IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v118y2012i1p60-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blind in one eye: How psychological ownership of ideas affects the types of suggestions people adopt

Author

Listed:
  • Baer, Markus
  • Brown, Graham

Abstract

Two experimental studies demonstrated that feeling as though an object, such as an idea, is “ours” (i.e., experiencing feelings of psychological ownership) propels people to selectively adopt others’ suggestions for change. Whereas feelings of ownership caused individuals to embrace the adoption of suggestions that expanded upon their possessions (additive change), it simultaneously made them shun the adoption of suggestions that shrank them (subtractive change) (Studies 1 and 2). Furthermore, results indicated that both a sense of personal loss and negative affect sequentially mediated this joint effect of psychological ownership and change type on the adoption of others’ suggestions for change (Study 2). Our findings suggest that the nature of change and how it impacts high ownership people’s sense of loss and negative affect is an important determinant of whether feelings of ownership will cause individuals to remain open to or resist others’ suggestions for change.

Suggested Citation

  • Baer, Markus & Brown, Graham, 2012. "Blind in one eye: How psychological ownership of ideas affects the types of suggestions people adopt," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 60-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:118:y:2012:i:1:p:60-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.01.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597812000192
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2012.01.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Belk, Russell W, 1988. "Possessions and the Extended Self," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(2), pages 139-168, September.
    2. Yaniv, Ilan & Kleinberger, Eli, 2000. "Advice Taking in Decision Making: Egocentric Discounting and Reputation Formation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 260-281, November.
    3. Dusya Vera & Mary Crossan, 2005. "Improvisation and Innovative Performance in Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 203-224, June.
    4. Graham Brown & Sandra L. Robinson, 2011. "Reactions to Territorial Infringement," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 210-224, February.
    5. Forgas, Joseph P. & George, Jennifer M., 2001. "Affective Influences on Judgments and Behavior in Organizations: An Information Processing Perspective," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 3-34, September.
    6. Scott E. Page, 2007. "Prologue to The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies," Introductory Chapters, in: The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies, Princeton University Press.
    7. Porath, Christine L. & Erez, Amir, 2009. "Overlooked but not untouched: How rudeness reduces onlookers' performance on routine and creative tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 29-44, May.
    8. Yaniv, Ilan, 2004. "Receiving other people's advice: Influence and benefit," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 1-13, January.
    9. Bonaccio, Silvia & Dalal, Reeshad S., 2006. "Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for the organizational sciences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 127-151, November.
    10. Andrew B. Hargadon & Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "When Collections of Creatives Become Creative Collectives: A Field Study of Problem Solving at Work," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(4), pages 484-500, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Steven M. Gray & Andrew P. Knight & Markus Baer, 2020. "On the Emergence of Collective Psychological Ownership in New Creative Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 141-164, January.
    2. Potdar, Balkrushna & Guthrie, John & Gnoth, Juergen & Garry, Tony, 2018. "The role of psychological ownership in shoplifting prevention: An exploratory study," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 253-265.
    3. Hingston, Sean T. & Whelan, Jodie, 2024. "What’s mine is mine, what’s yours is yours: Contamination concerns enhance psychological ownership," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    4. Aga, Deribe Assefa, 2016. "Factors affecting the success of development projects : A behavioral perspective," Other publications TiSEM 867ae95e-d53d-4a68-ad46-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Shengxiang She & Shicheng Li & Jiaqi Xu & Bo Yang, 2022. "Exploring the Concept, Antecedents, and Consequences of Environmental Psychological Ownership," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-15, October.
    6. Xiaoxiao Gong & Zuoliang Ye & Kuo Liu & Na Wu, 2020. "The Effects of Live Platform Exterior Design on Sustainable Impulse Buying: Exploring the Mechanisms of Self-Efficacy and Psychological Ownership," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-16, March.
    7. Kimberly D. Elsbach & Francis J. Flynn, 2013. "Creative Collaboration and the Self-Concept: A Study of Toy Designers," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(4), pages 515-544, June.
    8. Nesij Huvaj, M. & Darmody, Aron & Smith, Robert S., 2023. "Psychological ownership and disownership in reward-based crowdfunding," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    9. Fang Liu & Irene Hau-Siu Chow & Jun-Cheng Zhang & Man Huang, 2019. "Organizational innovation climate and individual innovative behavior: exploring the moderating effects of psychological ownership and psychological empowerment," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 771-789, August.
    10. Xiaobo Li & Ting Wu & Jianhong Ma, 2021. "How leaders are persuaded: An elaboration likelihood model of voice endorsement," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-17, May.
    11. Foulk, Trevor A. & Venkataramani, Vijaya & Cao, Rujiao & Krishnan, Satish, 2022. "Thinking outside the box helps build social connections: The role of creative mindsets in reducing daily rudeness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    12. Shi, Xiaoxiao & Evans, Richard & Shan, Wei, 2022. "Solver engagement in online crowdsourcing communities: The roles of perceived interactivity, relationship quality and psychological ownership," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    13. Walasek, Lukasz & Matthews, William J & Rakow, Tim, 2015. "The need to belong and the value of belongings: Does ostracism change the subjective value of personal possessions?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 195-204.
    14. Sherman, Gary D., 2020. "The moral psychology of continuation decisions: A recipe for moral disengagement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 36-48.
    15. Thürridl, Carina & Kamleitner, Bernadette & Ruzeviciute, Ruta & Süssenbach, Sophie & Dickert, Stephan, 2020. "From happy consumption to possessive bonds: When positive affect increases psychological ownership for brands," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 89-103.
    16. Lazar, Moran & Miron-Spektor, Ella & Mueller, Jennifer S., 2022. "Love at first insight: An attachment perspective on early-phase idea selection," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    17. Burnell, Devin & Stevenson, Regan & Fisher, Greg, 2023. "Early-stage business model experimentation and pivoting," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 38(4).
    18. Kumar, Jitender, 2024. "Psychological mechanisms behind access-based luxury brand consumption: Empirical investigation from the lens of new ownership paradigm," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    19. Waqas, Muhammad & Yahya, Farzan & Ahmed, Ammar & Rasool, Yasir & Hongbo, Li, 2021. "Unlocking employee's green behavior in fertilizer industry: the role of green HRM practices and psychological ownership," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 24(5), May.
    20. Deribe Assefa Aga & N. Noorderhaven & B. Vallejo, 2018. "Project beneficiary participation and behavioural intentions promoting project sustainability: The mediating role of psychological ownership," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 36(5), pages 527-546, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Soll, Jack B. & Mannes, Albert E., 2011. "Judgmental aggregation strategies depend on whether the self is involved," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 81-102, January.
    2. Soll, Jack B. & Mannes, Albert E., 2011. "Judgmental aggregation strategies depend on whether the self is involved," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 81-102.
    3. Gehrig, Thomas & Güth, Werner & Leví0nský, René & Popova, Vera, 2010. "On the evolution of professional consulting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 113-126, October.
    4. Amaral, Christopher & Kolsarici, Ceren, 2020. "The financial advice puzzle: The role of consumer heterogeneity in the advisor choice," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    5. Jodlbauer, Barbara & Jonas, Eva, 2011. "Forecasting clients' reactions: How does the perception of strategic behavior influence the acceptance of advice?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 121-133, January.
    6. Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Leiva, Pedro I. & Slaughter, Jerel E. & Jackson, Alexander T., 2015. "Too arrogant for their own good? Why and when narcissists dismiss advice," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 33-50.
    7. Albert E. Mannes, 2009. "Are We Wise About the Wisdom of Crowds? The Use of Group Judgments in Belief Revision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1267-1279, August.
    8. Van Swol, Lyn M., 2011. "Forecasting another's enjoyment versus giving the right answer: Trust, shared values, task effects, and confidence in improving the acceptance of advice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 103-120, January.
    9. Christian Ganser & Marc Keuschnigg, 2018. "Social Influence Strengthens Crowd Wisdom Under Voting," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(06n07), pages 1-23, September.
    10. Camacho, Nuno & De Jong, Martijn & Stremersch, Stefan, 2014. "The effect of customer empowerment on adherence to expert advice," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 293-308.
    11. Jodlbauer, Barbara & Jonas, Eva, 2011. "Forecasting clients’ reactions: How does the perception of strategic behavior influence the acceptance of advice?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 121-133.
    12. Atanasov, Pavel & Witkowski, Jens & Ungar, Lyle & Mellers, Barbara & Tetlock, Philip, 2020. "Small steps to accuracy: Incremental belief updaters are better forecasters," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 19-35.
    13. Gino, Francesca, 2008. "Do we listen to advice just because we paid for it? The impact of advice cost on its use," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 234-245, November.
    14. Alison Wood Brooks & Francesca Gino & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2015. "Smart People Ask for (My) Advice: Seeking Advice Boosts Perceptions of Competence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1421-1435, June.
    15. Van Swol, Lyn M., 2011. "Forecasting another’s enjoyment versus giving the right answer: Trust, shared values, task effects, and confidence in improving the acceptance of advice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 103-120.
    16. Sprenger, Julia, 2016. "Financial literacy: A barrier to seek financial advice but not a shield against following it," Ruhr Economic Papers 634, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    17. Pavel Valeryevich Voinov & Natalie Sebanz & Günther Knoblich, 2017. "Perceptual judgments made better by indirect interactions: Evidence from a joint localization task," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-24, November.
    18. Effron, Daniel A. & Miller, Dale T., 2015. "Do as I say, not as I’ve done: Suffering for a misdeed reduces the hypocrisy of advising others against it," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 16-32.
    19. Lourenço, Carlos J.S. & Dellaert, Benedict G.C. & Donkers, Bas, 2020. "Whose Algorithm Says So: The Relationships Between Type of Firm, Perceptions of Trust and Expertise, and the Acceptance of Financial Robo-Advice," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 107-124.
    20. Clayton Arlen Looney & Andrew M. Hardin, 2009. "Decision Support for Retirement Portfolio Management: Overcoming Myopic Loss Aversion via Technology Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(10), pages 1688-1703, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:118:y:2012:i:1:p:60-71. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.