Skip to main content

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

Marketing Letters volume 28, pages 591–605 (2017)Cite this article

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Argo, J. J., Dahl, D. W., & Morales, A. C. (2006). Consumer contamination: how consumers react to products touched by others. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 81–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Argo, J. J., Dahl, D. W., & Morales, A. C. (2008). Positive consumer contagion: responses to attractive others in a retail context. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 690–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arora, N., Neslin, S., & Sajeesh, S. (2008). Putting one-to-one marketing to work: personalization, customization, and choice. Marketing Letters, 19(3/4), 305–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi, R. P., & Dholakia, U. (1999). Goal setting and goal striving in consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing, 63, 19–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R. W. (1995). Collecting as luxury consumption: effects on individuals and households. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16(3), 477–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belk, R. W., Sherry, J. F., & Wallendorf, M. (1988). A naturalistic inquiry into buyer and seller behavior at a swap meet. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(4), 449–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brough, A. R., & Isaac, M. S. (2012). Finding a home for products we love: how buyer usage intent affects the pricing of used goods. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 78–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, D. W., & Hoeffler, S. (2004). Visualizing the self: exploring the potential benefits and drawbacks for new product evaluation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(4), 259–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doorn, J. V., & Hoekstra, J. C. (2013). Customization of online advertising: the role of intrusiveness. Marketing Letters, 24(4), 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Florack, A., Kleber, J., Busch, R., & Stöhr, D. (2014). Detaching the ties of ownership: the effects of hand washing on the exchange of endowed products. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 24(2), 284–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabbott, M. (1991). The role of product cues in assessing risk in second-hand markets. European Journal of Marketing, 25(9), 38–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoorens, V., & Todorova, E. (1988). The name letter effect: attachment to self or primacy of own name writing? European Journal of Social Psychology, 18(4), 365–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J., & Kim, J. (2016). The influence of hedonic versus utilitarian consumption situations on the compromise effect. Marketing Letters, 27(2), 382–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J., Rao, R., Kim, K. H., & Rao, A. (2011). More or less: a model and empirical evidence on preferences for under and over-payment in trade-in transactions. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(1), 157–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knetsch, J. L. (1989). The endowment effect and evidence of nonreversible indifference curves. The American Economic Review, 79(5), 1277–1284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lastovicka, J., & Fernandez, K. (2005). Three paths to disposition: the movement of meaningful possessions to strangers. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(4), 813–823.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morales, A. C., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2007). Product contagion: changing consumer evaluations through physical contact with “disgusting” products. Journal of Marketing Research, 44(2), 272–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, G. E., Diesendruck, G., & Bloom, P. (2011). Celebrity contagion and the value of objects. Journal of Consumer Research, 38(2), 215–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nuttin, J. M. (1987). Affective consequences of mere ownership: the name letter effect in twelve European languages. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17(4), 381–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peck, J., & Shu, S. B. (2009). The effect of mere touch on perceived ownership. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(3), 434–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 298–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rozin, P., Millman, L., & Nemeroff, C. (1986). Operation of the laws of sympathetic magic in disgust and other domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(4), 703–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiv, B., & Huber, J. (2000). The impact of anticipating satisfaction on consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 202–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shu, S. B., & Peck, J. (2011). Psychological ownership and affective reaction: emotional attachment process variables and the endowment effect. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21(4), 439–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117(2), 440–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, S., Ray, S., Gurnani, H., & Animesh, A. (2010). Durable products with multiple used goods markets: product upgrade and retail pricing implications. Marketing Science, 29(3), 540–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zervas G., Proserpio D., & Byers, J. W. (2017). The rise of the sharing economy: estimating the impact of Airbnb on the hotel industry. Journal of Marketing Research Forthcoming.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea Grant funded by the Korean Government (NRF-2014S1A5A2A03065829).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Marketing, Advertising, Retailing, and Sales, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand

    Jungkeun Kim

Authors
  1. Jungkeun Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jungkeun Kim.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 The experimental stimuli for studies 1, 2, and 3

1.1.1 Stimuli of study 1

figure a

1.1.2 Stimuli of studies 2 and 3

When a house has highly salient traces left by previous owners

figure b

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, J. The ownership distance effect: the impact of traces left by previous owners on the evaluation of used goods. Mark Lett 28, 591–605 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-017-9432-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-017-9432-7

Keywords

  • Ownership distance effect
  • Psychological ownership
  • Contagion effect
  • Owner’s trace
  • Used goods