No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Hold it! Where do we put the body?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 October 2023
Abstract
Boyer's formulation neglects that humans are embodied agents. It is a biological imperative to distinguish self from other. Ownership of ideas, bodies, objects, and locations is an inevitable extension of this. We argue that (1) the body's capability influences the inputs that guide future actions, and (2) bodies in action influence all of cognition, from perception to decision making.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Andersen, R. A., & Mountcastle, V. B. (1983). The influence of the angle of gaze upon the excitability of the light-sensitive neurons of the posterior parietal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 3(3), 532–548.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barton, S. L., Matthis, J. S., & Fajen, B. R. (2017). Visual regulation of gait: Zeroing in on a solution to the complex terrain problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(10), 1773.Google Scholar
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyer, P. (2022). Ownership psychology as a cognitive adaptation: A minimalist model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1–35. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X22002527CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chapman, C. S., Gallivan, J. P., & Enns, J. T. (2015). Separating value from selection frequency in rapid reaching biases to visual targets. Visual Cognition, 23(1–2), 249–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vito, D., & Fenske, M. J. (2018). Affective evidence that inhibition is involved in separating accessory representations from active representations in visual working memory. Visual Cognition, 26(8), 583–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dudarev, V., Manaligod, M. G., Enns, J. T., & Todd, R. M. (2022). In the hands of the beholder: Wearing a COVID-19 mask is associated with its attractiveness. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 75(4), 598–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenske, M. J., & Raymond, J. E. (2006). Affective influences of selective attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(6), 312–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foglia, L., & Wilson, R. A. (2013). Embodied cognition. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4(3), 319–325.Google ScholarPubMed
Gale, D. J., Areshenkoff, C. N., Honda, C., Johnsrude, I. S., Flanagan, J. R., & Gallivan, J. P. (2021). Motor planning modulates neural activity patterns in early human auditory cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 31(6), 2952–2967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallivan, J. P., Cavina-Pratesi, C., & Culham, J. C. (2009). Is that within reach? fMRI reveals that the human superior parieto-occipital cortex encodes objects reachable by the hand. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(14), 4381–4391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallivan, J. P., Chapman, C. S., Gale, D. J., Flanagan, J. R., & Culham, J. C. (2019). Selective modulation of early visual cortical activity by movement intention. Cerebral Cortex, 29(11), 4662–4678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, O., & Mitchell, C. J. (2008). Negative priming reduces affective ratings. Cognition and Emotion, 22(6), 1119–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiss, M., Goolsby, B. A., Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., Silvert, L., Nobre, A. C., … Eimer, M. (2007). Efficient attentional selection predicts distractor devaluation: Event-related potential evidence for a direct link between attention and emotion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(8), 1316–1322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, D. N., Lishman, J. R., & Thomson, J. A. (1982). Regulation of gait in long jumping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8(3), 448.Google Scholar
Mukherjee, S. (2022). The song of the cell: An exploration of medicine and the new human. Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Nakayama, K., Moher, J., & Song, J. H. (2023). Rethinking vision and action. Annual Review of Psychology, 74, 59–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peck, J., & Shu, S. B. (2009). The effect of mere touch on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 434–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, C. J., Amarasooriya, P., & Fallah, M. (2016). An eye in the palm of your hand: Alterations in visual processing near the hand, a mini-review. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 10, 37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raymond, J. E., Fenske, M. J., & Westoby, N. (2005). Emotional devaluation of distracting patterns and faces: A consequence of attentional inhibition during visual search? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(6), 1404.Google ScholarPubMed
Reed, C. L., Grubb, J. D., & Steele, C. (2006). Hands up: Attentional prioritization of space near the hand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(1), 166–177.Google ScholarPubMed
Rizzolatti, G., Fogassi, L., & Gallese, V. (2001). Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the understanding and imitation of action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2(9), 661–670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sarpeshkar, V., Abernethy, B., & Mann, D. L. (2017). Visual strategies underpinning the development of visual–motor expertise when hitting a ball. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(10), 1744.Google ScholarPubMed
Savelsbergh, G. J., Whiting, H. T., & Bootsma, R. J. (1991). Grasping tau. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17(2), 315.Google ScholarPubMed
Silver, A. M., Stahl, A. E., Loiotile, R., Smith-Flores, A. S., & Feigenson, L. (2020). When not choosing leads to not liking: Choice-induced preference in infancy. Psychological Science, 31(11), 1422–1429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Snyder, L. H. (2000). Coordinate transformations for eye and arm movements in the brain. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 10(6): 747–754.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sommer, R. (2002). Personal space in a digital age. In Bechtel, R. B. & Churchman, A. (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 647–660). Wiley.Google Scholar
Tanaka, J. W., & Philibert, V. (2022). The expertise of perception: How experience changes the way we see the world. Elements in Perception.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todd, J. T. (1981). Visual information about moving objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7(4), 795.Google ScholarPubMed
Truong, G., Chapman, C. S., Chisholm, J. D., Enns, J. T., & Handy, T. C. (2016). Mine in motion: How physical actions impact the psychological sense of object ownership. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(3), 375.Google ScholarPubMed
Wispinski, N. J., Gallivan, J. P., & Chapman, C. S. (2020). Models, movements, and minds: Bridging the gap between decision making and action. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1464(1), 30–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wispinski, N. J., Lin, S., Enns, J. T., & Chapman, C. S. (2021). Selective attention to real-world objects drives their emotional appraisal. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(1), 122–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Witt, J. K. (2011). Action's effect on perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(3), 201–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
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