Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-mzsfj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-15T17:32:34.067Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Boyer's minimal model should also represent multiple ownership without collective agency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2023

Radu Umbreș Open the ORCID record for Radu Umbreș [Opens in a new window]
Radu Umbreș*
Affiliation:
Faculty of Political Sciences, SNSPA, Bucharest, Romania radu.umbres@politice.ro; www.umbres.ro
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Boyer's minimal model of ownership psychology suggests that joint possession triggers representations of collective agency. However, many forms of co-ownership based on cooperation or competition can be represented as a set of P() or L() tags without inferring a unifying collective entity. Moreover, representations of partible ownership are required to engage in cooperative production and distribution of resources.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e353
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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Baumard, N., Mascaro, O., & Chevallier, C. (2012). Preschoolers are able to take merit into account when distributing goods. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 492–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026598.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeScioli, P., & Karpoff, R. (2015). People's judgments about classic property law cases. Human Nature, 26, 184–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-015-9230-y.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huh, M., & Friedman, O. (2017). Young children's understanding of the limits and benefits of group ownership. Developmental Psychology, 53(4), 686–697. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tooby, J., Cosmides, L., & Price, M. E. (2006). Cognitive adaptations for n-person exchange: The evolutionary roots of organizational behavior. Managerial and Decision Economics, 27(2–3), 103–129. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.1287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Umbres, R. (2022). Living with distrust: Morality and cooperation in a Romanian village. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verkuyten, M., Sierksma, J., & Martinovic, B. (2015). First arrival and collective land ownership: How children reason about who owns the land. Social Development, 24(4), 868–882. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Widlok, T. (2016). Anthropology and the economy of sharing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315671291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar