Research has demonstrated that possession exerts a potent influence on stimulus processing, such that objects are categorized more rapidly when owned-by-self than when they belong to other people. Outstanding theoretical questions remain, however, regarding the extent of this self-prioritization effect. In particular, does ownership enhance the processing of objects regardless of their valence or is self-prioritization restricted to only desirable items? To address this issue, here we explored the speed with which participants categorized objects (i.e., desirable and undesirable posters) that ostensibly belonged to the self and a best friend. In addition, to identify the cognitive processes supporting task performance, data were submitted to a hierarchical drift-diffusion model (HDDM) analysis. The results revealed a self-prioritization effect (i.e., RTself < RTfriend) for desirable posters that was underpinned by differences in the efficiency of stimulus processing. Specifically, decisional evidence was extracted more rapidly from self-owned posters when they were desirable than undesirable, an effect that was reversed for friend-owned posters. These findings advance understanding of when and how valence influences self-prioritization during decisional processing.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Based on a medium effect size, G*Power (d = 0.50, α = 0.05, power = 80%) revealed a requirement of 34 participants. For complete counterbalancing, 40 participants were recruited.
A paired sample t test revealed that errors were faster than correct responses (respective Ms: 578 ms (SD = 155 ms) vs. 616 ms (SD = 80 ms), t (39) = 2.04, p = 0.049, dz = 0.32).
Bayesian p values quantify the degree to which the difference in the posterior distribution is consistent with the hypothesis that the parameter is greater for self-owned than friend-owned responses. For example, a Bayesian p of 0.05 indicates that 95% of the posterior distribution supports the hypothesis.
Alicke, M. D., & Sedikides, C. (2009). Self-enhancement and self-protection: What they are and what they do. European Review of Social Psychology, 20, 1–48.
Barrett, L. F., Mesquita, B., Ochsner, K. N., & Gross, J. J. (2007). The experience of emotion. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 373–403.
Baumeister, R. F. (1998). The self. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (pp. 680–740). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370.
Beggan, J. K. (1992). On the social nature of nonsocial perception: The mere ownership effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 229–237.
Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 139–168.
Belk, R. W. (2014). The extended self unbound. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 22, 133–134.
Cacioppo, J. T., & Gardiner, W. L. (1999). Emotion. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 191–214.
Carstensen, L. L., & Turk-Charles, S. (1994). The salience of emotion across the adult life span. Psychology and Aging, 9, 259–264.
Charles, S. T., Mather, M., & Carstensen, L. L. (2003). Aging and emotional memory: The forgettable nature of negative images for older adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 310–324.
Constable, M. D., Welsh, T. N., Huffman, G., & Pratt, J. (2019). I before U: Temporal order judgments reveal a bias for self-owned objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 589–598.
Correll, J., Wittenbrink, B., Crawford, M. T., & Sadler, M. S. (2015). Stereotypic vision: How stereotypes disambiguate visual stimuli. Journal of personality and social psychology, 108, 219–233.
Cunningham, S. J., Turk, D. J., Macdonald, L. M., & Macrae, C. N. (2008). Yours or mine? Ownership and memory. Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 312–318.
D'Argembeau, A., Collette, F., Van der Linden, M., Laureys, S., Del Fiore, G., Degueldre, C., Luxen, A., & Salmon, E. (2005). Self-referential reflective activity and its relationship with rest: a PET study. Neuroimage, 25, 616–624.
D’Argenbeau, A., & van der Linden, M. (2008). Remembering pride and shame. Self-enhancement and the phenomenology of autobiographical memory. Memory, 16, 538–547.
Dan-Glauser, E. S., & Scherer, K. R. (2011). The Geneva affective picture database (GAPED): A new 730-picture database focusing on valence and normative significance. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 468–477.
Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment: Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5, 69–106.
Durbin, K. A., Mitchell, K. J., & Johnson, M. K. (2017). Source memory that encoding was self-referential. The influence of stimulus characteristics. Memory, 25, 1191–1200.
Epley, N., & Gilovich, T. (2004). Are adjustments insufficient? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 447–460.
Falbén, J. K., Golubickis, M., Balseryte, R., Persson, L. M., Tsamadi, D., Caughey, S., & Macrae, C. N. (2019). How prioritized is self-prioritization during stimulus processing? Visual Cognition, 27, 46–51.
Golubickis, M., Falbén, J. K., Cunningham, W. A., & Macrae, C. N. (2018). Exploring the self-ownership effect: Separating stimulus and response biases. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44, 295–306.
Golubickis, M., Falbén, J. K., Sahraie, A., Visokomogilski, A., Cunningham, W. A., Sui, J., & Macrae, C. N. (2017). Self-prioritization and perceptual matching: The effects of temporal construal. Memory and Cognition, 45, 1223–1239.
Golubickis, M., Ho, N. S. P., Falbén, J. K., Mackenzie, K. M., Boschetti, A., Cunningham, W. A., & Macrae, C. N. (2019). Mine or mother’s? Exploring the self-ownership effect across cultures. Culture and Brain, 7, 1–25.
Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., Rudman, L. A., Farnham, S. D., Nosek, B. A., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3–25.
Heatherton, T. F. (2011). Neuroscience of self and self-regulation. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 363–390.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review, 94, 319–340.
Huang, Y., Wang, L., & Shi, J. (2009). When do objects become more attractive? The individual and interactive effects of choice and ownership on object evaluation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 713–722.
Humphreys, G. W., & Sui, J. (2016). Attentional control and the self: The self-attention network (SAN). Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 5–17.
Ito, T. A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2005). Variations on a human universal: Individual differences in positivity offset and negativity bias. Cognition and Emotion, 19, 1–26.
Ito, T. A., Cacioppo, J. T., & Lang, P. J. (1998). Eliciting affect using the International Affective Picture System: Trajectories through evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 855–879.
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York: Henry-Holt & Co.
Juth, P., Lundqvist, D., Karlsson, A., & Ohman, A. (2005). Looking for foes and friends: Perceptual and emotional factors when finding a face in the crowd. Emotion, 5, 379–395.
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5, 193–206.
Kass, R. E., & Raftery, A. E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795.
Krypotos, A.-M., Beckers, T., Kindt, M., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2015). A Bayesian hierarchical diffusion model decomposition of performance in approach–avoidance tasks. Cognition and Emotion, 29, 1424–1444.
Langford, Z. D., Schevernels, H., & Boehler, C. N. (2016). Motivational context for response inhibition influences proactive involvement of attention. Scientific Reports, 6, 35122. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep35122.
Leary, M. R. (2007). Motivational and emotional aspects of the self. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 317–344.
Macrae, C. N., Visokomogilski, A., Golubickis, M., Cunningham, W. A., & Sahraie, A. (2017). Self-relevance prioritizes access to visual awareness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 438–443.
Macrae, C. N., Visokomogilski, A., Golubickis, M., & Sahraie, A. (2018). Self-relevance enhances the benefits of attention on perception. Visual Cognition, 26, 475–481.
Mather, M., & Carstensen, L. L. (2003). Aging and attentional biases for emotional faces. Psychological Science, 14, 409–415.
McCoy, B., & Theeuwes, J. (2016). Effects of reward on oculomotor control. Journal of Neurophysiology, 116, 2453–2466.
Milstein, D. M., & Dorris, M. C. (2007). The influence of expected value on saccadic preparation. Journal of Neuroscience, 27, 4810–4818.
Miyakoshi, M., Nomura, M., & Ohira, H. (2007). An ERP study on self-relevant object recognition. Brain and Cognition, 63, 182–189.
Moran, J. M., Macrae, C. N., Heatherton, T. F., Wyland, C. L., & Kelley, W. M. (2006). Neuroanatomical evidence for distinct cognitive and affective components of self. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1586–1594.
Morewedge, C. K., & Giblin, C. E. (2015). Explanations of the endowment effect: An integrative review. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 339–348.
Northoff, G., & Hayes, D. J. (2011). Is our self nothing but reward. Biological Psychiatry, 69, 1019–1025.
Peeters, G., & Czapinski, J. (1990). Positive-negative asymmetry in evaluations. The distinction between affective and informational negativity effects. European Review of Social Psychology, 1, 33–60.
Pessoa, L., & Engelmann, J. B. (2010). Embedding reward signals into perception and cognition. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 4, 17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2010.00017.
Ratcliff, R., & Childers, R. (2015). Individual differences and fitting methods for the two-choice diffusion model of decision making. Decision, 2, 237–279.
Ratcliff, R., & Rouder, J. N. (1998). Modeling response times for two-choice decisions. Psychological Science, 9, 347–356.
Ratcliff, R., Smith, P. L., Brown, S. D., & McKoon, G. (2016). Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 260–281.
Reuther, J., & Chakravarthi, R. (2017). Does self-prioritization affect perceptual processes? Visual Cognition, 25, 381–398.
Sedikides, C., & Gregg, A. P. (2008). Self-enhancement: Food for thought. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 102–116.
Sedikides, C., & Strube, M. (1997). Self-evaluation. To thine own self be good, to thine own self be sure, to thine own self be true, and to thine own self be better. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 209–269.
Siebold, A., Weaver, M. D., Donk, M., & van Zoest, W. (2015). Social salience does not transfer to oculomotor visual search. Visual Cognition, 23, 989–1019.
Sparks, S., Cunningham, S. J., & Kritikos, A. (2016). Culture modulates implicit ownership-induced self-bias in memory. Cognition, 153, 89–98.
Spiegelhalter, D. J., Best, N. G., Carlin, B. P., & Van der Linde, A. (1998). Bayesian deviance, the effective number of parameters, and the comparison of arbitrarily complex models (Research Report 98 – 009). Minneapolis, MN: Division of Biostatistics, University of Minnesota.
Stein, T., Siebold, A., & Zoest, M. V. (2016). Testing the idea of privileged awareness of self-relevant information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 1–16.
Sui, J., He, X., & Humphreys, G. W. (2012). Perceptual effects of social salience: Evidence from self-prioritization effects on perceptual matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38, 1105–1117.
Sui, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (2015). The integrative self: How self-reference integrates perception and memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19, 719–728.
Sui, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (2017). The ubiquitous self: What can the properties of self-bias tell us about the self. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1396, 222–235.
Sui, J., & Rothstein, P. (2019). Self-prioritization and the attentional systems. Current Opinion in Psychology, 29, 148–152.
Sui, J., Rothstein, P., & Humphreys, G. W. (2013). Coupling social attention to the self forms a network for personal significance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 7607–7612.
Truong, G., Roberts, K. H., & Todd, R. M. (2017). I saw mine first: A prior-entry effect for newly acquired ownership. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 192–205.
Truong, G., & Todd, R. M. (2017). Soap opera: Self as object and agent in prioritizing attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 29, 937–952.
Vandekerckhove, J., Tuerlinckx, F., & Lee, M. D. (2011). Hierarchical diffusion models for two-choice response times. Psychological Methods, 16, 44–62.
Voss, A., Nagler, M., & Lerche, V. (2013). Diffusion models in experimental psychology. Experimental Psychology, 60, 385–402.
Wade, G. L., & Vickery, T. J. (2018). Target self-relevance speeds visual search responses but does not improve search efficiency. Visual Cognition, 26, 563–582.
Walker, W. R., Skowronski, J. J., & Thompson, C. P. (2003). Life is pleasant—and memory helps to keep it that way! Review of General Psychology, 7, 203–210.
White, C. N., & Poldrack, R. A. (2014). Decomposing bias in different types of simple decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 385.
Wieki, T. V., Sofer, I., & Frank, M. J. (2013). HDDM: Hierarchical Bayesian estimation of the drift-diffusion model in Python. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 7, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2013.00014.
Ye, Y., & Gawronski, B. (2016). When possessions become part of the self: Ownership and implicit self-object linking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 64, 72–87.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in the current experiment were approved by the ethical standards of the School of Psychology, University of Aberdeen, Ethics Review Board, and in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
All participants provided written, informed consent prior to their participation in the current experiment.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Golubickis, M., Ho, N.S.P., Falbén, J.K. et al. Valence and ownership: object desirability influences self-prioritization. Psychological Research 85, 91–100 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01235-w