The Psychology of Ownership

Kline, Linus W.

doi:10.1080/08919402.1899.10532973

Cited by 33 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ardrey, 1966;Burk, 1900;Darling, 1937;Hall & Wiltse, 1891;1937;Porteous, 1976;Kline & France, 1899;Weil, 1952). Baldwin (cited by Litwinski, 1942), for example, suggests that possessive and property-related behavior is an instinct.…”

Section: The Genesis Of Psychological Ownershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some have offered a genetic explanation for the emergence of such psychological states (e.g., Burk, 1900;Darling, 1937), others have argued that they are the product of socialization practices carried out in society (e.g., Furby, 1976;Kline & France, 1899), while a sociobiological (cf. Buss, 1990;Wilson, 1975) perspective envisions a combination of both biological tendencies toward territoriality and accepted social practices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Buss, 1990;Wilson, 1975) perspective envisions a combination of both biological tendencies toward territoriality and accepted social practices. The psychology of ownership has been studied in a variety of contexts including child development (e.g., Isaacs, 1933;Kline & France, 1899), consumer behavior (Belk, 1988), among the elderly (Cram & Paton, 1993;Kamptner, 1989), within the customs and practices of different societies (Kline & France, 1899), from the perspective of holding land and having a house "with four walls" (Duncan, 1981;Porteous, 1976), across different socio-economic strata (Rochberg-Halton, 1980), within the philosophical discussions of 'being' (Heidegger, 1967;Sartre, 1943), and finally, in the workplace (Dirks, Cummings, & Pierce, 1996;Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001;Pratt & Dutton, 1998).We integrate and build on these diverse literatures in developing one conceptual perspective on psychological ownership. We focus on several questions that are central to the establishment of the construct and that still need to be addressed in a systematic manner, including the meaning of psychological ownership, the genesis of this state, and the conditions under which it manifests itself.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

Pierce

Kostova

Dirks

2003

Review of General Psychology

1,360

1,801

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People develop feelings of ownership for a variety of objects, material and immaterial in nature. We refer to this state as psychological ownership. Building upon and extending prior scholarship we offer a conceptual examination of this construct. After defining psychological ownership, we address "why" it exists and "how" it comes into being. We propose that this state finds its roots in a set of intra-individual motives (efficacy and effectance, self-identity, and having a place to dwell). In addition, we discuss the experiences that give rise to psychological ownership and propose several positive and negative consequences of this state. Our work provides a foundation for the development of a comprehensive theory of psychological ownership and the conceptual underpinnings for empirical testing.2 Expressing a 'classical' Western perspective, Rousseau (1950) suggested that 'civil society' most likely began when a person fenced off a plot of ground and took it into his/her head to claim 'this is mine,' while others accepted this assertion. Recognizing the psychology of ownership, Etzioni writes that ownership is a "dual creation, part attitude, part object, part in the mind, part 'real'" (1991: 466), andHeider (1958) observes that 'attitudes of ownership' are common among people. Consistent with these views, economic psychologist Leon Litwinski (1942) and social psychologist Lita Furby (1991) offer the thesis that there is a 'psychology of mine and property' that attaches itself to objects. These perspectives provide a new lens with which to view possession, property, and ownership. We refer to this lens as psychological ownership, a cognitive-affective state that characterizes the human condition.Scholars from various disciplines have been interested in the genesis of possessive tendencies and the psychology of mine and property (e.g., Etzioni, 1991;Furby 1991;Litwinski, 1942Litwinski, , 1947. Some have offered a genetic explanation for the emergence of such psychological states (e.g., Burk, 1900;Darling, 1937), others have argued that they are the product of socialization practices carried out in society (e.g., Furby, 1976;Kline & France, 1899), while a sociobiological (cf. Buss, 1990;Wilson, 1975) perspective envisions a combination of both biological tendencies toward territoriality and accepted social practices. The psychology of ownership has been studied in a variety of contexts including child development (e.g., Isaacs, 1933;Kline & France, 1899), consumer behavior (Belk, 1988), among the elderly (Cram & Paton, 1993;Kamptner, 1989), within the customs and practices of different societies (Kline & France, 1899), from the perspective of holding land and having a house "with four walls" (Duncan, 1981;Porteous, 1976), across different socio-economic strata (Rochberg-Halton, 1980), within the philosophical discussions of 'being' (Heidegger, 1967;Sartre, 1943), and finally, in the workplace (Dirks, Cummings, & Pierce, 1996;Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001;Pratt & Dutton, 1998).We integrate and build on t...

show abstract

Section: The Genesis Of Psychological Ownershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

Pierce

Kostova

Dirks

2003

Review of General Psychology

1,360

1,801

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Jussila & Tuominen, 2010;Kline & France, 1899). As the members typically do not see themselves as owners, what do they see their role is?…”

Section: "I Do Not Think That This (Co-operative) Is My Own But Thatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, in order that a person may recognize some objects as part of oneself, s/he must recognize them as his/her own (Kline & France, 1899). Extant research on governance of consumer co-operatives (Tuominen, Jussila, & Kojonen, 2009) suggests that we should not take it for granted that members actually recognize or consider themselves as owners.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are We Owners or Regular Customers? The Obscure Meaning of Ownership in Consumer Co-operatives

Jussila¹,

Tuominen²,

Tuominen³

2012

IBR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is argued in literature on consumer co-operation that a distinctive feature of consumer co-operatives is the dual role of customers as owners and the associated strong linkage between customer-owners and their co-operative organization. However, some findings suggest that co-operative ownership is obscure, which might interfere with the development of the special bond between the customers and the organization they own. Thereby, there is need to investigate this issue further. This qualitative study focuses on analyzing customer-owners' accounts of their role and particularly the meanings associated with ownership. This serves setting forth ideas useful for both future research and practice.

show abstract

Rethinking the evolution of property and possession: A review and methodological proposition

Tibble

Carvalho

2018

Evolutionary Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Property is a key feature of modern human society; however, identifying the origin of this multifaceted behavior poses a formidable challenge. Here, we explore the methodologies for researching the origin of property. We discuss how an interdisciplinary approach can shed light on how our human ancestors shifted behaviorally from possessing an object to having exclusive property control over it. Possession occurs when social group members only respect an individual's claim to have exclusive access to an object when the individual has physical control over the object. Property occurs when an individual can claim exclusive access to an object, without challenge, regardless of whether the object is in their physical control or not. Researchers across different disciplines have asked what, if anything, distinguishes human property behavior from the behavior of other animals? Further, when and how did this behavior evolve in our lineage? Due to the considerable methodological challenges posed by researching this topic, few studies have been able to directly address these questions. In this review, we explore the challenges involved in defining property and possession and suggest a two‐step approach to interdisciplinary definitions. Next, we evaluate four core approaches to the study of property behavior: evolutionary game theory, ethology, comparative cognition, and developmental psychology. Finally, we propose an empirical study, using an ethological approach to test the presence of property and possessive behavior in a natural setting, using our closest living relative, the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Overall, we argue that this field of research is at a turning point, where the novel integration of various methods may provide an explanation to the origin of property.

show abstract

The Psychology of Ownership

Cited by 33 publications

References 0 publications

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

Are We Owners or Regular Customers? The Obscure Meaning of Ownership in Consumer Co-operatives

Rethinking the evolution of property and possession: A review and methodological proposition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About