Does psychology provide an argument in favour of object-oriented programming?
maybe this is a starting point: Cognitive psychology reveals some of the thought-related benefits of object-orientation in computer programming. … goes on to make a reference to Gerald Weinberg.
Two further thoughts on rereading your question: 1) I really doubt that human psychology is going to provide an argument for OOP. We know exactly how OOP works, but we have no idea how the mind works. Rather, OOP might inspire and eventually provide arguments for the architecture of the mind. (By the way, what would it mean for OOP to require an argument? For some tasks, it’s appropriate, for others it’s not. If we discovered that the human mind was “object-oriented”, would or should that change the way that we code?) 2) I missed, on first reading, that this question was inspired because lines in object-oriented code are easier to attribute psychological states to than lines in non-object-oriented code. Logicpunk was right: Daniel Dennett is the person to read here. He thinks that, as you start decomposing the mind, you get various systems that you can attribute semi-psychological states to, and those can be decomposed into systems with demi-semi-psychological states, and those can be
