Psychological ownership and affective reaction: Emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect

By Suzanne B. Shu, Joann Peck. 2011

382 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9b4abdb5a3b5c61a79ca6232322c0a62cbfc216f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Digital Sensory Marketing: Integrating New Technologies into Multisensory Online Experience (2019, background): “Seeing the picture of a given food or reading its name can activate the olfactory and the gustatory cortices (González et al. 2006; Simmons, Martin, and Barsalou 2005).”
Evolution of Consumption: A Psychological Ownership Framework (2020, background): “It can be considered a form of emotional attachment between consumers and the goods and services they use (Shu and Peck 2011).”
A psychological ownership approach to designing object attachment (2015, background): “Shu and Peck (2011) directly link psychological ownership to feelings of attachment.”
When Posting About Products on Social Media Backfires: The Negative Effects of Consumer Identity Signaling on Product Interest (2019, background): “At the end, everyone answered questions measuring impression management concerns (White and Peloza 2009), felt psychological ownership of their posted products (Shu and Peck 2011), and standard demographic questions and were informed that a follow-up survey would be available in a week.”
Tablets, touchscreens, and touchpads: : How varying touch interfaces trigger psychological ownership and endowment (2014, background): “These results support that the effect of interface touch on product endowment is mediated by psychological ownership, consistent with Shu and Peck (2011).”
Sensory marketing, embodiment, and grounded cognition: A review and introduction (2014, background): “Other consumer research has addressed the haptic properties of consumer goods (Peck& Childers, 2003) and communications (Peck & Wiggins, 2006) and their impact on purchase intention, donation behaviors, and feelings of ownership and endowment (Peck & Shu, 2009; Shu & Peck, 2011).”
The power of sensory marketing in advertising (2016, background): “They point out that individuals who have the opportunity to touch an object feel a stronger sense of ownership of that object [20,21], thereby increasing their perception of its value (i.”
The Smartphone as a Pacifying Technology (2020, positive): “Importantly, such haptic qualities have been shown to generate hedonic beneﬁts in the form of comfort and pleasure (Peck and Childers 2003; Shu and Peck 2011; Vaucelle, Bonanni, and Ishii 2009).”
In Search of a Surrogate for Touch: The Effect of Haptic Imagery on Perceived Ownership (2013, methodology): “Previous research, which has demonstrated a link between touch and perceived ownership (Peck & Shu, 2009; Shu & Peck, 2011), has hypothesized, but not shown, that physical control is an antecedent of perceived ownership.”
“As if It Were Mine”: Imagery Works by Inducing Psychological Ownership (2015, positive): “Third and most important for the argument that psychological ownership may lie behind the effectiveness of imagery processing: Psychological ownership elicits favorable attitudinal and behavioral consumer responses (e.g., Jussila and Tuominen, 2010; Reb and Connolly, 2007; Shu and Peck, 2011).”
Psychological Ownership Motivation and Use of Social Media (2015, positive): “Shu and Peck (2011) found that the perceived loss of psychological ownership has negative effects on consumers’ willingness to trade.”
I’m Proud of It: Consumer Technology Appropriation and Psychological Ownership (2015, neutral): “…Kamleitner and Feuchtl, 2015; Weiss and Johar, 2013), in part because psychological ownership is a robust predictor of willingness to pay more for a product (Brasel and Gips, 2013; Fuchs, Prandelli, and Schreier, 2010; Lessard-Bonaventure and Chebat, 2015; Peck and Shu, 2009; Shu and Peck, 2011).”