Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42421677›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cognition2026

When less is more: single selfhood-related cues elicit higher selfhood ratings than multiple cues.

Jan Pohl, Kristina Nikolovska, Francesco Maurelli, Arvid Kappas, Bernhard Hommel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jan PohlFaculty of Psychology, Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Kristina NikolovskaSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Constructor University, Bremen, Germany.
Francesco MaurelliSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Constructor University, Bremen, Germany.
Arvid KappasSchool of Business, Social and Decision Sciences, Constructor University, Bremen, Germany.
Bernhard HommelDepartment of Psychology, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In everyday social cognition, people reliably tend to anthropomorphize non-human agents or ascribe to them features associated with selfhood. In prior research, we showed that individuals often (over-)generalize from a single behavioral indicator of selfhood, such as learning ability or attentional sharing, to the assumption that other, unobserved indicators of selfhood are also present. This suggests that even minimal cues may be sufficient to activate a broader selfhood concept and its associated implications. Method: Here, we tested the prediction that single selfhood cues are as effective as multiple selfhood cues in eliciting selfhood- attributions to an artificial agent. In three experiments, we compared selfhood ratings for a robot exhibiting behavioral cues of efficiency, learning sensitivity, and equifinality with ratings for a robot exhibiting only one of these cues. Results: Contrary to our expectations, participants did not attribute the same degree of selfhood to both robots. They attributed more selfhood to the single-cue robot in Experiments 1 (single efficiency cue) and 3 (single equifinality cue), whereas in Experiment 2 (single learning cue), the multiple-cue robot received higher ratings on the manipulated characteristics as well as on context sensitivity (results for selfhood-attribution were negligible). Discussion: In sum, we conclude that a single selfhood cue tends to elicit stronger selfhood-attributions overall than multiple cues. We discuss this finding in relation to the literature on cognitive bootstrapping (i.e., developing new and complex knowledge from a limited starting set), concluding that consistently applying a single skill to an apparent problem may reflect more human-like behavior.

Indexed as

agencyanthropomorphismattributionbootstrappinghuman-robot interactionmindnon-humanoid robotself

Identifiers

PMID42421677
PMCPMC13342225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.