Technology hasn’t just changed the way consumers use goods and services, it’s also changed the way they own them. Music collections, for example, have evolved from hundreds of alphabetically-organized records on a shelf, to carefully edited digital libraries, to the 2021 version — a list of songs stored on Spotify or some other streaming platform. What consumers used to think of as “mine” is now “ours” in the sharing economy, where everything from car rides to books has become less of a coveted item and more of an experience.

科技不僅改變了消費(fèi)者使用商品和服務(wù)的方式，也改變了他們擁有的方式。例如，音樂收藏已經(jīng)從數(shù)百張按字母順序排列的唱片，發(fā)展到精心編輯的數(shù)字圖書館，再到存儲在Spotify或其他流媒體平臺上的歌曲列表。在共享經(jīng)濟(jì)中，過去被消費(fèi)者認(rèn)為是“我的”東西現(xiàn)在變成了“我們的”，從乘車到閱讀，一切都不再是令人垂涎的有形物品，而是一種體驗。

But marketers know that there is value in psychological ownership. When customers form an emotional attachment or self-identify with a product, that sense of “mine” enhances its luster and keeps them coming back for more. As shoppers shift away from owning material things, how can marketers preserve these benefits? Some answers can be found in a new study, “Evolution of Consumption: A Psychological Ownership frxwork,” which recently appeared in the Journal of Marketing. Wharton marketing professor Deborah Small and Carey Morewedge, a marketing professor at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business, are two of the paper’s authors. They joined Knowledge@Wharton to talk about changes in consumption and offered some strategies for marketers.

但心理所有權(quán)是有價值的。當(dāng)顧客對產(chǎn)品形成情感依戀或自我認(rèn)同時，這種“我的”感覺會增強(qiáng)產(chǎn)品的光澤，讓他們不斷地需要更多。那么，當(dāng)消費(fèi)者不再執(zhí)著于擁有某項物品時，企業(yè)將如何應(yīng)對這一趨勢？在最近發(fā)表在《市場營銷雜志》上的一項新研究“消費(fèi)的演變：心理所有權(quán)框架”中可以找到一些答案。論文作者沃頓商學(xué)院營銷學(xué)教授黛博拉·斯莫和波士頓大學(xué)奎斯特羅姆商學(xué)院營銷學(xué)教授凱里·莫韋奇最近和沃頓知識在線討論了對于消費(fèi)和心理所有權(quán)演變的研究，并為企業(yè)營銷提供了一些策略。

Read an edited transcr1ipt of the conversation below.

閱讀下面經(jīng)過編輯的對話記錄。

Knowledge@Wharton: This is such a timely topic for marketers. What made you want to study it and what questions were you trying to answer?

沃頓知識在線：對于營銷人員來說，這是一個非常及時的話題。是什么讓你想研究它？你想回答什么問題？

Deborah Small: There is this very classic and robust finding in the science of decision-making known as the “endowment effect.” The endowment effect is the fact that people value things more when they own them than they would if they were not in their possession. For instance, if you had a fancy bottle of wine in your possession, the amount of money you would be willing to [accept to] give it up is much higher than the amount of money you would be willing to pay to acquire it if you didn’t own it.

斯莫：在決策科學(xué)中有一個非常經(jīng)典和有力的發(fā)現(xiàn)，被稱為“稟賦效應(yīng)”。稟賦效應(yīng)是指當(dāng)個人一旦擁有某項物品，那么他對該物品價值的評價要比未擁有之前大大提高。例如，如果你擁有一瓶名貴的葡萄酒，你愿意[接受]放棄它的金額要比你未擁有時愿意購買它的金額高得多。

Scholars have understood for a long time that ownership takes on this special psychological significance, but much of this evidence was based on very traditional possessions, very tangible items that a person had all to themselves. Maybe a coffee mug or something like that. What really started this paper was our musings about all of these new business models and new technologies that are moving away from traditional forms of ownership. Rather than owning my own car or bicycle, I might participate in ridesharing or bike-sharing. Before, I had all these bookshelves filled with books and CDs and photo albums; now, I can store these things virtually. We used to keep all of our medical records and tax records and bank account records. All that personal data was stored in a filing cabinet in physical files in our homes. Now, that storage is mainly in the cloud in an opaque form.

長期以來，學(xué)者們一直認(rèn)為所有權(quán)具有這種特殊的心理意義，但證據(jù)大多基于有形物品，比如一套家具。本文真正的出發(fā)點(diǎn)是我們對新商業(yè)模式的思考。
目前新的商業(yè)模式和新技術(shù)正在擺脫傳統(tǒng)的所有權(quán)形式。與其擁有自己的汽車或自行車，我可以用共享單車或共享出行。以前，我的書架上堆滿了書、CD和相冊；現(xiàn)在，我可以用云存儲。以前所有的醫(yī)療記錄、稅務(wù)記錄和銀行賬戶等個人資料都儲存在文件柜里?，F(xiàn)在，它們以不透明的形式存在于云中。

These advances are no doubt fantastic and provide a lot of value to consumers, but we found that they’re missing some of the signature markers of ownership. One is tangibility: I can still experience music, but I don’t have a physical album. Second, permanence: When I use a rideshare, I don’t expect a long-term relationship with that car. We wrote this paper as a way to try to deepen our understanding of what is at stake here from a psychological ownership perspective.

這些進(jìn)步無疑是了不起的，并為消費(fèi)者提供了很多價值。但我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，他們?nèi)鄙僖恍﹤鹘y(tǒng)的所有權(quán)的特征。傳統(tǒng)所有權(quán)的特征第一是有形，而現(xiàn)在我雖然可以體驗音樂，但我沒有實體唱片。第二是永久性。而現(xiàn)在我使用共享單車時，并不長期擁有那輛車。我們的研究是為了從心理所有權(quán)的角度加深對目前趨勢的理解。

Carey Morewedge: I remember in graduate school I would go to the library, and if I had to read an article, I would photocopy it and write all over it. Those articles became a treasured resource locked in a filing cabinet in my office, and I would go back to the same physical document each time, covered in notes, underlining, and my reactions. When I eventually moved offices, I recycled all of that because I had duplicates on my computer, but it still felt like a loss of the self. I use PDFs now. Everything is digital, and I can read it anywhere, but there’s something about that digital copy that I don’t care as much about. I don’t feel ownership for the collection of PDFs that I store in the cloud. At least not in the way that those tangible pieces of paper felt like part of me.

莫韋奇：我記得在研究生院時會去圖書館，如果我必須讀一篇文章，我會把它影印下來，然后在上面寫評論。這些文章成了我文件柜里的珍貴資源，上面有我的筆記。當(dāng)我最終搬家的時候，我把所有文件都處理掉了，因為電腦上有影印版文件。但我還是覺得因此失去了自我。我現(xiàn)在用的所有文檔都是數(shù)字的，可以在任何地方閱讀，但我似乎對這些數(shù)字文檔沒有太多感情。我不覺得自己擁有云空間里的PDF集合。至少不像那些有形的文件感覺像是我自己的一部分。

“The trend is shifting such that we’re owning less and less material, tangible things than we did in the past.”–Deborah Small

“這種趨勢正在改變，我們擁有的物質(zhì)和有形的東西比過去越來越少?！薄觳├に鼓?/b>

The second personal example is when I was younger, I was a DJ, and I have thousands of records in my house. I haven’t played them for a while. I’ve got a young child, a second on the way, and don’t have time to do that. But I still see them on the wall, and they remind me of a part of my identity and past. The music that I listen to now is no more or less important to me, but it somehow feels different because when I close my laptop or turn off my phone, it all disappears. There’s no permanence to that kind of content.

第二個例子是我年輕的時候是個DJ，家里有上千張唱片。我有一陣子沒玩音樂了?，F(xiàn)在我馬上就要當(dāng)媽媽了，沒時間玩音樂。但我仍然在墻上看到這些唱片，它們讓我想起了自己的一部分身份和過去的歲月。我現(xiàn)在也聽音樂，但感覺有些不同，因為當(dāng)我關(guān)上電腦或手機(jī)時，一切都消失了。它們似乎沒有永久性。

This exchange that we’re making is extraordinarily convenient. I can be on the beach and pull down from the cloud the exact song I want to listen to, or the book I want to read. At the same time, it feels like we’re losing something — the feeling of mine. Our paper tries to understand and explore the consequences of its absence.

現(xiàn)在要聽音樂或閱讀非常方便。我可以躺在沙灘上，在手機(jī)上從云端聽我想聽的歌，想讀的書。但是同時，我們失去了一些東西——那種感覺。本文試圖理解和探討其缺失的后果。

Knowledge@Wharton: In the paper, you identify two important changes in consumer behavior. The first one is a change from legal ownership of goods to legal access of goods. The second one is that material possession is being replaced with experiences. Can you explain those?

沃頓知識在線：在本文中，您確定了消費(fèi)者行為有兩個重要變化。第一個是從合法擁有商品到合法獲取商品的轉(zhuǎn)變。第二，物質(zhì)占有正在被體驗經(jīng)歷所取代。你能解釋一下嗎？

Small: We’re not the first to notice these changes. There’s been much discussion about access-based consumption. Sometimes it’s referred to as “l(fā)iquid consumption,” which essentially distributes or spreads out property rights across hundreds, even thousands of consumers. As Dr. Morewedge mentioned, this is very convenient for consumers. It’s cheaper, it’s less of a commitment, they can try out different things without the big expensive purchase. There’s a lot of freedom there for consumers, but they also lose a lot of control over the good because it’s not just theirs anymore. It’s also very temporary and short-lived, so they are less prone to develop psychological attachments and feel connections to their goods. These are critical aspects of psychological ownership — the ability to control things, the development of a relationship over time.

斯莫：我們不是第一個注意到這些變化的人。對于基于訪問的消費(fèi)有很多討論。有時它被稱為“流動消費(fèi)”，實質(zhì)上是將產(chǎn)權(quán)分配或分散到數(shù)百數(shù)千人或更多。正如莫韋奇博士所提到的，這對消費(fèi)者來說非常方便。它更便宜，更不需要承諾，他們不需要昂貴的購買，就可以嘗試不同的東西。
消費(fèi)者擁有了很多自由，但他們也失去了對商品的控制，因為商品不再只屬于他們。同時這種消費(fèi)體驗也是暫時和短暫的，所以他們不太容易對它們發(fā)展出心理依戀和感情。這些都是心理所有權(quán)的關(guān)鍵要素——控制力，以及關(guān)系的發(fā)展。

The feeling that something is mine is a function of believing I am in control and expect to maintain something for a long time. That’s the first dimension — legal ownership to legal access. The second is this shift from more material consumption to more experiential consumption. We’re moving away from physical goods in many categories, to things that we merely experience, or that are digital or ephemeral in some way.
The key threat to psychological ownership here is the lack of tangibility. Tangibility is a signature marker of a possession. Consider the case of purchasing a DVD for your movie collection. We don’t do that anymore. We purchase access to consume music.But it’s also more than that. The goal of purchasing is more about experiencing that movie or song rather than the goal of owning it or having it. It’s not that we never did that before — we went on vacation and stayed in a hotel, and we rented things occasionally. But the trend is shifting such that we’re owning less and less material, tangible things than we did in the past.

感覺某樣?xùn)|西是我的，這是一種相信我具有控制力并能保有它很長時間的功能。這是第一個維度的轉(zhuǎn)變——從合法所有權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)楹戏ㄔL問權(quán)。第二個維度的轉(zhuǎn)變是從物質(zhì)消費(fèi)轉(zhuǎn)向體驗消費(fèi)。我們正在從擁有許多實物商品，轉(zhuǎn)向僅是去體驗，或在某種程度上是數(shù)字化或短暫擁有的物品。
心理所有權(quán)面臨的主要威脅是缺乏有形性。有形是占有的標(biāo)志?？紤]一下你為了電影收藏購買了多少DVD。現(xiàn)在我們購買的是消費(fèi)權(quán)，是為了體驗電影或歌曲，而不是擁有它。并不是說我們以前不這么做——我們?nèi)ザ燃?，住在旅館里，偶爾租用物品。但這種大趨勢正在形成：我們擁有的物質(zhì)和有形的東西越來越少。

Knowledge@Wharton: The paper identifies three macro trends in marketing. What are those?

沃頓知識在線：本文指出了消費(fèi)市場的三大趨勢。那些是什么？

Morewedge: The first would be growth of the sharing economy. We’re now engaging in many kinds of collaborative consumption like renting, reselling, and lending. We’re consuming things simultaneously. Many people are reading the same file or listening to the same music at once, and we’re resource pooling. It’s not that these things weren’t present in our economy before. People used libraries and shared with their friends and neighbors. The difference is that these platforms are mediating these kinds of transactions between strangers. What used to be public goods or things that you shared with your friends are now things that we’re using through this exchange with other people through these technologically-mediated platforms. You could think about a rideshare platform or a bicycle rental or renting an office from WeWork or renting clothes from Rent the Runway. We might not necessarily have wanted to spend the money on a fancy outfit for a wedding, and now you can rent that. It’s not that there weren’t places that you could rent clothes before, but it’s becoming much easier, and we’re using it for much more of our life.

莫韋奇：首先是共享經(jīng)濟(jì)的增長。我們現(xiàn)在從事多種合作消費(fèi)（共享經(jīng)濟(jì)），如租賃、轉(zhuǎn)售和出借。我們同時消費(fèi)同一樣?xùn)|西。很多人同時在讀同一本書或聽同一首音樂，我們正在進(jìn)行資源共享。并不是說以前就沒有這些東西。以前人們也有圖書館，或與朋友和鄰居等熟人分享事物。不同之處在于，現(xiàn)在的這些平臺在陌生人之間調(diào)解這類交易，我們通過這些技術(shù)中介平臺和陌生人交流共享。
我們從共享平臺租車，從WeWork租辦公室，或者從Rent the Runway租衣服。并不是說以前沒有地方租衣服，但現(xiàn)在越來越容易了，我們也越來越多地使用這些服務(wù)。

“Our possessions become part of our self. And we see ourselves, and thus our things, through rose-colored glasses.”–Carey Morewedge

“我們的財產(chǎn)成為自我的一部分。通過玫瑰色的眼鏡，我們看到了它們，也看到了自己?！薄獎P里·莫韋奇

The second is the digitization of goods and services. Streaming is now the most popular way to consume music, and we see this kind of diffusion of digital consumption through books, email, films, magazines, maps, news, and television. Think about the last time that you opened a paper map or the last time that you sent letters. Most of our letters are exchanged in these kinds of digital communications. Those are not necessarily the ones that people consider identity-relevant (like a birthday card), but the kinds of goods that we used to think about as holding our cherished memories (like our communications, our photographs, our videos) are now all digital.

第二是商品和服務(wù)的數(shù)字化。流媒體是現(xiàn)在最流行的音樂消費(fèi)方式，數(shù)字消費(fèi)幾乎囊括所有傳播。想想上一次你打開紙質(zhì)地圖或者親筆寫信是什么時候？現(xiàn)在我們都是用電子郵件，發(fā)給朋友的是電子賀卡……過去曾用來保存珍貴記憶的物品（比如信件、照片、視頻）現(xiàn)在都是數(shù)字化的。

The last trend is expansion of personal data. Our interactions, whether with government or with businesses, were often constrained to a record that was a single exchange. We had a receipt, and that was the data that existed about our behavior. Now, governments and firms have incredibly personal information about all facets of our lives: where we visited, who we were with, what photographs and videos we’ve taken, what’s our search history, what’s our medical or even our genetic information.

最后一個趨勢是個人數(shù)據(jù)的擴(kuò)張。過去個人與政府、與企業(yè)的互動，往往局限于單一的交易記錄?，F(xiàn)在，政府和各企業(yè)有令人難以置信的個人信息：我們?nèi)チ四睦?，和誰在一起，拍了什么照片和視頻，搜索歷史，醫(yī)療信息，甚至基因信息，都有記錄。

The firm owns that data and is selling it to others for marketing purposes for loans or for credit cards. The question of who owns that kind of information is becoming increasingly relevant for consumers. That tension is being played out in really interesting kinds of policy arguments about what data should firms own, what data should consumers have rights to, and do we have a right to be forgotten. We wanted to map paths for the field to explore.

而企業(yè)擁有這些數(shù)據(jù)，則有可能出售給其它企業(yè)用于貸款或信用卡的營銷目的。誰擁有這類信息對消費(fèi)者來說變得越來越重要。目前有很多爭論涉及企業(yè)應(yīng)該擁有哪些數(shù)據(jù)，消費(fèi)者應(yīng)該有權(quán)獲得哪些數(shù)據(jù)，以及我們是否有權(quán)被遺忘。我們想為這個領(lǐng)域探索更多路徑。

Knowledge@Wharton: If psychological ownership is so beneficial in marketing, what can marketers do to preserve it?

沃頓知識在線：如果心理所有權(quán)在營銷中如此有益，那么營銷人員可以做些什么？

Small: It’s important to start with an understanding of the underlying features of psychological ownership that are particularly meaningful and important to consumers. Feeling in control. Being able to express who you are through the goods that you possess. There’s a very seminal academic article in marketing titled “Possessions and the Extended Self,” which is all about how our possessions help define who we are and signal who we are both to ourselves and to others. Everything from the type of car you drive to your brand of blue jeans says something about who you are. To answer your question about how marketers need to think about this, it’s going to vary a lot across firms and product categories. But marketers need to be thinking about ways to offer those benefits in other forms and ways to retain psychological ownership as they shift to these new models.

斯莫：重要的是，首先要了解心理所有權(quán)的基本特征，這些特征對消費(fèi)者特別有意義和重要。比如：感覺有控制力；能夠通過你擁有的物品來表達(dá)你是誰。在市場營銷領(lǐng)域有一篇非常有開創(chuàng)性的研究論文，標(biāo)題是“財產(chǎn)和擴(kuò)展的自我”（Possessions and the Extended Self），它是關(guān)于財產(chǎn)如何幫助定義我們是誰，如何向自己和他人表明我們是誰。從你所駕駛的汽車類型到你的牛仔褲品牌，每件事都能說明你是誰。營銷人員需要考慮如何以其他形式提供這些好處，以及如何在轉(zhuǎn)向這些新模式時讓用戶保持心理所有權(quán)。

Can they find new ways to offer their consumers choices even when they’re in an access-based consumption model? Let’s say they’re sexting a car for a rental or a rideshare. Can they still have choices over the features of that car, so they feel more in control? Are there other opportunities for them to express who they are within these platforms, where they’re creating profiles of themselves and interacting with other consumers and firms?
It’s going to vary a lot, but I think the crux is for marketers to recognize that those are some of the key features that provide value to consumers, and to try to kind of creatively find ways to bring those back.

即使是在基于訪問的消費(fèi)模式下，他們能否找到新方式為消費(fèi)者提供選擇？假設(shè)他們選擇租車或搭車，他們能對那輛車的功能有選擇嗎？這樣他們就能感覺到更多的控制力。他們是否能在這些平臺上表達(dá)自己的身份，創(chuàng)建個人資料，并與其他消費(fèi)者和公司互動？
關(guān)鍵是營銷人員要認(rèn)識到，這些都是為消費(fèi)者提供價值的一些關(guān)鍵功能，并嘗試創(chuàng)造性地找到方法將這些功能融入到體驗中。

“Everything from the type of car you drive to your brand of blue jeans says something about who you are. The question is: What is lost, psychologically-speaking, when much of consumption exists without ownership?”–Deborah Small

“從你駕駛的汽車類型到你的牛仔褲品牌，每件事都能說明你是誰?，F(xiàn)在，從心理上講，當(dāng)顧客對所消費(fèi)物品沒有所有權(quán)時，他們失去了什么？“–黛博拉·斯莫

Morewedge: I would think first about the kinds of changes that are happening and how we find ways to either address them, offset them, or channel them. Think about the impermanence of things. If consumers access their health data through MyChart in the cloud, for example, are there ways to give them an extended feeling of permanence? If we’re losing the tangibility of material goods for these kinds of experiences, are there ways that we can offer control that aren’t necessarily physical, but that give us different kinds of control over the goods?

莫韋奇：我會首先考慮正在發(fā)生的變化，以及我們?nèi)绾握业浇鉀Q、抵消或引導(dǎo)這些變化的方法。想想事物的無常。例如，如果消費(fèi)者通過云中訪問健康數(shù)據(jù)，能否讓他們有一種持久的感覺？如果失去了有形物品，有沒有辦法提供其它類型的控制權(quán)？

In experiential consumption, when you’re buying a trip from point A to point B in a rideshare like Uber or Lyft, it’s ambiguous who owns what. You’re purchasing a ride, but what do you really own in that kind of context? Give people some sense of clarity about what they own. For example, if you’re renting a house on Airbnb, do you get information about your upcoming visit and what you’re getting with your trip? Are there ways we can remind people of their usage history and all the kinds of experiences that they’ve had in these kinds of settings? Are there kinds of gamification we can use to show people a progression in their status through different kinds of programs? You’ve listened to this song 10 times! These were your top 10 songs on the streaming service in 2020. Give those experiences meaning, and connect them to memory cues, markers of having had them.

在體驗式消費(fèi)中，當(dāng)你在優(yōu)步或Lyft上打車或租車旅行時，誰擁有什么是模糊的。你買的是一項服務(wù)，在這種情況下你真正擁有什么？企業(yè)可以嘗試讓人們對自己的擁有提供一種清晰的感覺。
例如，如果你在Airbnb租房，你有沒有得到關(guān)于你即將到訪的信息，以及你的旅行會得到什么？我們有沒有辦法提醒人們他們的使用歷史以及在這些環(huán)境中的各種經(jīng)歷？我們是否可以用游戲化的方式，通過不同的程序向人們展示他們的生活軌跡？這首歌你已經(jīng)聽了10遍了！這是在2020年流媒體服務(wù)中最受你喜愛的10首歌曲。給那些經(jīng)歷賦予意義，并把它們與記憶線索聯(lián)系起來，作為個人生活的標(biāo)志。

So, brands have to start thinking about whether or not they want to engage in vertical integration to keep consumers caring about their brand. Brands have to think about becoming commodities in cases where they were once these really strong markers of a consumer’s identity. Disney pulled most of its content from Netflix, for example, and started its own streaming platform. That may save Disney movies from becoming fungible with all the other programming for kids available through Netflix (or Amazon).

品牌商必須開始考慮是否要進(jìn)行垂直整合，以保持消費(fèi)者對品牌的關(guān)心。而品牌曾經(jīng)是消費(fèi)者身份的有力標(biāo)志。例如，迪斯尼從Netflix獲取了大部分內(nèi)容，并創(chuàng)建了自己的流媒體平臺。這或許可以避免迪斯尼電影與其他通過Netflix（或亞馬遜）提供的兒童節(jié)目相互替代。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處


These kinds of threats are also giving rise to new kinds of opportunities. In many cases, we’re engaging in new ways of collaborative consumption with other people. We have these communities of people consuming things that didn’t exist before. In those cases, we’re moving from mine to ours. Can brands tie into thinking about how we get people to feel membership in a group of consumers? There’s a lot of work in marketing looking at these kinds of brand communities. Harley Davidson is always touted as a firm that successfully built up a community around its products. Reddit is a place these communities appear to be forming organically. Other brands may have to start to think about that kind of development and get consumers to think about their membership in a group rather than their use of a particular good.

這些趨勢也帶來了新機(jī)遇。我們正在與其他人合作消費(fèi)。這是一種新模式。物品的標(biāo)簽從“我的”轉(zhuǎn)變成“我們的”。品牌是否能讓人們感覺自己是消費(fèi)者群體中的一員？有很多企業(yè)都在關(guān)注建設(shè)品牌社區(qū)。哈雷戴維森一直被標(biāo)榜為一家成功地圍繞其產(chǎn)品建立社群的公司。Reddit網(wǎng)站是這些社群有機(jī)形成的地方。其他品牌可能不得不開始考慮這種趨勢，讓消費(fèi)者對于社群更有認(rèn)同感，而不僅僅是商品的使用者。

Knowledge@Wharton: I was surprised to read in your paper that there are some instances where companies would actually benefit if their customers do not have a sense of ownership in the product. What kind of instances are those?

沃頓知識在線：我很驚訝地讀到，在某些情況下，如果客戶對產(chǎn)品沒有所有權(quán)意識，公司實際上會從中受益。這些是什么例子？

Morewedge: We identify four in the paper. The first is when changes in access rights are likely. The next is when consumers are the product, like lots of advertising-based and freemium services. The third is when it creates frictions in sharing markets. And the last is when service quality is inconsistent.

莫韋奇：我們在論文中確定了四種案例。首先是訪問權(quán)可能發(fā)生變化的時候。其次是消費(fèi)者本身是產(chǎn)品的時候，比如基于廣告的免費(fèi)服務(wù)模式。第三是在共享市場上制造摩擦的情況。最后是服務(wù)質(zhì)量不一致。

Getting to this question of access rights, for example, Microsoft ended sales of e-books in 2019, and it also dexed and refunded all books purchased through that platform. So, if I built this library on Microsoft e-books, it’s suddenly gone and I get a check in the mail for what I purchased. That kind of sudden change in access, if consumers do feel strong psychological ownership, may leave them to feel a sense of loss or anger when their access rights are revoked. So, when the catalog that firms are offering in terms of these access-based models is highly fluid, they may not want consumers to feel psychological ownership if it’s going to disappear later on.

例如，談到訪問權(quán)問題，微軟在2019年結(jié)束了電子書的銷售，刪除并退還了通過該平臺購買的所有書籍。如果我在微軟電子書上建立了個人圖書館，它突然消失了，我在郵件中收到了我購買的支票。這種突如其來的訪問權(quán)變化，可能會讓他們感到失落或憤怒。因此，當(dāng)公司提供的這些基于訪問的服務(wù)非常不穩(wěn)定時，他們可能不想讓消費(fèi)者感到心理上的所有權(quán)。

“Brands have to think about becoming commodities-, even in categories where brands were once strong signals of identity to consumers and to their social world.”–Carey Morewedge

“品牌必須考慮成為商品，即使在那些品牌曾經(jīng)是消費(fèi)者及其社交世界的強(qiáng)烈身份標(biāo)志的類別中也是如此。”—凱里·莫韋奇

The second case is when firms are using consumers as the product. When firms are profiting from advertising or mining and selling consumer personal data, they’re going to benefit from cases in which consumers feel little psychological ownership for their behavior online. Amazon may not want you to think about all of the data they have about all of the records and transactions that you’ve engaged in. Google may not want you to think about your search history as something that you have a right to control. When those kinds of services are monetized, firms profit when consumers don’t feel like they have ownership rights.

第二種情況是公司將消費(fèi)者作為產(chǎn)品。當(dāng)公司從挖掘和銷售消費(fèi)者個人數(shù)據(jù)以獲取廣告收益中獲利時，他們將從消費(fèi)者對其在線行為的心理歸屬感很低的現(xiàn)狀中獲益。亞馬遜可能不想讓你完全擁有你所有交易的數(shù)據(jù)。谷歌可能不想讓你對你的搜索歷史有控制權(quán)。當(dāng)這些服務(wù)被貨幣化時，當(dāng)消費(fèi)者覺得他們沒有所有權(quán)，公司就會獲利。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處


The third case would be when it creates frictions in sharing markets. For example, if I feel really strong psychological ownership for a particular brand of car, whether it be BMW or Toyota or Honda or Ford, that may create frictions for Uber when they try to give me a substitute like a Hyundai.

第三種情況是它會在共享市場上制造摩擦。例如，如果我對某一品牌的汽車（無論是寶馬、豐田、本田還是福特）有著強(qiáng)烈的心理歸屬感，那么當(dāng)優(yōu)步試圖給我一輛現(xiàn)代時，可能會讓我不滿。

The last case is when service quality is inconsistent. As Dr. Small mentioned, this kind of endowment effect, or feeling of psychological ownership, has a value-enhancing effect. We see the things that are ours through these rose-colored glasses. If I feel psychological ownership for something, I may have higher expectations for the performance of that product, and firms have difficulty living up to that. We know that customer satisfaction is performance minus expectations, and so it may not need to have that kind of value enhancement that psychological ownership engenders.

最后一種情況是服務(wù)質(zhì)量不一致。正如斯莫爾博士所提到的，這種稟賦效應(yīng)，或者說心理歸屬感，有一種價值提升效應(yīng)。我們透過這些玫瑰色的眼鏡看到屬于我們的東西。如果我對某樣?xùn)|西有心理歸屬感，我可能會對該產(chǎn)品的性能有更高期望，而公司很難做到這一點(diǎn)。我們知道，客戶滿意度是績效減去期望值，因此，企業(yè)不需要有那種心理所有權(quán)產(chǎn)生的期望值。