No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
How the minimalist model of ownership psychology can aid in explaining moral behaviors under resource constraints
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 October 2023
Abstract
The model of ownership psychology as a cognitive adaptation proposes that people flexibly navigate cognitive systems of cooperation and competition, thus enabling them to justify unethical behavior. We discuss how this model captures previous accounts of unethical behavior and propose that a disengagement heuristic can help us understand recent findings in the interconnection between scarcity psychology and unethical behavior.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Bandura, A. (2017). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. In Recent developments in criminological theory (pp. 135–152). Routledge.10.4324/9781315089089-12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyer, P. (2022). Ownership psychology as a cognitive adaptation: A minimalist model. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1–35.10.1017/S0140525X22002527CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curry, O. S., Mullins, D. A., & Whitehouse, H. (2019). Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies. Current Anthropology, 60(1), 47–69.10.1086/701478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbaek, C., Mitkidis, P., Aarøe, L., & Otterbring, T. (2021a). Material scarcity and unethical economic behavior: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-800481/v2.Google Scholar
Elbaek, C., Mitkidis, P., Aarøe, L., & Otterbring, T. (2021b). Social class and income inequality is associated with morality: Empirical evidence from 67 countries. Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1082570/v1.Google Scholar
Elbæk, C. T., Mitkidis, P., Aarøe, L., & Otterbring, T. (2022). Honestly hungry: Acute hunger does not increase unethical economic behaviour. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 101, 104312.10.1016/j.jesp.2022.104312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldsmith, K., Roux, C., & Ma, J. (2018). When seeking the best brings out the worst in consumers: Understanding the relationship between a maximizing mindset and immoral behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(2), 293–309.10.1002/jcpy.1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, J. D. (2015). The rise of moral cognition. Cognition, 135, 39–42.10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.018CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kilduff, G. J., Galinsky, A. D., Gallo, E., & Reade, J. J. (2016). Whatever it takes to win: Rivalry increases unethical behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1508–1534.10.5465/amj.2014.0545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., Mendoza-Denton, R., Rheinschmidt, M. L., & Keltner, D. (2012). Social class, solipsism, and contextualism: How the rich are different from the poor. Psychological Review, 119(3), 546.10.1037/a0028756CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mitkidis, P., Lindeløv, J. K., Elbaek, C. T., Porubanova, M., Grzymala-Moszczynska, J., & Ariely, D. (2022). Morality in the time of cognitive famine: The effects of memory load on cooperation and honesty. Acta Psychologica, 228, 103664.10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103664CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Cheng, B. H., & Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more: The influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(5), 771.10.1037/a0020092CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schurr, A., & Ritov, I. (2016). Winning a competition predicts dishonest behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(7), 1754–1759.10.1073/pnas.1515102113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shu, L. L., Gino, F., & Bazerman, M. H. (2011). Dishonest deed, clear conscience: When cheating leads to moral disengagement and motivated forgetting. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(3), 330–349.10.1177/0146167211398138CrossRefGoogle 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