IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/mktlet/v28y2017i4d10.1007_s11002-017-9432-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The ownership distance effect: the impact of traces left by previous owners on the evaluation of used goods

Author

Listed:
  • Jungkeun Kim

    (Auckland University of Technology)

Abstract

This article examines how salient traces left by previous owners on used goods influence product evaluations. Based on the concept of psychological ownership, we propose the ownership distance effect in the context of buying used goods. We argue that when there are salient traces left by previous owners on a used good, it will widen the ownership distance between the potential buyers and the product. As a consequence, buyers will tend to evaluate the product less positively. Four experimental studies were conducted, and the results support this prediction. Buyers preferred used goods with salient traces left by a previous owner less (studies 1 and 2) due to the ownership distance effect. In addition, perceived psychological ownership mediates the ownership distance effect (studies 2 and 4). However, this negative effect decreased when specific situations (e.g., free housecleaning service) lessened the ownership distance, or when people believed that a previous owner’s trace would benefit them in obtaining their consumption goal (studies 3 and 4). The analysis of actual transactions from eBay.com also confirms this effect (study 5). We conclude with a discussion of the substantive theoretical and managerial implications of this research.

Suggested Citation

  • Jungkeun Kim, 2017. "The ownership distance effect: the impact of traces left by previous owners on the evaluation of used goods," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 591-605, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:mktlet:v:28:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s11002-017-9432-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11002-017-9432-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11002-017-9432-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11002-017-9432-7?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. Shiv, Baba & Huber, Joel, 2000. "The Impact of Anticipating Satisfaction on Consumer Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(2), pages 202-216, September.
    2. Knetsch, Jack L, 1989. "The Endowment Effect and Evidence of Nonreversible Indifference Curves," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1277-1284, December.
    3. John L. Lastovicka & Karen V. Fernandez, 2005. "Three Paths to Disposition: The Movement of Meaningful Possessions to Strangers," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 31(4), pages 813-823, March.
    4. Belk, Russell W., 1995. "Collecting as luxury consumption: Effects on individuals and households," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 477-490, September.
    5. Joann Peck & Suzanne B. Shu, 2009. "The Effect of Mere Touch on Perceived Ownership," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 36(3), pages 434-447.
    6. Neeraj Arora & Xavier Dreze & Anindya Ghose & James Hess & Raghuram Iyengar & Bing Jing & Yogesh Joshi & V. Kumar & Nicholas Lurie & Scott Neslin & S. Sajeesh & Meng Su & Niladri Syam & Jacquelyn Thom, 2008. "Putting one-to-one marketing to work: Personalization, customization, and choice," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 305-321, December.
    7. George E. Newman & Gil Diesendruck & Paul Bloom, 2011. "Celebrity Contagion and the Value of Objects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 38(2), pages 215-228.
    8. Shuya Yin & Saibal Ray & Haresh Gurnani & Animesh Animesh, 2010. "Durable Products with Multiple Used Goods Markets: Product Upgrade and Retail Pricing Implications," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 540-560, 05-06.
    9. Belk, Russell W & Sherry, John F, Jr & Wallendorf, Melanie, 1988. "A Naturalistic Inquiry into Buyer and Seller Behavior at a Swap Meet," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(4), pages 449-470, March.
    10. Jenny Doorn & Janny Hoekstra, 2013. "Customization of online advertising: The role of intrusiveness," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 339-351, December.
    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. Zhao, Taiyang & Lu, Yan & Lynette Wang, Valerie & Wu, Banggang & Chen, Zhi & Song, Wei & Zhou, Liying, 2023. "Shared but unhappy? Detrimental effects of using shared products on psychological ownership and consumer happiness," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    2. Marjolaine Bezançon & Denis Guiot & Emmanuelle Le Nagard, 2019. "Le rôle de la contagion physique négative dans l'achat d'un produit d'occasion vendu en ligne," Post-Print halshs-01957512, HAL.
    3. Paul Rogers, 2021. "Rented But MINE! Application of Psychological Ownership Theory to Access-Based Consumption and the Circular Economy," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 719-744, 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. Myriam Ertz & Fabien Durif & Manon Arcand, 2019. "A conceptual perspective on collaborative consumption," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(1), pages 27-41, June.
    2. Eva Cerio & Alain Debenedetti, 2019. "From dispossession to objects' reuse: trajectories and practices in the context of clothing," Post-Print hal-02135221, HAL.
    3. Turunen, Linda Lisa Maria & Cervellon, Marie-Cecile & Carey, Lindsey Drylie, 2020. "Selling second-hand luxury: Empowerment and enactment of social roles," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 474-481.
    4. Donald R. Lehmann & Jeffrey R. Parker, 2017. "Disadoption," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 7(1), pages 36-51, June.
    5. Daniel Villanova, 2019. "The extended self, product valuation, and the endowment effect," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 9(3), pages 357-371, December.
    6. Mike Molesworth & Rebecca Watkins & Janice Denegri-Knott, 2016. "Possession Work on Hosted Digital Consumption Objects as Consumer Ensnarement," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(2), pages 246-261.
    7. Weidig, Jakob & Weippert, Marco & Kuehnl, Christina, 2024. "Personalized touchpoints and customer experience: A conceptual synthesis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    8. Logkizidou, Maria & Bottomley, Paul & Angell, Rob & Evanschitzky, Heiner, 2019. "Why Museological Merchandise Displays Enhance Luxury Product Evaluations: An Extended Art Infusion Effect," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 67-82.
    9. Marco Galvagno & Sonia C. Giaccone, 2015. "Second-hand shopping. analisi delle motivazioni d?acquisto e implicazioni per la distribuzione," MERCATI & COMPETITIVIT?, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(1), pages 123-147.
    10. Peter Landry, 2019. "Sunk ‘Decision Points’: a theory of the endowment effect and present bias," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 86(1), pages 23-39, February.
    11. Jain, Arvind K. & Joy, Annamma, 1997. "Money matters: An exploratory study of the socio-cultural context of consumption, saving, and investment patterns," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 649-675, November.
    12. Johannes D. Hattula & Walter Herzog & Ravi Dhar, 2023. "The impact of touchscreen devices on consumers’ choice confidence and purchase likelihood," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 35-53, March.
    13. Abdul-Ghani, Eathar & Hyde, Kenneth F. & Marshall, Roger, 2011. "Emic and etic interpretations of engagement with a consumer-to-consumer online auction site," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(10), pages 1060-1066, October.
    14. Alexopoulos, Theodore & Šimleša, Milija & Francis, Mélanie, 2015. "Good self, bad self: Initial success and failure moderate the endowment effect," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 32-40.
    15. Katherine Burson & David Faro & Yuval Rottenstreich, 2013. "Multiple-Unit Holdings Yield Attenuated Endowment Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(3), pages 545-555, November.
    16. Ashworth, Laurence & Darke, Peter R. & McShane, Lindsay & Vu, Tiffany, 2019. "The rules of exchange: The role of an exchange surplus in producing the endowment effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 11-24.
    17. Wei, Xiaoyong & Jung, Sojin & Choi, Tsan-Ming, 2022. "Share it or buy it? Exploring the effects of product brand attachment on commercial sharing services," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 115-127.
    18. Cerio, Eva & Debenedetti, Alain, 2021. "“Should I give it away or sell it?” A strategic perspective on consumers’ redistribution of their unused objects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 581-591.
    19. Linwan Wu & Jiangmeng Liu, 2021. "Need for control may motivate consumers to approach digital products: a social media advertising study," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1031-1054, December.
    20. Zhao, Min & Xia, Lan, 2021. "Joint or separate? The effect of visual presentation on imagery and product evaluation," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 935-952.

    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:kap:mktlet:v:28:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s11002-017-9432-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.