Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-8v9h9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-27T10:09:16.981Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ownership as an extension of self: An alternative to a minimalist model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 October 2023

Shaylene E. Nancekivell Open the ORCID record for Shaylene E. Nancekivell [Opens in a new window]  and
Madison L. Pesowski
Shaylene E. Nancekivell
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada shaylene.nancekivell@umanitoba.ca www.youngmindsresearch.com
Madison L. Pesowski
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of the Fraser Valley, Abbotsford, BC, Canada madison.pesowski@ufv.ca; https://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=uFSncn4AAAAJ&hl=en
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e345
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

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