A circular economy is a “closed-loop” system designed so that products flow back into the production cycle after use. With many companies implementing take-back programs as part of their sustainability strategy, a fundamental shift in consumption has occurred, with consumers considering disposal during and even before purchase decision making. Eight experiments reveal that consumers indicate a greater willingness to pay for circular program products. An increase in psychological ownership underlies the difference in product valuation. Specifically, the additional disposal control uniquely afforded by circular products increases the capacity of circular take-back program products to evoke psychological ownership. The process explanation is directly tested through mediation. Experimentally manipulating antecedents of psychological ownership (i.e., disposal control and psychological ownership) provides further support for the conceptual framework.
AilawadiKusum L.NeslinScott A. (1998), “The Effect of Promotion on Consumption: Buying More and Consuming It Faster,” Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (3), 390–98.
2.
AndrewsMichelleLuoXuemingFangZhengAsparaJaakko (2014), “Cause Marketing Effectiveness and the Moderating Role of Price Discounts,” Journal of Marketing, 78 (6), 120–42.
3.
ArkesHal R. (1996), “The Psychology of Waste,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9 (3), 213–24.
4.
AtasoyOzgunMorewedgeCarey K. (2018), “Digital Goods Are Valued Less Than Physical Goods,” Journal of Consumer Research, 44 (6), 1343–57.
5.
BaerMarkusBrownGraham (2012), “Blind in One Eye: How Psychological Ownership of Ideas Affects the Types of Suggestions People Adopt,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 118 (1), 60–71.
6.
BaxterWeston L.AurisicchioMarcoChildsPeter R.N. (2015), “A Psychological Ownership Approach to Designing Object Attachment,” Journal of Engineering Design, 26 (4–6), 140–56.
7.
BeckerGordon M.DeGrootMorris H.MarschakJacob (1964), “Measuring Utility by a Single-Response Sequential Method,” Behavioral Science, 9 (3), 226–32.
8.
BoltonLisa E.AlbaJoseph W. (2012), “When Less Is More: Consumer Aversion to Unused Utility,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22 (3), 369–83.
9.
BoltonRuth N.DrewJames H. (1991), “A Multistage Model of Customers’ Assessments of Service Quality and Value,” Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (4), 375–84.
10.
BorghiniStefaniaSherryJohn F.JoyAnnamma (2021), “Attachment to and Detachment from Favourite Stores: An Affordance Theory Perspective,” Journal of Consumer Research, 47 (6), 890–913.
11.
BrennerLyleRottenstreichYuvalSoodSanjayBilginBaler (2007), “On the Psychology of Loss Aversion: Possession, Valence, and Reversals of the Endowment Effect,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (3), 369–76.
12.
CalRecycle (2016), “California’s Used Mattress Recovery and Recycling Program: Enforcement Overview” (accessed October 17, 2023), California Department of Resource Recovery and Recycling, https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1555.
13.
CsikszentmihalyiMihalyHaltonEugene (1981), The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self. Cambridge University Press.
14.
DavisJenny L. (2020), How Artifacts Afford: The Power and Politics of Everyday Things. MIT Press.
15.
DavisJenny L.ChouinardJames B. (2016), “Theorizing Affordances: From Request to Refuse,” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 36 (4), 241–48.
16.
DiehlKristinKornishLaura J.LynchJohn G.Jr. (2003), “Smart Agents: When Lower Search Costs for Quality Information Increase Price Sensitivity,” Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (1), 56–71.
17.
DommerSara LoughranSwaminathanVanitha (2013), “Explaining the Endowment Effect Through Ownership: The Role of Identity, Gender, and Self-Threat,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39 (5), 1034–50.
18.
DonnellyGrant E.LambertonCaitReczekRebecca W.NortonMichael I. (2017), “Social Recycling Transforms Unwanted Goods into Happiness,” Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2 (1), 48–63.
EricsonKeith M.FusterAndreas (2011), “Expectations as Endowments: Evidence on Reference-Dependent Preferences from Exchange and Valuation Experiments,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126 (4), 1879–907.
23.
EscalasJennifer EdsonBettmanJames R. (2005), “Self-Construal, Reference Groups, and Brand Meaning,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32 (3), 378–89.
24.
FreyBruno S.Oberholzer-GeeFelix (1997), “The Cost of Price Incentives: An Empirical Analysis of Motivation Crowding-Out,” American Economic Review, 87 (4), 746–55.
25.
FuchsChristophPrandelliEmanuelaSchreierMartin (2010), “The Psychological Effects of Empowerment Strategies on Consumers’ Product Demand,” Journal of Marketing, 74 (1), 65–79.
26.
GaustadGabrielleKrystofikMarkBustamanteMicheleBadamiKedar (2018), “Circular Economy Strategies for Mitigating Critical Material Supply Issues,” Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 135, 24–33.
27.
GibsonJames J. (1979), The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Houghton Mifflin.
28.
GibsonJames J. (1986), The Theory of Affordances. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29.
HayesAndrew F. (2013), Methodology in the Social Sciences: Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. Guilford Press.
30.
HoelscherVeraChatzidakisAndreas (2021), “Ethical Consumption Communities Across Physical and Digital Spaces: An Exploration of Their Complementary and Synergistic Affordances,” Journal of Business Ethics, 172 (2), 291–306.
IwealaSarahSpillerAchimNaygaRodolfo M.Jr.LemkenDominic (2022), “Warm Glow and Consumers’ Valuation of Ethically Certified Products,” Q Open, 2 (2), qoac020.
33.
JamiAtaKouchakiMaryamGinoFrancesca (2020), “I Own, So I Help Out: How Psychological Ownership Increases Prosocial Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 47 (5), 698–715.
34.
KahnemanDanielKnetschJack L.ThalerRichard (1986), “Fairness as a Constraint on Profit Seeking: Entitlements in the Market,” American Economic Review, 76 (4), 728–41.
35.
KimJae-EunJohnsonKim K.P. (2014), “Shame or Pride? The Moderating Role of Self-Construal on Moral Judgments Concerning Fashion Counterfeits,” European Journal of Marketing, 48 (7–8), 1431–50.
36.
KirkColleen P.PeckJoannSwainScott D. (2018), “Property Lines in the Mind: Consumers’ Psychological Ownership and Their Territorial Responses,” Journal of Consumer Research, 45 (1), 148–68.
37.
KirkColleen P.SwainScott D. (2018), “Consumer Psychological Ownership of Digital Technology,” in Psychological Ownership and Consumer Behavior, PeckJoannShuSuzanne B., eds. Springer, 69–90.
38.
KozinetsRobert V.FerreiraDaniela AbrantesChimentiPaula (2021), “How Do Platforms Empower Consumers? Insights from the Affordances and Constraints of Reclame Aqui,” Journal of Consumer Research, 48 (3), 428–55.
39.
LeeChang-YuanMorewedgeCarey K.HochmanGuyArielyDan (2019), “Small Probabilistic Discounts Stimulate Spending: Pain of Paying in Price Promotions,” Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 4 (2), 160–71.
40.
MardonRebeccaDenegri-KnottJaniceMolesworthMike (2022), “‘Kind of Mine, Kind of Not’: Digital Possessions and Affordance Misalignment,” Journal of Consumer Research, 50 (2), 255–81.
41.
MorewedgeCarey K. (2021), “Psychological Ownership: Implicit and Explicit,” Current Opinion in Psychology, 39 (2), 125–32.
42.
MorewedgeCarey K.MongaAshwaniPalmatierRobert W.ShuSuzanne B.SmallDeborah A. (2021), “Evolution of Consumption: A Psychological Ownership Framework,” Journal of Marketing, 82 (1), 196–218.
43.
NagyPeterNeffGina (2015), “Imagined Affordance: Reconstructing a Keyword for Communication Theory,” Social Media + Society, 1 (2).
44.
NormanDonald A. (1988), The Psychology of Everyday Things. Basic Books.
45.
OkadaErica Mina (2001), “Trade-Ins, Mental Accounting, and Product Replacement Decisions,” Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (4), 433–46.
PahariaNeeruKeinanAnatAveryJillSchorJuliet B. (2011), “The Underdog Effect: The Marketing of Disadvantage and Determination Through Brand Biography,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (5), 775–90.
48.
PeckJoannBargerVictor A.WebbAndrea (2013), “In Search of a Surrogate for Touch: The Effect of Haptic Imagery on Perceived Ownership,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 23 (2), 189–96.
49.
PeckJoannKirkColleen P.LuangrathAndrea W.ShuSuzanne B. (2021), “Caring for the Commons: Using Psychological Ownership to Enhance Stewardship Behavior for Public Goods,” Journal of Marketing, 85 (2), 33–49.
50.
PeckJoannLuangrathAndrea W. (2023), “A Review and Future Avenues for Psychological Ownership in Consumer Research,” Consumer Psychology Review, 6 (1), 52–74.
51.
PeckJoannShuSuzanne B. (2009), “The Effect of Mere Touch on Perceived Ownership,” Journal of Consumer Research, 36 (3), 434–47.
52.
PierceJon L.KostovaTatianaDirksKurt T. (2001), “Toward a Theory of Psychological Ownership in Organizations,” Academy of Management Review, 26 (2), 298–310.
53.
PierceJon L.KostovaTatianaDirksKurt T. (2003), “The State of Psychological Ownership: Integrating and Extending a Century of Research,” Review of General Psychology, 7 (1), 84–107.
RebJochenConnollyTerry (2007), “Possession, Feelings of Ownership, and the Endowment Effect,” Judgment and Decision Making, 2 (2), 107–14.
56.
ReczekRebecca WalkerTrudelRemiWhiteKatherine (2018), “Focusing on the Forest or the Trees: How Abstract Versus Concrete Construal Level Predicts Responses to Eco-Friendly Products,” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 57, 87–98.
57.
ReddenJoseph P. (2008), “Reducing Satiation: The Role of Categorization Level,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34 (5), 624–34.
58.
RichinsMarsha L. (1994), “Special Possessions and the Expression of Material Values,” Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (3), 522–33.
59.
SandbergJörgen (2021), “‘How Do I Carry All This Now?’: Understanding Consumer Resistance to Sustainability Interventions,” Journal of Marketing, 85 (3), 44–61.
60.
SenSankarJohnsonEric J. (1997), “Mere-Possession Effects Without Possession in Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 24 (1), 105–17.
61.
SharmaEeshaTullyStephanieCryderCynthia (2021), “Psychological Ownership of (Borrowed) Money,” Journal of Marketing Research, 58 (3), 497–514.
62.
ShuSuzanne B.PeckJoann (2011), “Psychological Ownership and Affective Reaction: Emotional Attachment Process Variables and the Endowment Effect,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 21 (4), 439–52.
63.
SnareFrank (1972), “The Concept of Property,” American Philosophical Quarterly, 9 (2), 200–206.
64.
StahelWalter R (2016), “The Circular Economy,” Nature News, 531 (7595), 435–38.
65.
StrahilevitzMichal A.LoewensteinGeorge (1998), “The Effect of Ownership History on the Valuation of Objects,” Journal of Consumer Research, 25 (3), 276–89.
66.
SunMonicTrudelRemi (2017), “The Effect of Recycling Versus Trashing on Consumption: Theory and Experimental Evidence,” Journal of Marketing Research, 54 (2), 293–305.
67.
ThomsonMatthewMacInnisDeborah J.ParkC. Whan (2005), “The Ties That Bind: Measuring the Strength of Consumers’ Emotional Attachments to Brands,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (1), 77–91.
TrudelRemiArgoJennifer J. (2013), “The Effect of Product Size and Form Distortion on Consumer Recycling Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research, 40 (4), 632–43.
70.
TrudelRemiArgoJennifer J.MengMatthew D. (2016), “The Recycled Self: Consumers’ Disposal Decisions of Identity-Linked Products,” Journal of Consumer Research, 43 (2), 246–64.
71.
TrudelRemiCotteJune (2009), “Does It Pay to Be Good,” MIT/Sloan Management Review, 50 (Winter), 61–68.
72.
UrbinatiAndreaChiaroniDavideChiesaVittorio (2017), “Towards a New Taxonomy of Circular Economy Business Models,” Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, 487–98.
73.
WhiteKatherineHabibRishadHardistyDavid J. (2019), “How to SHIFT Consumer Behaviors to Be More Sustainable: A Literature Review and Guiding Framework,” Journal of Marketing, 83 (3), 22–49.
74.
WinterichKaren PageNenkovGergana Y.GonzalesGabriel E. (2019), “Knowing What It Makes: How Product Transformation Salience Increases Recycling,” Journal of Marketing, 83 (4), 21–37.
75.
XiangWangMingChen (2011), “Implementing Extended Producer Responsibility: Vehicle Remanufacturing in China,” Journal of Cleaner Production, 19 (6–7), 680–86.
76.
ZajoncRobert B. (1968), “Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9 (2), 1–27.
77.
ZhaoXinshuLynchJohn G.Jr.ChenQimei (2010), “Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and Truths About Mediation Analysis,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (2), 197–206.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
