collective psychological ownership
Definition
Collective psychological ownership refers to a group's psychological sense that a target belongs to them—the experience of "this is ours"—extending beyond material possessions to intangible entities and operating at the group rather than individual level. The concept comprises two distinct dimensions: territorial ownership (CPO-T), concerning ownership over physical land and geopolitical borders, and epistemic ownership (CPO-E), concerning ownership over national narratives, cultural knowledge, and symbolic borders that bind communities together. These dimensions develop through three ownership activators—collective control, collective intimate knowledge, and collective investment—which may operate differently across majority and minority populations and function differently in shaping perceived rights and responsibilities. For majority groups, territorial ownership is associated with exclusive determination rights, while epistemic ownership predicts collective responsibility; for second-generation immigrants, both dimensions are associated with claiming rights but not responsibility. Understanding country ownership requires examining how territorial and epistemic dimensions serve different psychological functions for majority and migrant groups' claims of belonging.
Sources: Szebeni et al. (2025)
Related Terms
Applications
Collective Psychological Ownership and Group Status
The pathways to collective psychological ownership differ significantly between majority and minority populations. For majority groups, collective control operates as an entitlement, while for minority groups such as second-generation immigrants, control represents an aspiration reflecting efforts to gain voice.
Sources: Szebeni et al. (2025)
Collective Psychological Ownership and Perceived Rights and Responsibilities
Collective psychological ownership serves distinct functions in determining perceived rights and responsibilities across groups. For majority groups, territorial ownership was associated with exclusive determination rights, while epistemic ownership uniquely predicted collective responsibility; conversely, among second-generation immigrants, both ownership dimensions were associated with claiming rights but showed no significant association with responsibility.
Sources: Szebeni et al. (2025)
