Search

How can consumers be encouraged to take better care of public goods? Across four studies, including two experiments in the field and three documenting actual behaviors, the authors demonstrate that increasing consumers' individual psychological ownership facilitates stewardship of public goods. This effect occurs because feelings of ownership increase consumers' perceived responsibility, which then leads to active behavior to care for the good. Evidence from a variety of contexts, including a public lake with kayakers, a state park with skiers, and a public walking path, suggests that increasing psychological ownership enhances both effortful stewardship, such as picking up trash from a lake, and financial stewardship, such as donating money. This work further demonstrates that the relationship between psychological ownership and resulting stewardship behavior is attenuated when there are cues, such as an attendance sign, which diffuse responsibility among many people. This work offers implications for consumers, practitioners, and policy makers with simple interventions that can encourage consumers to be better stewards of public goods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on psychological ownership is prevalent in the consumer domain. This article details the theoretical core of psychological ownership, integrating research in consumer psychology and marketing. The underlying motivations behind psychological ownership are also considered as well as the antecedents and consequences of feeling ownership. This article discusses how consumers signal and infer a sense of ownership, acknowledging that the characteristics of the target of ownership vary greatly to include physical targets as well as those that are intangible. Research is discussed on the lifecycle of ownership considering the formation, perception, and eventual dissolution of psychological ownership. The authors note various avenues for future research in psychological ownership with the aim to spur research in consumer psychology and feelings of ownership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Psychological ownership, or the feeling that something is mine, has garnered growing attention in marketing. While previous work focuses on the positive aspects of psychological ownership, this research draws attention to the darker side of psychological ownership--territorial behavior. Results of five experimental studies demonstrate that when consumers feel psychological ownership of a target, they are prone to perceptions of infringement and subsequent territorial responses when they infer that another individual feels ownership of the same target. Potential infringers are held less accountable when they acknowledge ownership prior to engaging in otherwise threatening behaviors, and when they could not be expected to know that a target is owned, as it was not clearly marked. In addition, high narcissists are subject to a psychological ownership metaperception bias, and are thus more apt than low narcissists to perceive infringement. A multitude of territorial responses are documented for both tangible (coffee, sweater, chair, pizza) and intangible (a design) targets of ownership. Further, consumers infer the psychological ownership of others from signals of the antecedents of psychological ownership: control, investment of self, and intimate knowledge. Theoretical implications for territoriality and psychological ownership are discussed, along with managerial implications and areas for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research finds that merely touching an object results in an increase in perceived ownership of that object. For nonowners, or buyers, perceived ownership can be increased with either mere touch or with imagery encouraging touch. Perceived ownership can also be increased through touch for legal owners, or sellers of an object. We also explore valuation of an object and conclude that it is jointly influenced by both perceived ownership and by the valence of the touch experience. We discuss the implications of this research for online and traditional retailers as well as for touch research and endowment effect research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research details the development of the "Need for Touch" (NFT) scale designed to measure individual differences in preference for haptic (touch) information. The 12-item NFT scale consists of autotelic and instrumental dimensions. Results are reported that support the scale's hypothesized internal structure as well as its reliability, convergent, discriminant, and nomological validity. Individual differences in chronic accessibility to haptic information across groups varying in NFT were also found in two experiments. Additionally, NFT moderated the relationship between direct experience and confidence in judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT As arts organizations frequently seek purchases and donations from the same consumers, one of their challenges is identifying which consumers are likely to become donors in the future. With all of the data currently available, many organizations are looking to their databases to predict future consumer behavior. In the customer relationship management literature, models have been developed that allow organizations to use consumer purchase data to predict future purchase behavior. This goal of this research is to extend this literature to determine whether it is possible to predict consumer willingness to donate using purchase behavior data. It is not expected that purchase behavior data will be nearly as accurate a predictor of future donation behavior as past donation behavior would be. Rather, the goal is simply to determine whether organizations would be able to use purchase behavior data as a proxy for relationship perceptions to improve their ability to identify prospective donors among their consumers. Three commonly used methods of prediction based on past behavior are tested using a combination of purchase behavior data and consumer surveys: a segmentation approach, a recency/frequency/monetary value model, and a Pareto/NBD customer relationship management model. Across all three methods, purchase behavior is found to be a poor predictor of both customer relationship perceptions and willingness to donate to the organization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This research proposes that the concept of emotional attachment, and specifically the independent constructs of psychological ownership and affective reaction, can help explain many of the endowment effect findings documented in the literature. We define these constructs and then test them across a set of nine studies in which we both replicate previous and generate new endowment effect findings, and then show that psychological ownership and affective reaction can mediate the effects. In doing so, we offer direct empirical support for the idea of emotional attachment as a driver of loss aversion while also providing practitioners and future endowment effect researchers with new insights about the psychological processes that underlie the endowment effect. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The role of exemplars in formation of attitudes toward a category has, surprisingly, been ignored in prior consumer research. In the present research we seek to develop a better understanding of the relationship between category exemplars (e.g., the products in a brand category) and overall attitudes toward the category. Attitude measures that incorporate evaluations of individual branded products may be useful, both conceptually and practically, and can complement more traditional multi-attribute measures of attitude. Across 3 studies we present evidence that a composite index of attitudes toward category exemplars, weighted by exemplar typicality, is related to overall category attitudes, sometimes more strongly than a traditional multi-attribute index. We also demonstrate that elaboration upon the individual exemplars further strengthens the relationship between category attitudes and this composite index. Theoretical implications for attitude theory, as well as managerial implications, are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While past work has explored some of the reasons why people themselves may remain silent in a group, almost no research has examined the mirror image of this question: How do consumers construe the silence of others? Do they project the opinions of the speakers in a conversation onto the silent individuals, assuming that silence signals agreement? Do they have a usual or "default" naïve theory of silence that they use to explain it across multiple contexts—i.e., "silence usually signals disagreement?" Or does silence act as a mirror, reflecting observers' own opinions back at them? Three experiments contrasted perceivers' estimates of conversational silence with their estimates of unknown opinions outside the conversation. Estimates of opinions outside the conversation generally followed an agreement‐with‐the‐speakers rule—the more an opinion was expressed in the group, the more consumers assumed others would support it too. In contrast, silence inside the conversation was interpreted very differently, serving as a mirror for participants' own thoughts, even when the vocal majority favored the opposite position. Results suggest a process whereby observers project the reason they personally would have been silent in the group (given their opinion) onto silence, leading to an inference that the silents agree with the self. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]