No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Ownership as an extension of self: An alternative to a minimalist model
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 October 2023
Abstract
Our commentary challenges Boyer's model by arguing that the extended-self is a more likely basis for ownership psychology. We outline how self-based principles of investment and control might structure thinking about ownership and related rights. We end by expanding the extended-self account to include welfare, as a way of understanding the contexts under which ownership is upheld or violated.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, S. J., Vergunst, F., Macrae, C. N., & Turk, D. J. (2013). Exploring early self-referential memory effects through ownership. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 31(3), 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Echelbarger, M., Roberts, S. O., & Gelman, S. A. (2022). Children's concern for equity and ownership in contexts of individual-based and group-based inequality. Journal of Cognition and Development, 23(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2021.1956931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espinosa, J., & Starmans, C. (2020). Control it and it is yours: Children's reasoning about the ownership of living things. Cognition, 202, 104319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Essler, S., & Paulus, M. (2021). Robin Hood or Matthew? Children's reasoning about redistributive justice in the context of economic inequalities. Child Development, 92(4), 1254–1273. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13482.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Furby, L. (1978). Possession in humans: An exploratory study of its meaning and motivation. Social Behavior and Personality, 6(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.1978.6.1.49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, S. A., & Legare, C. H. (2011). Concepts and folk theories. Annual Review of Anthropology, 40(1), 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-081309-145822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, S. A., Manczak, E. M., & Noles, N. S. (2012). The nonobvious basis of ownership: Preschool children trace the history and value of owned objects: Nonobvious basis of ownership. Child Development, 83(5), 1732–1747. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01806.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grisdale, E., Lind, S. E., Eacott, M. J., & Williams, D. M. (2014). Self-referential memory in autism spectrum disorder and typical development: Exploring the ownership effect. Consciousness and Cognition, 30, 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2014.08.023.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartley, C., & Fisher, S. (2018). Mine is better than yours: Investigating the ownership effect in children with autism spectrum disorder and typically developing children. Cognition, 172, 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.11.009.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keil, F. C. (2010). The feasibility of folk science. Cognitive Science, 34(5), 826–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01108.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirk, C. P., Peck, J., & Swain, S. D. (2018). Property lines in the mind: Consumers’ psychological ownership and their territorial responses. Journal of Consumer Research, 45(1), 148–168. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucx111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J. (1978). Of property. In MacPherson, C. B. (Ed.), Property: Mainstream and critical positions (pp. 17–27). University of Toronto Press (original work published 1690).Google Scholar
Morewedge, C. K. (2021). Psychological ownership: Implicit and explicit. Current Opinion in Psychology, 39, 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.10.003.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peck, J., & Luangrath, A. W. (2023). A review and future avenues for psychological ownership in consumer research. Consumer Psychology Review, 6(1), 52–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/arcp.1084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudmin, F. W., & Berry, J. W. (1987). Semantics of ownership: A free-recall study of property. The Psychological Record, 37, 257–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03394988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shtulman, A., & Legare, C. H. (2020). Competing explanations of competing explanations: Accounting for conflict between scientific and folk explanations. Topics in Cognitive Science, 12(4), 1337–1362. https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12483.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sommers, R. (2021). Experimental jurisprudence. Science, 373(6553), 394–395. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abf0711.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Starmans, C., & Friedman, O. (2016). If I am free, you can't own me: Autonomy makes entities less ownable. Cognition, 148, 145–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.11.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Symons, C. S., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 121(3), 371–394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.371.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van De Vondervoort, J. W., & Friedman, O. (2015). Parallels in preschoolers’ and adults’ judgments about ownership rights and bodily rights. Cognitive Science, 39(1), 184–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van de Vondervoort, J. W., Meinz, P., & Friedman, O. (2017). Children's judgments about ownership rights and body rights: Evidence for a common basis. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 155, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.10.007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
Ownership psychology as a cognitive adaptation: A minimalist model
Related commentaries (31)
A cooperative–competitive perspective of ownership necessitates an understanding of ownership disagreements
A developmental perspective on the minimalist model: The case of respect for ownership
Autonomy, the moral circle, and the limits of ownership
Beyond personal ownership: Examining the complexities of ownership in culture
Boyer's minimal model should also represent multiple ownership without collective agency
Computational theories should be made with natural language instead of meaningless code
Development, history, and a minimalist model of ownership psychology
Hold it! Where do we put the body?
How the minimalist model of ownership psychology can aid in explaining moral behaviors under resource constraints
Invested effort and our open-ended sense of ownership
No single notion of cooperation explains when we respect ownership
Not by intuitions alone: Institutions shape our ownership behaviour
On intuitive versus institutional accounts of ownership
Ownership and willingness to compete for resources
Ownership as a component of the extended self
Ownership as an extension of self: An alternative to a minimalist model
Ownership is (likely to be) a moral foundation
Ownership language informs ownership psychology
Ownership psychology and group size
Ownership psychology as a “cognitive cell” adaptation: A minimalist model of microbial goods theory
Primordial feeling of possession in development
Psychological ownership: Actors' and observers' perspectives
Reciprocal contracts – not competitive acquisition – explain the moral psychology of ownership
Similarity and the coordination of ownership
The curious origins of ownership
The evolutionary psychology of ownership is rooted in the Lockean liberal principle of self-ownership
The missing link? How do non-human primates fit in the minimalist model of ownership?
The origins of property law
The recursive nature of ownership intuitions
What do infants need an ownership concept for? Frugal possession concepts can adequately support early reasoning about distributive dilemmas
When it comes to taxes, ownership intuitions abide by the law
Author response
Ownership psychology, its antecedents and consequences