Ownership (psychology)

In psychology, ownership is the feeling that something is yours.[1][2][3][4] Psychological ownership is distinct from legal ownership:[5] one may feel that one's cubicle at work is theirs and no one else's (i.e. psychological ownership), but legal ownership of the cubicle is actually conferred to the organization.

Overview

People can feel ownership about a variety of things: products, workspaces, ideas, and roles.[6] An example of ownership is the feeling that a product that you developed is yours and no one else's. For instance, the IKEA effect reveals that those who create a particular item value that item more than identical alternatives that they did not develop.[7] At its core, ownership is about possession, stewardship, and the need to have control over something.

Since psychological ownership can be experienced for diverse targets such as concrete objects[8] and abstract concepts (e.g., jobs,[9] investments,[10] brands,[11] ideas[12]), the construct of ownership as a psychological phenomenon has been researched within various fields. These fields include organizational behavior,[13] consumer behavior,[14] environmentalism and sustainability.[15]

Causes and Mechanisms

Why does psychological ownership prevail?

The causes of psychological ownership are the following fundamental human motivations:

  • Efficacy – Humans’ motivation to control their surroundings lead to efficacy, i.e., the ability to generate a preferred or intended outcome.[16] They can control their environment by owning various possessions, which induces psychological ownership.[17]
  • Self-identity – The target of ownership tied to self-identity can be emblematic representations of the self.[18] Their possessions aid people to establish their self-identity, both to themselves and to others.[19]
  • Belonging – People have a motivation to possess a “home”.[20] In order to fulfill this desire, people spend significant resources for potential targets of ownership.[1] These targets eventually get to be a part of ourselves.[21]

How does psychological ownership emerge?

Psychological ownership emerges in three ways:

  • Control – Having control over a target can result in psychological ownership due to enhanced feelings of self-determination and responsibility.[22]
  • Intimate knowledge – The more we know something, the more likely we are to feel it belongs to us.[23] A sense of fusion with the target of ownership occurs after intimately knowing that target.[24]
  • Self-investment – By expending physical and mental energies, time, ideas, and skills in something, we begin to feel greater ownership.[25]

Consequences

Positive outcomes

Ownership can lead to several positive outcomes:

  1. Citizenship behavior, discretionary effort, and personal sacrifice[26]
  2. Experienced responsibility and stewardship[27]

Negative outcomes

Ownership can also lead to negative outcomes, especially when that sense of ownership is challenged (either legitimately, by a higher authority asserting their ownership of an entity, or illegitimately, by a subordinate or co-equal entity usurping one's own ownership):

  1. Feelings of personal loss[28]
  2. Interpersonal conflict[6]
  3. Unwillingness to accept advice[28]
  4. Resistance to change[29]

Measuring Psychological Ownership

Since psychological ownership has been studied by multiple disciplines such as organizational behavior and consumer behavior, there are multiple scales in which the target of ownership is different (e.g., company, product).[4][14] In organizational behavior, the following scale is used to measure psychological ownership:[4]

  1. This is MY organization.
  2. I sense that this organization is OUR company.
  3. I feel a very high degree of personal ownership for this organization.
  4. I sense that this is MY company.

In consumer research, the following scale[14] or scales adapted from it[30][31][32] are used to measure psychological ownership of products that are the target of ownership:

  1. I feel like this is MY (target).
  2. I feel a very high degree of personal ownership for this (target).
  3. I feel like I own this (target).

Ownership in Organizational Settings

Ownership is distinctly related to psychological concepts such as organizational identification and organizational commitment. Organizational identification is the sense of belongingness to an organization and using the organization to define oneself.[33] An example of organizational identification could be proudly stating for which organization you work in a casual conversation with a new acquaintance. Organizational commitment is defined as accepting the organization's goals, exerting effort, and a desire to maintain membership.[34] An example of organizational commitment could be deciding to stay at an organization despite receiving an attractive job offer from another organization. Psychological ownership answers the question, ‘What is mine?’ Organizational identification answers the question, ‘Who am I?’ Organizational commitment answers the question, ‘Should I stay?’[1]

Employee ownership is an effective managerial practice to strengthen commitment and emotional connection to the organization's vision and employee motivation at an individual level.[35] Employee ownership can be generated through the following four factors:[1][36]

  • Independence – Offering instances in which the workers can have leadership and control over an aspect in the organization, e.g., self-managed projects, can produce psychological ownership.
  • Shared information – Sharing information about the project, position, team, or organization that the employee is partaking in can increase psychological ownership. Therefore, workers gathering and knowing more information about certain aspects of the organization is essential.
  • Investing self and contributing to the organization – Employees often invest their time, abilities, and ideas into their jobs. Increasing the sense of personal investment can be also possible through self-managed tasks.
  • Accountability – Giving employees certain responsibilities that will evoke a sense of shared burden and authority can enhance psychological ownership.

Ownership of Physical Objects

Ownership consists of the relationship between an individual and an object. This relationship can be very strong such that the individual considers their possessions as extensions of themselves.[37] One may claim to own an object by (1) paying attention to it, (2) being in physical contact with it, (3) linking it with an experience or a memory, (4) labeling or marking it, hence, constructing a unique relationship, (5) legally owning.[38]  Furthermore, one might extend themselves to objects by creating both physical and digital collections such as books and music records.[39][40]

Ownership in Personal Finances

Ownership can exist in decisions that involve financial programs and services, such as the Social Security program and investments. The American Social Security Administration program was set up by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1935.[41] The way it was structured was such that the workers’ contributions, exclusively, would fund it. It was a revolutionary idea at the time, since most social programs in other countries were funded by a composite of government and worker contributions.[42] Even though the US social security system finances current retirees mainly through the contributions of the current employees, instead of what they individually contributed when they were working.[43] These worker-only contributions were intended to install psychological ownership of benefits in workers, since each employee would be actively engaging in the program and have a sense of duty.[42][44] The research has shown that their goals were met: people feel like the benefits they receive are coming from their own contributions.[45][46]

Similarly, endowment effect supports that investment decisions such as home purchases and stock ownership instantly increase the appraisal of that particular item.[47] This increase in valuation is, at least partially, caused by increased psychological ownership.[14][48] This effect can be seen when investors prefer to stay with the status quo, i.e., their current particular investment assets more than other assets[49] and when individuals do not want to swap their current inferior bank for a superior bank.[50]

See also

References
  1. Pierce, J. L.; Kostova, T.; Dirks, K. (2001). "Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations". Academy of Management Review. 26 (2): 298–310. doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4378028.
  2. Pierce, J. L.; Kostova, T.; Dirks, K. T. (2003). "The state of psychological ownership: integrating and extending a century of research". Review of General Psychology. 7: 84–107. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.466.2674. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.1.84. S2CID 144464789.
  3. Pierce, J. L.; O’Driscoll, M. P.; Coghlan, A. M. (2004). "Work environment structure and psychological ownership: the mediating effects of control". Journal of Social Psychology. 144 (5): 507–34. doi:10.3200/SOCP.144.5.507-534. PMID 15449699. S2CID 42925264.
  4. Pierce, J.L.; Van Dyne, L. (2004). "Psychological ownership and feelings of possession: three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational citizenship behavior". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 25 (4): 439–459. doi:10.1002/job.249.
  5. Etzioni, A. (1991). F. W. Rudmin (ed.). "The socio-economics of property" (PDF). Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 6 (6): 465–468.
  6. Brown, G.; Robinson, S. (2011). "Reaction to territorial infringement". Organization Science. 22: 210–224. doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0507.
  7. Norton, Michael I.; Mochon, Daniel; Ariely, Dan (July 2012). "The IKEA effect: When labor leads to love". Journal of Consumer Psychology. 22 (3): 453–460. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.002. ISSN 1057-7408.
  8. Peck, Joann; Barger, Victor A.; Webb, Andrea (April 2013). "In search of a surrogate for touch: The effect of haptic imagery on perceived ownership". Journal of Consumer Psychology. 23 (2): 189–196. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2012.09.001. ISSN 1057-7408.
  9. Brown, Graham; Pierce, Jon L.; Crossley, Craig (2013-05-28). "Toward an Understanding of the Development of Ownership Feelings". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 35 (3): 318–338. doi:10.1002/job.1869. ISSN 0894-3796.
  10. Kirk, Colleen Patricia; McSherry, Bernard; Swain, Scott D. (2016). "Investing the Self: The Effect of Nonconscious Goals on Investor Psychological Ownership and Word-of-Mouth Intentions". SSRN Working Paper Series. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2719333. ISSN 1556-5068.
  11. Chang, Hua; Kwak, Hyokjin; Puzakova, Marina; Park, Jisoo; Smit, Edith G. (2015). "Sense of Loss Measure". doi:10.1037/t54232-000. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  12. Baer, Markus; Brown, Graham (2012-05-01). "Blind in one eye: How psychological ownership of ideas affects the types of suggestions people adopt". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 118 (1): 60–71. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.01.003. ISSN 0749-5978.
  13. Pierce, Jon L.; Rubenfeld, Stephen A.; Morgan, Susan (January 1991). "Employee Ownership: A Conceptual Model of Process and Effects". Academy of Management Review. 16 (1): 121–144. doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279000. ISSN 0363-7425.
  14. Peck, Joann; Shu, Suzanne B. (October 2009). "The Effect of Mere Touch on Perceived Ownership". Journal of Consumer Research. 36 (3): 434–447. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.702.8010. doi:10.1086/598614. ISSN 0093-5301.
  15. Peck, J.; Shu, S. (2015). "From tragedy to benefit of the commons: Increasing shared psychological ownership" (PDF). ACR North American Advances. 43.
  16. Furby, Lita (1978). Possessions: toward a theory of their meaning and function throughout the life cycle. New York: Academic Press. pp. 297–336.
  17. Furby, L. (February 1978). "Possession in humans: An exploratory study of its meaning and motivation". Social Behavior and Personality. 6 (1): 49–65. doi:10.2224/sbp.1978.6.1.49.
  18. Helga., Dittmar (1992). The social psychology of material possessions : to have is to be. Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire: Harvester Wheatsheaf. ISBN 978-0745009551. OCLC 25674838.
  19. Pierce, Jon L.; Kostova, Tatiana; Dirks, Kurt T. (April 2001). "Toward a Theory of Psychological Ownership in Organizations". Academy of Management Review. 26 (2): 298–310. doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4378028. ISSN 0363-7425.
  20. Jr., Ralph L. Holloway; Ardrey, Robert (December 1967). "The Territorial Imperative: A Personal Inquiry into the Animal Origins of Property and Nations". Political Science Quarterly. 82 (4): 630. doi:10.2307/2148087. ISSN 0032-3195. JSTOR 2148087.
  21. L., Dreyfus, Hubert. Being-in-the-world : a commentary on Heidegger's Being and time, division I. Cambridge, Massachusetts. ISBN 978-0262041065. OCLC 20217004.
  22. Furby, Lita (January 1978). "Possession in Humans: an Exploratory Study of its Meaning and Motivation". Social Behavior and Personality. 6 (1): 49–65. doi:10.2224/sbp.1978.6.1.49.
  23. Weil, Simone (1952). The need for roots: Prelude to a declaration of duties towards mankind. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  24. Beaglehole, Ernest (1932). Property : A study in social psychology. New York: Macmillan.
  25. Rochberg-Halton, E. (1980). Cultural signs and urban adaptation: The meaning of cherished household possessions (Thesis). University of Chicago.
  26. O'Driscoll, Michael P.; Pierce, Jon L.; Coghlan, Ann-Marie (June 2006). "The Psychology of Ownership: Work Environment Structure, Organizational Commitment, and Citizenship Behaviors". Group and Organization Management. 31 (3): 388–416. doi:10.1177/1059601104273066. S2CID 145652768.
  27. Davis, James H.; Schoorman, F. David; Donaldson, Lex (January 1997). "Toward a Stewardship View of Management". The Academy of Management Review. 22 (1): 20–47. doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9707180258. JSTOR 259223.
  28. Baer, M.; Brown, G. (March 2012). "Blind in one eye: How psychological ownership of ideas affects the types of suggestions people adopt". Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 118: 60–71. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.01.003.
  29. Dirks, Kurt; Cummings, Larry; Pierce, John (1996). "Psychological ownership in organizations: Conditions under which individuals promote and resist change". Research in Organizational Change and Development. 9 (1): 1–23. JSTOR 259223.
  30. Kirk, Colleen P.; McSherry, Bernard; Swain, Scott D. (October 2015). "Investing the self: The effect of nonconscious goals on investor psychological ownership and word-of-mouth intentions". Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics. 58: 186–194. doi:10.1016/j.socec.2015.04.013. ISSN 2214-8043.
  31. Shu, Suzanne B.; Payne, John W.; Sagara, Namika (2014). "The psychology of SSA claiming decisions: Toward the understanding and design of interventions" (PDF). 16th Annual Joint Conference of the Retirement Research Consortium, Washington DC.
  32. 1759-1796., Burns, Robert (1937). The poems and songs of Robert Burns. Collier. OCLC 2153197.CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  33. Mael, F.; Ashforth, B.E. (1992). "Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 13 (2): 103–123. doi:10.1002/job.4030130202.
  34. Mowday, Richard T.; Porter, Lyman W.; Steers, Richard M. (1982). Mowday, Richard T. (ed.). Employee-organization linkages: the psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. Academic Press. ISBN 9780125093705.
  35. Doh, Jonathan P.; Quigley, Narda R. (August 2014). "Responsible Leadership and Stakeholder Management: Influence Pathways and Organizational Outcomes". Academy of Management Perspectives. 28 (3): 255–274. doi:10.5465/amp.2014.0013. ISSN 1558-9080.
  36. Avey, James B.; Avolio, Bruce J.; Crossley, Craig D.; Luthans, Fred (February 2009). "Psychological ownership: theoretical extensions, measurement and relation to work outcomes". Journal of Organizational Behavior. 30 (2): 173–191. doi:10.1002/job.583. ISSN 0894-3796.
  37. Belk, Russell W. (September 1988). "Possessions and the Extended Self". Journal of Consumer Research. 15 (2): 139. doi:10.1086/209154. ISSN 0093-5301.
  38. Hodder, Ian (2012-04-20). Entangled. doi:10.1002/9781118241912. ISBN 9781118241912.
  39. Belk, Russell (1995). Collecting in a consumer society. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0415105347. OCLC 31610184.
  40. Contemporary collecting : objects, practices, and the fate of things. Moist, Kevin M., Banash, David C. Lanham, MD: The Scarecrow Press, Inc. 2013. pp. 13–29. ISBN 9780810891142. OCLC 843880824.CS1 maint: others (link)
  41. "Social Security Act of 1935". Legislative History 1935 Social Security Act. Retrieved October 25, 2018.
  42. Leff, Mark H. (September 1983). "Taxing the "Forgotten Man": The Politics of Social Security Finance in the New Deal". The Journal of American History. 70 (2): 359–381. doi:10.2307/1900209. ISSN 0021-8723. JSTOR 1900209.
  43. Feldstein, Martin; Liebman, Jeffrey B. (2002), "Chapter 32 Social security", Handbook of Public Economics, Elsevier, pp. 2245–2324, doi:10.1016/s1573-4420(02)80011-8, ISBN 9780444823151
  44. "Research Note #23. Luther Gulick Memorandum re: Famous FDR Quote". Social Security History. Retrieved 2018-10-31.
  45. Shu, Suzanne B.; Payne, John W.; Sagara, Namika (2014). "The psychology of SSA claiming decisions: Toward the understanding and design of interventions" (PDF). 16th Annual Joint Conference of the Retirement Research Consortium, Washington DC.
  46. Payne, John W.; Sagara, Namika; Shu, Suzanne B.; Appelt, Kirstin C.; Johnson, Eric J. (2012). "Life Expectancy as a Constructed Belief: Evidence of a Live-To or Die-By Framing Effect" (PDF). Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 46: 27–50. doi:10.1007/s11166-012-9158-0. S2CID 189953027.
  47. Kahneman, Daniel; Knetsch, Jack L.; Thaler, Richard H. (December 1990). "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem". Journal of Political Economy. 98 (6): 1325–1348. doi:10.1086/261737. ISSN 0022-3808.
  48. Shu, Suzanne B.; Peck, Joann (October 2011). "Psychological ownership and affective reaction: Emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect". Journal of Consumer Psychology. 21 (4): 439–452. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.01.002. ISSN 1057-7408.
  49. Samuelson, William; Zeckhauser, Richard (March 1988). "Status quo bias in decision making". Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 1 (1): 7–59. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.632.3193. doi:10.1007/bf00055564. ISSN 0895-5646. S2CID 5641133.
  50. Anagol, Santosh; Balasubramaniam, Vimal; Ramadorai, Tarun (2015). "Endowment Effects in the Field: Evidence from India's IPO Lotteries" (PDF). SSRN Working Paper Series. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2702555. ISSN 1556-5068. S2CID 217213430.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.