. There is no shared notion of what it is to be human in
the absence of a globally recognized trait. Anthropomorphism can take many forms. These vary
on a continuum from weak forms, such as identifying similarities between ourselves and the
anthropomorphized object (Guthrie 1997) or speaking metaphorically of a nonhuman object, to
stronger forms of anthropomorphism whereby the person behaves and endorses the personally-
held belief that the non-human agent has humanlike characteristics or traits (Epley et al. 2007).
Different types of anthropomorphism have different social functions and practical applications.
They also do not all evolve in the same ways or under the same circumstances.
Anthropomorphism may be operationalized in a variety of ways, as evidenced by the variety of
personally held conceptions of what it is to be "human" and by depictions of traits that are
similar to those of humans.

Anthropomorphism can improve a person's sense of relationships. one important factor

influencing anthropomorphism is sociality. This suggests that a human connection goal can be
replaced by an anthropomorphized item. When an item has a personal touch, like a handwritten
typeface, people might feel a deep feeling of connection with it. People like anthropomorphized
items more when they perceive that their desires for belongingness are being threatened, and
exposure to anthropomorphized products decreases their desire for social connection. Greater
anthropomorphism tendencies are associated with a stronger sense that some items serve as
reminders of certain relationships with certain persons. Anthropomorphizing intangible things
occasionally facilitate interpersonal communication. People assess the anthropomorphized
object's suitability for the desired connection as well. For instance, when people blame
themselves for their social marginalization, they choose an anthropomorphized partner brand that
stands for the chance to establish long-term commitments in partnerships. But when people
blame others for their social marginalization, they undermine the value of forging enduring
connections with others.

anthropomorphism can help individuals feel more like a community. According to studies on
hoarding, people are more likely to feel that an object represents their group if they
anthropomorphize it more. By incorporating non-human things into their membership,
anthropomorphism also broadens the collective self of people. Collectively, humans are capable
of having conscious experiences. This characteristic sets the human race apart from the
outgroup of other beings and objects. People may be inspired by anthropomorphism to see these
non-human things as belonging to a similar group to humans and to establish a relationship with
them. For instance, humanizing nature improves environmental protection behavior,
anthropomorphizing animals encourages support for animal rights and welfare, and seeing social
concerns as human causes encourage message compliance. People's trust and resilience are
increased by anthropomorphizing automation since they give it its own characteristic of being
able to correct mistakes.

Anthropomorphism refers to the assignment of human characteristics to nonhuman entities

(Guthrie, 1993). people have an innate need to anthropomorphize inanimate objects, often driven
by the motivations to form social connections (Epley, Akalis, et al., 2008), and to exert control
over something seemingly unpredictable (Epley, Waytz, et al., 2008). According to Guthrie (1993.
Marketers also encourage consumers to anthropomorphize products and brands, since this will
forge stronger brand relations and more positive brand attitudes (Chen, Wan, & Levy, 2017).
More recently, researchers have begun to explore the effect of anthropomorphizing
environmental objects on subsequent conservation behaviors (Ahn et al., 2014; Tam et al.,
2013). This approach builds on the insight that anthropomorphized agents are seen as someone
similar to us, imbued with consciousness and self-identity; hence, should be treated as moral
agent’s worthy of care and concern (Tam et al., 2013). Therefore, people are more likely to
empathize with an anthropomorphized nature (Ahn et al., 2014). Similarly, people who believe
that nature can experience emotion are more likely to be concerned about them (Clayton, Fraser,
& Burgess, 2011); hence, the most commonly used “Mother Earth” phrase is probably an attempt
to anthropomorphize nature. Although anthropomorphizing nature can be useful in fostering
greater environmental awareness, wouldn't it be much more powerful if we had a personal
connection to the anthropomorphized thing? Varied social interactions, such as those between
humans and animals, might elicit different responses from individuals when they are
anthropomorphized.

In summary, It is common for people to anthropomorphize everyday objects. This

review takes a resource-based view to understand how anthropomorphism influences
people's psychological and emotional bond with the object. People's relationship with an
object can vary in strength, depending on factors such as the relationship type, and
people's interpersonal attachment style.

2.2 Relationships in anthropomorphism

Psychologists have long recognized that meaningful interactions with others, and the sense of
social connection that this interaction creates, is a fundamental human need (Baumeister &
Leary, 1995; Maslow, 1968). People often render an inanimate object “human-like” to help meet
their social needs. The tendency to imbue non-human entities with human-like characteristics is
called anthropomorphism (Epley, Waytz, & Cacioppo, 2007; Soanes & Stevenson, 2005). Epley
and colleagues (Epley, 2018; Epley et al., 2007) proposed the SEEK model to explain when and
why people are likely to anthropomorphize. Sociality motivation is the desire for social contact
and affiliation. The role of sociality motivation in determining when people anthropomorphize has
been robustly examined in recent years. Effecting motivation is the motivation to explain and
understand other agents; Elicited agent Knowledge, the accessibility and applicability of
anthropocentric knowledge; and most relevant for the current work, Sociality motivation. Feeling
a lack of social connection leads people to anthropomorphize non-human agents more (Im Shin &
Kim, 2018; Eyssel & Reich, 2013) and chronically lonely individuals are more likely to
anthropomorphize (Epley, Akalis, Waytz, & Cacioppo, 2008; Koike, Loughnan, Stanton, & Ban,
2020). Loneliness, however, is not the only social motivator of anthropomorphism. Similar
effects emerge among people with unstable social connections and insecure attachment
orientations (Timpano & Shaw, 2013). Women with high attachment avoidance or high
attachment fear are more prone to self-consciousness when it comes to relating to close
relationships with other people. anthropomorphize objects more than less avoidantly or anxiously
attached to women (Neave, Tyson, McInnes, & Hamilton, 2016). This prior work has focused on
the factors which lead people to anthropomorphize, such as sociality motivations, and neglected
the potential role of anthropomorphism in helping us form relationships (see Koike & Loughnan,
2021). We propose that once anthropomorphism begins, it may help us build a deeper
relationship with non-human entities (see also Kwok, Grisham & Norberg, 2018). To date, all
prior social psychological work on anthropomorphism has examined platonic relationships. While
platonic social ties are undoubtedly important, romantic relationships have been identified as a
particularly strong determinant of well-being (Dush & Amato, 2005; Selcuk, Gunaydin, Ong, &
Almeida, 2016), and both mental and physical health (for reviews, see Slatcher & Selcuk, 2017;
Uchino, 2006, 2013). anthropomorphism can facilitate empathy, responsiveness, and liking in
interactions with virtual agents and robots (e.g., Birnbaum et al., 2016; Nowak & Rauh, 2005;
Riek, Rabinowitch, Chakrabarti & Robinson, 2009; Salem, Eyssel, Rohlfing, Kopp, & Joublin,
2013),. If anthropomorphism is attractive to people who lack platonic connections (Epley et al.,
2007) and helps alleviate loneliness (e.g., Jakobek, 2019), Starting a new conversation
experience with non-human entities likely requires investigating a domain-specific experience
of anthropomorphism

Relationship reduces the social distance between individuals (Small & Simonsohn, 2005). Thus,
when the environmental object is anthropomorphized to be someone potentially related to us,
feel closer and perceive a smaller social distance toward this object. For two reasons, a smaller
social gap between people and the environment would lead to more conservation efforts. First,
the reduced social distance closes the distance between the people and the anthropomorphized
ambient items. People would be more likely to incorporate things into their lives under such
circumstances. This will cause children to mistakenly identify their own welfare with that of the
anthropomorphic environmental items. Additionally, it increases a person's sense of
responsibility for things, which motivates them to take action to ensure their happiness.

This is in line with research showing that people are more likely to assist victims who belong to
their in-group than those who do not (Levine, Cassidy, Brazier, & Reicher, 2002). Second, and
only for environmental items, human activity is mostly to blame for the harm they endure.
Therefore, anthropomorphizing an environmental object as someone close to us is more effective
in boosting conservation intention when people are reminded that their close others (i.e., mother
and child) are suffering as a result of their behaviors. They may also experience stronger
perceived responsibility and be more motivated to change to help the victims.

In conclusion, People often render an inanimate object "human-like" to help meet their social
needs. The tendency to imbue non-human entities with human-like characteristics is called
anthropomorphism. Epley and colleagues propose the SEEK model to explain when and why
people are likely to anthropomorphize. Sociality motivation is the desire for social contact and
affiliation. Similar effects emerge among people with unstable social connections and insecure
attachment orientations.

Anthropomorphism can facilitate empathy, responsiveness, and liking in interactions with virtual
agents and robots. When the environmental object is anthropomorphized to be someone
potentially related to us, feel closer and perceive a smaller social distance toward this object. A
reduction in the social distance between individuals and environmental objects would increase
conservation intentions.

2.3. Social exclusion

The idea of social exclusion first emerged in European nations in the 1970s (Kang Shin-wook
2006). In recent years, an increasing number of people have experienced social exclusion as a
result of the breakdown of traditional families, the aging population, escalating social
competition, and relative deprivation through social media (Ipsos 2018; Duclos, Wan, and
Jiang.2013).
When a person feels that a certain need is unmet, they look for alternate ways to satisfy it
(Gardner, Pickett, Jefferis, & Knowles, 2005). A person is motivated to pay attention to social
cues suggesting possibilities for social reconnection and relationship development when they
suffer social exclusion because it shows that their desire to belong is not being met (Gardner et
al., 2005). According to research supporting this theory, excluded people were more likely to
conform to the opinions of others and paid more attention to happy faces than included people
(DeWall, Maner, & Rouby, 2009). They were also more interested in making new friends and
wanted to work with others (Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000).
In our daily lives, social isolation is a frequent and pervasive phenomenon (Sinha and Lu, 2019;
Su et al., 2017; Williams, 2007). When someone is excluded or separated by others or by a
particular social group, their basic needs for belonging and interpersonal interactions cannot be
met (Kumar and Kaushal, 2021; Twenge et al., 2001; Williams, 2007).
Since the notion of social exclusion was introduced into marketing by Mead et al. (2011), related
studies have produced insightful findings. Marketing experts have discovered that when faced
with social isolation, customers are more likely to worry more about privacy (Xie et al., 2020),
purchase sentimental items (Loveland et al., 2010) and ugly goods (Chen et al., 2021), and look
for money possibilities.According to Molden et al. (2009) and Sinha and Lu (2019), there are two
main types of social exclusion: rejection (dominant exclusion) and ignoring (implicit exclusion).
Rejection occurs when someone is explicitly told that they are weak in a relationship, and it
serves as a signal that they are not liked by that person or group (Lee and Shrum, 2012).
Rejection is unequivocal and blunt. Rejected customers' social membership is refused, and their
participation in a social organization is called into doubt (Lee and Shrum, 2012; Molden et al.,
2009; Williams, 2007). . On the other hand, ignoring takes place when one's lack of social
connection is indicated in an indirect and implicit manner (Molden et al., 2009). It imperils a
person's sense of control over their environment, their ability to attract attention from others,
and their perception of the value of their existence (Lee and Shrum, 2012).
As a result, social exclusion poses a danger to two major categories of human wants: connection
requirements (such as a sense of belonging) and efficacy needs (such as a purposeful existence)
(Williams, 2007). People are more likely to retain a feeling of relationship (e.g., by engaging in
prosocial acts) when they are rejected because their relationship needs (i.e., belonging and self-
esteem) are most at risk; Lee and Shrum, 2012. Contrarily, when people are ignored, their
demand for efficacy is a major danger, which leads them to want to increase their sense of
control.
When a person feels that a certain need is unmet, they look for alternate ways to satisfy it
(Gardner, Pickett, Jefferis, & Knowles, 2005). A person is motivated to pay attention to social
cues suggesting possibilities for social reconnection and relationship development when they
suffer social exclusion because it shows that their desire to belong is not being met (Gardner et
al., 2005). According to research supporting this theory, excluded people were more likely to
conform to the opinions of others and paid more attention to happy faces than included people
(DeWall, Maner, & Rouby, 2009). They were also more interested in making new friends and
wanted to work with others (Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000).
Individualism, which disregards social relationships and seeks to express itself via flaunting, can
lead to social marginalization. social isolation results in antisocial conduct rather than socially
constructive activity (Baumeister, Twenge, and Nuss 2002) Being excluded from social
situations can hurt physically and psychologically, triggering defensive mechanisms that make
one aggressive against their environment. A propensity to focus primarily on material things
might appear in those who have experienced social marginalization. Isolation and loneliness
brought on by social exclusion result in a craving for material items, such as money or
conspicuous consumerism (Charles, Hurst and) Pro-social conduct might result from social
marginalization.
Pro-social inclinations will result from social exclusion, but the majority of them won't be
evident until they give off socially acceptable cues, including making visible offers that other
people can see (Song Ho-jun, Chun Sung-Yong 2017) or offering optional goods that denote
social connection (Su et al. 2017). If there is no such indicator, social exclusion can promote
materialism and lead to antisocial conduct, and the individualism/egoistic inclinations that are
brought on by this experience can be further amplified in a setting where people's short-term
interests and those of the community conflict

3. Hypothesis
We should feel more connected to an environmental object when it is anthropomorphized to
resemble someone who may be our relative. This would cause individuals to mistakenly identify
their own happiness with that of the anthropomorphized environmental items. there for below
hypothesis has been created.

Hypothesis 1 - Anthropomorphizing an environmental object as someone close to us will

increase the conversation intention of socially excluded people rather than non-
Anthropomorphized environmental objects

4. Model

ANTHROPOMORPHIZED
ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTS

SOCIAL EXCLUSION CONVERSATION INTENTION

 5. Method
Individuals and the design 100 participants in all. Four conditions will be assigned to participants
at random. The river will be used in this study's procedure as the environmental object. We can
influence social distance based on how well we know an environmental object. Participants will
be asked to picture a river that they have never seen in both the non-anthropomorphized and
distant connection conditions. Participants in the two scenarios involving close relationships,
however, were instructed to picture a river they were familiar with. Participants read an
objective description of a river in the non-anthropomorphized condition, which stated: "This is a
river that you have never been to. It has fish and shrimp and is 15 kilometers long. Along the
river's edge, there are trees and willows stranger/mother/child situation were described as "I am
a river that you have never been to," and it gives water for the locals (you are familiar with). I'm
15 kilometers long and my stomach is full of shrimp and fish. My arms are the willows and trees
along the river. I provide the locals here access to water (all the locals here are my kids or my
parents)." Participants in the three anthropomorphism conditions each had eight minutes to
characterize themselves in terms of their gender, appearance, occupation, personality, speaking
style, and prospective relationships with other participants as a manipulation check. Participants
in the nonanthropomorphic condition will devote the same amount of time to describe the river in
as much detail as they can.

Participants will be given five minutes to write down any pertinent ideas and feelings they have
about the anthropomorphized river in each of the three anthropomorphism circumstances
(stranger, mother, or kid). The non-anthropomorphism condition participants will be asked to
consider and record the effects of river pollution. Participants also gave demographic
information, and they would respond to questions on their goals for river conservation and
perspectives on the river.
6.References
Clayton, S., Fraser, J., & Burgess, C. (2011). The role of zoos in fostering environmental identity.
Ecopsychology.. https://doi.org/10.1089/eco.2010.0079.

Chen, R. P., Wan, E. W., & Levy, E. (2017). The effect of social exclusion on consumer
preference for anthropomorphized brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology. HTTPS://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2016.05.004.

Kim, S., & McGill, A. L. (2011). Gaming with Mr. Slot or gaming the slot machine? Power,
anthropomorphism, and risk perception. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.
org/10.1086/658148

Wong, N. Y., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2005). Emotional intensity as a function of psychological distance
and cultural orientation. Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10. 1016/S0148-
2963(03)00144-9.

Goodman, J. K., & Lim, S. (2018). When consumers prefer to give material gifts instead of
experiences: The role of social distance. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.
org/10.1093/jcr/ucy010.

Ahn, H. K., Kim, H. J., & Aggarwal, P. (2014). Helping fellow beings: Anthropomorphized social
causes and the role of anticipatory guilt. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0956797613496823.

Biel, A., & Thogersen, J. (2007). Activation of social norms in social dilemmas: A review of the
evidence and reflections on the implications for environmental behavior. Journal of Economic
Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Joep.2006.03.003.

Baumeister, R. F., DeWall, C. N., Ciarocco, N. J., & Twenge, J. M. (2005). Social exclusion
impairs self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88(4), 589–604

Chartrand, T. L., Fitzsimons, G. M., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2008). Automatic effects of

anthropomorphized objects on behavior. Social Cognition, 26(2), 198–209

Epley, N., Akalis, S., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Creating social connection through
inferential reproduction loneliness and perceived agency in gadgets, gods, and greyhounds.
Psychological Science, 19(2), 114–120

Goodman, J. K., & Lim, S. (2018). When consumers prefer to give material gifts instead of
experiences: The role of social distance. Journal of Consumer Research. https://doi.
org/10.1093/jcr/ucy010

Mourey, J. A., Olson, J. G., & Yoon, C. (2017). Products as pals: Engaging with anthropomorphic
products mitigates the effects of social exclusion. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(2), 414–
431. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucx038

White, K., & Argo, J. J. (2011). When imitation doesn’t flatter: The role of consumer
distinctiveness in responses to mimicry. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(4), 667–680.
https://doi.org/10.1086/660187