Almost all art is owned, and this affects how people interact with art and think about it. At the same time, people’s beliefs about artwork and artistic creation may affect their thinking about ownership. This article raises several questions about ways that ownership and art may matter for one another and reviews recent findings from experiments on adults and young children that suggest preliminary answers to these questions. Issues addressed include whether people’s conceptions of ownership contribute to their disapproval of plagiarism and forgery, whether people feel that making art can deprive owners of property, whether people are viewed as having less freedom for artwork they have over their other possessions, and whether artists are viewed as having enduring rights and claims over their creations.
BlakeP. R.HarrisP. L. (2009).
Children’s understanding of ownership transfers. Cognitive Development,
24(2), 133–145. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2009.01.002
2.
BoyleM.NazzaroS.O’ConnorD. (2010).
Moral rights protection for the visual arts.Journal of Cultural Economics,
34, 27–44. doi:10.1007/s10824-009-9113-3
3.
DavoodiT.NelsonL. J.BlakeP. R. (2018).
Children’s conceptions of ownership for self and other: Categorical ownership versus strength of claim. Child Development, doi:10.1111/cdev.13163
4.
DrakeJ.WinnerE. (2013).
Who will become a'super artist'?The Psychologist,
26(10), 730–733.
FriedmanO.NearyK. R. (2008).
Determining who owns what: Do children infer ownership from first possession?Cognition,
107(3), 829–849. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.002
7.
GardnerH.WinnerE.KircherM. (1975).
Children’s conceptions of the arts. Journal of Aesthetic Education,
9(3), 60–77. doi:10.1017/S0305000900000921
8.
GelmanS. A.FrazierB. N.NolesN. S.ManczakE. M.StilwellS. M. (2015).
How much are Harry Potter's glasses worth? Children’s monetary evaluation of authentic objects. Journal of Cognition and Development,
16(1), 97–117.
9.
GilliG. M.RuggiS.GattiM.FreemanN. H. (2016).
How children’s mentalistic theory widens their conception of pictorial possibilities. Frontiers in Psychology,
7, 177. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00177
10.
Hawley-DolanA.WinnerE. (2011).
Seeing the mind behind the art: People can distinguish abstract expressionist paintings from highly similar paintings by children, chimps, monkeys, and elephants. Psychological Science,
22(4), 435–441. doi:10.1177/0956797611400915
11.
HookJ. (1993).
Judgments about the right to property from preschool to adulthood. Law and Human Behavior,
17(1), 135–146.
12.
KanngiesserP.GjersoeN.HoodB. M. (2010).
The effect of creative labor on property-ownership transfer by preschool children and adults. Psychological Science,
21(9), 1236–1241. doi:10.1177/0956797610380701
13.
KanngiesserP.HoodB. M. (2014).
Not by labor alone: Considerations for value influence use of the labor rule in ownership transfers. Cognitive Science,
38, 353–366. doi:10.1111/cogs.12095
14.
KanngiesserP.ItakuraS.HoodB. M. (2014).
The effect of labour on ownership decisions in two cultures: Developmental evidence from Japan and the United Kingdom. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,
32, 320–329. doi:10.1111/bjdp.12043
15.
LeveneM.StarmansC.FriedmanO. (2015).
Creation in judgments about the establishment of ownership. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
60, 103–109. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2015.04.011
16.
McDermottC. H.NolesN. S. (2018).
The role of age, theory of mind, and linguistic ability in children’s understanding of ownership. Plos One,
13(10), e0206591. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0206591
17.
NancekivellS. E.FriedmanO. (2014).
Preschoolers selectively infer history when explaining outcomes: Evidence from explanations of ownership, liking, and use. Child Development,
85(3), 1236–1247. doi:10.1111/cdev.12170
18.
NancekivellS. E.FriedmanO.GelmanS. A. (2019).
Ownership matters: People possess a naïve theory of ownership. Trends in Cognitive Sciences,
23(2), 102–113. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2018.11.008
19.
NearyK. R.Van de VondervoortJ. W.FriedmanO. (2012).
Artifacts and natural kinds: Children's judgments about whether objects are owned. Developmental Psychology,
48(1), 149–158. doi:10.1037/a0025661
20.
NisselJ.Hawley-DolanA.WinnerE. (2016).
Can young children distinguish abstract expressionist art from superficially similar works by preschoolers and animals?Journal of Cognition and Development,
17(1), 18–29. doi:10.1080/15248372.2015.1014488
21.
NolesN. S.GelmanS. A. (2014).
You can’t always want what you get: Children’s intuitions about ownership and desire. Cognitive Development,
31, 59–68.
22.
OlsonK. R.ShawA. (2011).
No fair, copycat!: What children’s response to plagiarism tells us about their understanding of ideas. Developmental Science,
14, 431–439. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00993.x
23.
PierceJ. L.KostovaT.DirksK. T. (2003).
The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology,
7(1), 84–107. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.7.1.84
24.
RabbN.BrownellH.WinnerE. (2018).
Essentialist beliefs in aesthetic judgments of duplicate artworks. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,
12(3), 284–293. doi:10.1037/aca0000174
25.
RochatP.RobbinsE.Passos-FerreiraC.OlivaA. D.DiasM. D.GuoL. (2014).
Ownership reasoning in children across cultures. Cognition,
132(3), 471–484. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2014.04.014
26.
ShawA.OlsonK. (2015).
Whose idea is it anyway? The importance of reputation in acknowledgement. Developmental Science,
18, 502–509. doi:10.1111/desc.12234
27.
SilverI.ShawA. (2018).
No harm, still foul: Concerns about reputation drive dislike of harmless plagiarizers. Cognitive Science,
42, 213–240. doi:10.1111/cogs.12500
28.
SnareF. (1972).
The concept of property. American Philosophical Quarterly,
9(2), 200–206.
29.
SpellmanB. A.SchauerF. (2009).
Artists’ moral rights and the psychology of ownership. Tulane Law Review,
83, 661–678.
30.
WinnerE. (2000).
The origins and ends of giftedness. American Psychologist,
55(1), 159–169. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.159
31.
WinnerE. (2018). How art works: A psychological exploration.
Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
