Semantics of Ownership: A Free-Recall Study of Property

Rudmin, Floyd W.; Berry, John W.

doi:10.1007/bf03394988

Cited by 113 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Control also was found to be a core feature of ownership by Rudmin and Berry (1987) in their studies of ownership semantics. They found that ownership means the ability to use and to control the use of objects.…”

Section: Controlling the Ownership Targetmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…What has emerged from this work is the recognition that culture and personal values shape what can and cannot be owned (Furby, 1976); the nature and character of the most valued possessions changes throughout the individual's life-span (Kamptner, 1991); males tend to identify with objects that involve physical interaction and activity, while females are more inclined to associate with more contemplative, expressive and symbolic objects (Kamptner, 1991;Rochberg-Halton, 1980); and those items that are controlled, known intimately, and/or flow from one's self are likely to be items for which a psychology of mine emerges. In addition, ownership appears to attach itself to a wide variety of targets: work (Holmes, 1967), tools (Ellis, 1985), physical/material objects (Dittmar, 1989;Isaacs, 1933;Prelinger, 1959) some of which are action-oriented (e.g., sports equipment) and others are more contemplative in nature (e.g., photos, books, mementoes), ideas (Isaacs, 1933;Prelinger, 1959), relationships/people (e.g., copulatory partners and offspring) (Ellis, 1985;Prelinger, 1959;Rudmin & Berry, 1987), space/territory (Rudmin & Berry, 1987, body parts (Rudmin & Berry, 1987), ingestibles (Ellis, 1985), creations (Locke 1694;Rudmin & Berry, 1987), and sounds (e.g., nursery rhymes) heard (Isaacs, 1933).…”

Section: Target Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

Pierce

Kostova

Dirks

2003

Review of General Psychology

1,382

1,801

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People develop feelings of ownership for a variety of objects, material and immaterial in nature. We refer to this state as psychological ownership. Building upon and extending prior scholarship we offer a conceptual examination of this construct. After defining psychological ownership, we address "why" it exists and "how" it comes into being. We propose that this state finds its roots in a set of intra-individual motives (efficacy and effectance, self-identity, and having a place to dwell). In addition, we discuss the experiences that give rise to psychological ownership and propose several positive and negative consequences of this state. Our work provides a foundation for the development of a comprehensive theory of psychological ownership and the conceptual underpinnings for empirical testing.2 Expressing a 'classical' Western perspective, Rousseau (1950) suggested that 'civil society' most likely began when a person fenced off a plot of ground and took it into his/her head to claim 'this is mine,' while others accepted this assertion. Recognizing the psychology of ownership, Etzioni writes that ownership is a "dual creation, part attitude, part object, part in the mind, part 'real'" (1991: 466), andHeider (1958) observes that 'attitudes of ownership' are common among people. Consistent with these views, economic psychologist Leon Litwinski (1942) and social psychologist Lita Furby (1991) offer the thesis that there is a 'psychology of mine and property' that attaches itself to objects. These perspectives provide a new lens with which to view possession, property, and ownership. We refer to this lens as psychological ownership, a cognitive-affective state that characterizes the human condition.Scholars from various disciplines have been interested in the genesis of possessive tendencies and the psychology of mine and property (e.g., Etzioni, 1991;Furby 1991;Litwinski, 1942Litwinski, , 1947. Some have offered a genetic explanation for the emergence of such psychological states (e.g., Burk, 1900;Darling, 1937), others have argued that they are the product of socialization practices carried out in society (e.g., Furby, 1976;Kline & France, 1899), while a sociobiological (cf. Buss, 1990;Wilson, 1975) perspective envisions a combination of both biological tendencies toward territoriality and accepted social practices. The psychology of ownership has been studied in a variety of contexts including child development (e.g., Isaacs, 1933;Kline & France, 1899), consumer behavior (Belk, 1988), among the elderly (Cram & Paton, 1993;Kamptner, 1989), within the customs and practices of different societies (Kline & France, 1899), from the perspective of holding land and having a house "with four walls" (Duncan, 1981;Porteous, 1976), across different socio-economic strata (Rochberg-Halton, 1980), within the philosophical discussions of 'being' (Heidegger, 1967;Sartre, 1943), and finally, in the workplace (Dirks, Cummings, & Pierce, 1996;Pierce, Kostova, & Dirks, 2001;Pratt & Dutton, 1998).We integrate and build on t...

show abstract

Section: Controlling the Ownership Targetmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Target Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

Pierce

Kostova

Dirks

2003

Review of General Psychology

1,382

1,801

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rudmin and Berry (1987) concluded that a semantic component of possession and ownership was the ability to exercise influence and control. Congruent with the understanding that possessions shape identity, McClelland (1951) asserted that, when we are able to control external objects, they form part of the extended self.…”

Section: Job Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study of the Antecedents and Consequences of Psychological Ownership in Organizational Settings

Mayhew

Ashkanasy

Bramble

et al. 2007

The Journal of Social Psychology

260

225

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychological ownership is a feeling of possession in the absence of any formal or legal claims of ownership. The aim of our research was to extend previous empirical testing psychological ownership in work settings to encompass both job-based and organization-based psychological ownership, related work attitudes and behavioral outcomes.Questionnaire data from 68 employees and their managers revealed both job-based and organization-based psychological ownership as distinct work attitudes, distinguishable from job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Psychological ownership also predicted job satisfaction and organizational commitment, and mediated the relationship between autonomy and these work attitudes. There was no support for a relationship between psychological ownership and behavioral outcomes. We conclude with a discussion of the limitations of our research and the implications of psychological ownership.

show abstract

“…Theory of ownership element is vital to the success of a community intervention. According to the (Rudmin et al, 1987), it is the "living definitions" of ownership that affect beneficiaries' perceptions of the plan and their roles. Since these perceptions are the raw material of group behaviour, leaders or agents of change must work with and, where necessary, stand for such interpretations of ownership.…”

Section: 0% Source: Study Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Community participation in building climate change resilient rural housing: a case of the Jamuna river basin of Bangladesh

Ahmed¹

2017

AJCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The climate resilient community cluster village was established by a Non-Government Organization named "ActionAid Bangladesh" to ensure safe community living for the inhabitants of a vulnerable ecological zone of Bangladesh situated in the Jamuna river basin of Bangladesh. The experience was that local people had their houses destroyed by a flood almost every year with a far-reaching threat to livelihood and solemnity of women. It was, therefore, essential to facilitate the community in building multi-hazard resilient houses to make them self-protective from climatic hazards like a windy storm, flooding etc. Moreover, as the poor usually had no savings or insurance, there was additional need to make provision for livelihood sustenance. Therefore, it is important to provide for some flood free land, for instance, to grow vegetables and fruits or pond for fish culture, both self-consumption and selling in the market. The program started with a threadbare discussion with the vulnerable communities in a participatory manner where the program staffs had discussed with the community groups, to generate the basic analysis of vulnerabilities and its link to climate change. The community itself analysed the vulnerability faced by them. The result was building of climate resilient community cluster village housing for ten families whose dwellings were devastated almost annually by the flood. A social and economic feasibility analysis was carried out to determine to scale up of these types of adaptations to similar ecological zones of the country and elsewhere.

show abstract

Semantics of Ownership: A Free-Recall Study of Property

Cited by 113 publications

References 26 publications

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research

A Study of the Antecedents and Consequences of Psychological Ownership in Organizational Settings

Community participation in building climate change resilient rural housing: a case of the Jamuna river basin of Bangladesh

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About