Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-j5c6p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-09T02:12:29.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Psychological ownership: Actors' and observers' perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2023

Carey K. Morewedge Open the ORCID record for Carey K. Morewedge [Opens in a new window]  and
Liad Weiss Open the ORCID record for Liad Weiss [Opens in a new window]
Carey K. Morewedge
Affiliation:
Questrom School of Business, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA [email protected]; https://www.bu.edu/questrom/profile/carey-morewedge/
Liad Weiss
Affiliation:
Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Scarman Rd, Coventry, UK [email protected]; https://business.wisc.edu/directory/profile/liad-weiss/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Psychological ownership may be judged differently or similarly for self and others. Potential differences in how ownership is evaluated by actors and observers raise important questions about the concept of ownership (what is Mine, Ours, and Theirs) and how to resolve conflicting perceptions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e344
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alicke, M. D., Dunning, D. A., & Krueger, J. (2013). The self in social judgment. Psychology Press.10.4324/9780203943250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atasoy, O., & Morewedge, C. K. (2018). Digital goods are valued less than physical goods. Journal of Consumer Research, 44(6), 1343–1357.10.1093/jcr/ucx102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beggan, J. K. (1992). On the social nature of nonsocial perception: The mere ownership effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(2), 229.10.1037/0022-3514.62.2.229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.10.1086/209154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dommer, S. L., & Swaminathan, V. (2013). Explaining the endowment effect through ownership: The role of identity, gender, and self-threat. Journal of Consumer Research, 39(5), 1034–1050.10.1086/666737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. Holt.Google Scholar
Morewedge, C. K. (2021). Psychological ownership: Implicit and explicit. Current Opinion in Psychology, 39, 125–132.10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.10.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pierce, J. L., & Jussila, I. (2010). Collective psychological ownership within the work and organizational context: Construct introduction and elaboration. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(6), 810–834.10.1002/job.628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pronin, E. (2008). How we see ourselves and how we see others. Science, 320(5880), 1177–1180.10.1126/science.1154199CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shu, S. B., & Peck, J. (2011). Psychological ownership and affective reaction: Emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(4), 439–452.10.1016/j.jcps.2011.01.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verkuyten, M., & Martinovic, B. (2017). Collective psychological ownership and intergroup relations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(6), 1021–1039.10.1177/1745691617706514CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, L. (2022). Egocentric processing: The advantages of person-related features in consumers’ product decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 49(2), 288–311.10.1093/jcr/ucab070CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, L., & Johar, G. V. (2016). Products as self-evaluation standards: When owned and unowned products have opposite effects on self-judgment. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(6), 915–930.10.1093/jcr/ucv097CrossRefGoogle Scholar