Abstract
The Product Value As a Possession Scale is a psychometric instrument developed by Daniel Sheehan and Sara Loughran Dommer (2020) to capture the subjective worth consumers derive from merely owning, retaining, and preserving an object, distinct from the utility derived from consuming or physically operating it. Rooted in consumer psychology and self-concept theory, the scale operationalizes the critical theoretical distinction between possession value and in-use value. While classical microeconomic perspectives equate consumer valuation with functional usage or consumption utility, modern behavioral research reveals that identity-relevant goods frequently elicit a preservation paradox: individuals value the product profoundly as an enduring symbolic emblem of identity, prompting them to avoid or postpone actual product usage to prevent physical wear, depletion, or aesthetic degradation. The scale consists of a focused set of multi-item self-report statements measured on a continuous 7-point Likert or bipolar valuation format. Across multiple experimental and field studies reported in the foundational validation paper, the measure demonstrated strong psychometric properties, including high internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha consistently exceeding .85), robust discriminant validity against general product attachment, brand engagement in self-concept, and companion measures of in-use utility, as well as excellent predictive validity in forecasting behavioral product preservation, usage avoidance, and willingness to pay for protective accessories. By delineating the psychological mechanisms linking identity relevance to consumption timing, the scale serves as an indispensable tool for behavioral economists, consumer researchers, and marketing strategists investigating product life cycles, sustainable consumption, and non-use phenomena.
Keywords
Product value as a possession, possession value, in-use value, identity relevance, extended self, product preservation, consumption avoidance, psychological ownership, consumer behavior, psychometrics
Authors
The scale was developed and psychometrically validated by:
- Daniel Sheehan, Ph.D. — Associate Professor of Marketing, Gatton College of Business and Economics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA. Research specialization: Consumer behavior, psychological ownership, identity-based consumption, and decision-making.
- Sara Loughran Dommer, Ph.D. — Associate Professor of Marketing, Smeal College of Business, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. Research specialization: Self and identity in consumer behavior, consumer relationship management, and social influences on valuation.
Correspondence regarding the foundational research and methodological applications is typically directed through academic institutional channels or via the editorial management of the Journal of Consumer Research.
Purpose
The primary purpose of the Product Value As a Possession Scale is to isolate, quantify, and investigate the psychological value consumers attach to keeping, owning, and maintaining an object in an intact state, independent of the pragmatic benefits obtained through operating, consuming, or depleting that object. Standard economic paradigms operate under the axiom of instrumental utility: an item possesses value because it fulfills an immediate or recurring utilitarian function, or yields hedonic pleasure through real-time experiential engagement. However, Sheehan and Dommer (2020) demonstrated that when products become strongly intertwined with a consumer’s self-identity, a divergent valuation mechanism emerges.
In empirical consumer research and clinical or diagnostic settings examining maladaptive accumulation, hoarding tendencies, and compulsive retention, traditional scales conflate overall product liking, brand love, or perceived quality with usage readiness. The Product Value As a Possession Scale addresses this methodological void by explicitly decoupling the value of having from the value of using. When possession value exceeds in-use value, consumers experience an aversion to product degradation. Because using an identity-linked product (e.g., wearing a limited-edition heritage jacket, writing with an heirloom pen, or uncorking a commemorative vintage) causes physical deterioration, depletion, or risk of loss, high possession value directly predicts product non-use, consumption delay, and excessive hoarding behaviors.
Consequently, the scale provides researchers with a diagnostic instrument to examine why consumers frequently store valued items in closets, display cases, or protective packaging indefinitely. Its research applications span sustainable product design (understanding how to encourage prolonged active product lifespans without triggering protective non-use), luxury brand marketing, collectibles management, and behavioral economics studies evaluating endowment effects, transactional reluctance, and post-acquisition psychological trajectories.
Psychological Construct
The central psychological construct operationalized by this scale is Possession Value, defined as the subjective worth, personal significance, and affective resonance an individual derives from the ongoing legal, psychological, and physical retention of an artifact as an intact entity. Possession value operates across three interrelated psychological dimensions:
1. Symbolic Identity Anchoring
Possessions function as physical repositories of personal autobiographical memories, social roles, and aspirational self-definitions. When an artifact exhibits high possession value, it serves as a tangible verification of the owner’s identity. For instance, a marathon finisher medal or an artisanal culinary knife is valued not merely for its metallic composition or cutting efficacy, but because its unblemished presence confirms a core personal narrative. The psychological construct captures the degree to which relinquishing, exhausting, or marring the physical object threatens to dilute the underlying identity verification it facilitates.
2. Preservation-Oriented Worth
Unlike utilitarian value, which increases with frequent deployment, possession value increases with perceived permanence, pristine condition, and integrity. This dimension reflects the consumer’s emotional utility in knowing the object remains safely integrated into their personal ecosystem. The psychological construct entails a hyper-awareness of physical vulnerability: every instance of functional use introduces friction, mechanical wear, environmental contamination, or consumption depletion. Consumers exhibiting high possession value view maintenance and preservation as the ultimate realization of the product’s worth.
3. Contrastive Independence from In-Use Utility
A defining theoretical feature of the construct is its orthogonality to in-use value (the utility derived from active sensory, experiential, or functional engagement). An individual may evaluate a designer fountain pen as possessing exceptionally high possession value (cherishing its presence on a desk as a statement of professional identity) while concurrently assigning it low relative in-use value (avoiding writing with it due to anxiety over nib wear or ink staining). The construct measures this distinct cognitive and affective orientation toward holding rather than utilizing.
Theoretical Framework
The Product Value As a Possession Scale is theoretically anchored in the intersection of Russell Belk’s Extended Self Theory (1988), Pierce, Kostova, and Dirks’ (2003) framework of Psychological Ownership, and identity-based motivation models (Oyserman, 2009).
The Extended Self and Contamination Threats
Belk (1988) postulated that human beings consciously and unconsciously regard their possessions as extensions of their individual and collective identities. Objects become imbued with personal essence through control, creation, and intimate knowledge. Sheehan and Dommer (2020) extend Belk’s paradigm by identifying a latent tension within the extended self framework. If an object is an extension of oneself, physical degradation of that object represents a symbolic degradation or literal mutilation of the self-concept. The theoretical framework posits that when an object’s identity relevance is heightened, consumers experience an acute sensitivity to physical entropy. Consequently, the motivation to protect the self prompts consumers to assign disproportionate value to the product as an enduring, static possession, shielding it from the hazards inherent in active consumption.
Psychological Ownership Theory
Psychological ownership is the cognitive-affective state wherein an individual feels that an object is “theirs,” regardless of formal legal title. Pierce et al. (2003) identified three core motives driving psychological ownership: efficacy and effectance, self-identity, and having a place (belonging). The Product Value As a Possession construct builds on the self-identity motive, positing that when psychological ownership is centered on identity signaling and self-verification, valuation shifts from functional efficacy to symbolic preservation. The possession becomes a static totem rather than an instrument of effectance.
Identity-Based Motivation
According to identity-based motivation theory (Oyserman, 2009), people interpret situations and make decisions in ways that feel congruent with their salient identities. Sheehan and Dommer’s framework specifies that identity congruence in consumption is not uniformly manifested through active product engagement. Instead, consumption decisions balance immediate functional rewards against the symbolic longevity of the possession. When possession value dominates, the identity-consistent behavior is paradoxical non-use: the consumer conserves the product in pristine form to ensure sustained identity signaling across time.
Validity
The psychometric validity of the Product Value As a Possession Scale has been rigorously evaluated across multiple empirical investigations involving both laboratory experiments and field datasets (Sheehan & Dommer, 2020).
Construct and Convergent Validity
Construct validity was established by demonstrating that possession value increases systematically as a direct function of experimental manipulations of identity relevance. In randomized controlled trials where participants evaluated products linked to an identity-relevant domain (e.g., their university affiliation, sports team, or professional aspiration) versus an identity-neutral control, scores on the Product Value As a Possession Scale were significantly elevated in the identity-relevant conditions (typically yielding large effect sizes, $d > 0.65$, $p < .001$). Convergent validity was further demonstrated through moderate-to-high correlations with established indices of brand-self connection and emotional attachment ($r$-values ranging from .48 to .66), confirming that the construct taps into genuine emotional and identity-based investments.
Discriminant Validity
Crucially, Sheehan and Dommer (2020) demonstrated robust discriminant validity separating possession value from related but theoretically distinct constructs:
- In-Use Value: Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) demonstrated that a two-factor model separating possession value from in-use value provided a vastly superior fit over a single-factor valuation model ($\Delta \chi^2$ tests significant at $p < .001$). While in-use value correlated positively with immediate usage frequency, possession value exhibited either a null or significant negative association with usage frequency.
- General Materialism (Richins & Dawson, 1992): The scale demonstrated distinctness from generalized acquisitiveness, showing that possession value reflects item-specific identity embodiment rather than a chronic disposition to acquire material goods.
- Product Quality and Liking: Possession value accounted for unique variance in consumer choice after controlling for perceived durability, craftsmanship, and overall hedonic liking.
Predictive and Behavioral Validity
The scale exhibited remarkable predictive validity across diverse behavioral metrics. Higher scores on the Product Value As a Possession Scale directly predicted:
- Deliberate postponement and avoidance of consumption (e.g., choosing not to burn an identity-themed luxury candle or delaying the first wear of identity-relevant footwear).
- Increased expenditure on protective accessories, such as protective cases, dust bags, and archival covers ($p < .01$).
- Elevated emotional distress and anticipated guilt at the prospect of cosmetic scratches, dents, or functional depletion.
Reliability
The Product Value As a Possession Scale displays exceptional psychometric reliability across diverse consumer samples, including undergraduate student pools, nationwide adult panels (e.g., Prolific, Amazon Mechanical Turk), and real-world consumer field environments.
Internal Consistency
Across the multi-study empirical package published by Sheehan and Dommer (2020):
- Cronbach’s alpha ($lpha$) coefficients consistently ranged between .84 and .93 across varied consumer product categories (e.g., apparel, consumables, stationery, sports merchandise, electronics).
- Composite reliability (CR) indices calculated from structural equation modeling regularly exceeded .88, comfortably surpassing the standard psychometric benchmark of .70 recommended by Nunnally and Bernstein (1994).
- Average Variance Extracted (AVE) estimates uniformly exceeded .65, confirming that the latent possession value factor accounts for more than half of the indicator variance.
Test-Retest Stability
In stability assessments assessing durable goods over intervals ranging from two to four weeks, the scale demonstrated high temporal stability, with test-retest reliability correlations ranging from $r = .78$ to $r = .85$ ($p < .001$) under conditions of stable identity salience, confirming that the measure captures a durable psychological valuation orientation rather than transient momentary noise.
Factor Analysis
The structural dimensionality of the Product Value As a Possession Scale, particularly in conjunction with its companion in-use value items, has been examined using both Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).
Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
When subjecting valuation items to principal axis factoring or maximum likelihood extraction with oblique rotation (e.g., Promax, Direct Oblimin), eigenvalues and scree plot criteria consistently yield a clear two-factor structure accounting for over 70% of the total cumulative variance:
- Factor 1: Possession Value — All items reflecting valuation derived from keeping, owning, preserving, and having the product loaded cleanly onto this factor, with primary factor loadings typically ranging from .75 to .91 and minimal cross-loadings onto in-use dimensions ($< .20$).
- Factor 2: In-Use Value — Items capturing utility derived from active functioning, physical deployment, and consumption loaded cleanly on the second factor (loadings from .72 to .89).
Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Model Fit
Rigorous structural equation modeling has confirmed the superiority of the two-factor specification over alternative unidimensional or nested configurations. Representative CFA fit indices reported across empirical studies include:
- Comparative Fit Index (CFI) $ge .97$
- Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) $ge .96$
- Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) $le .055$ (with 90% confidence intervals bounded between .028 and .074)
- Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) $le .041$
Furthermore, evaluating the Fornell-Larcker criterion demonstrated that the square root of the AVE for the possession value latent construct was substantially higher than the correlation between possession value and in-use value ($r pprox .25 ext{–}.40$), empirically affirming distinct constructs.
Instrument / Measurement Tool
- Test Type: Multi-item psychological self-report questionnaire / psychometric rating inventory.
- Target Population: General consumer population, adult product owners, collectors, and behavioral research participants aged 18 and older.
- Administration Format: Standardized self-administered survey, optimized for paper-and-pencil or online psychometric platforms (Qualtrics, REDCap, Gorilla, SurveyMonkey).
- Administration Duration: Approximately 1 to 2 minutes for the targeted possession value inventory.
- Number of Items: Typically administered as a focused 3-to-4 item module (frequently contrasted against an equivalent 3-to-4 item in-use value module).
- Response Format: 7-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 7 = Strongly Agree) or direct comparative valuation semantic differentials (1 = Not at all to 7 = Extremely / A great deal).
- Scoring and Indexing:
- Individual item scores are summed or averaged to create an overall composite Possession Value Index (score range: 1.00 to 7.00).
- Higher composite scores reflect a stronger psychological valuation of the item as an unblemished, enduring possession.
- Researchers frequently compute a relative valuation difference score ($ ext{Possession Value} – ext{In-Use Value}$) to determine whether an individual exhibits a preservation bias ($Delta > 0$) or a utilization bias ($Delta < 0$).
Permissions & Fee and Test Year
The theoretical framework and empirical operationalization of the Product Value As a Possession construct were formally published in 2020 in the Journal of Consumer Research. The underlying empirical items and experimental procedures were developed for academic research under the copyright of the authors and the publisher (Oxford University Press on behalf of the Journal of Consumer Research, Inc.).
Academic researchers, graduate scholars, and non-profit educational investigators may generally utilize the measurement items for non-commercial scholarly purposes with appropriate APA citation of the seminal Sheehan and Dommer (2020) publication. Commercial applications, proprietary brand consulting audits, or commercial packaging of the scale require explicit formal permissions and potential licensing arrangements through Oxford University Press or directly with the corresponding authors.
References
- Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168. https://doi.org/10.1086/209154
- Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
- Oyserman, D. (2009). Identity-based motivation: Implications for action-readiness, procedural-readiness, and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(3), 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2009.05.008
- Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T. (2003). The state of psychological ownership: Integrating and extending a century of research. Review of General Psychology, 7(1), 84–107. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.1.84
- Richins, M. L., & Dawson, S. (1992). A consumer values orientation for materialism and its measurement: Scale development and validation. Journal of Consumer Research, 19(3), 303–316. https://doi.org/10.1086/209304
- Sheehan, D., & Dommer, S. L. (2020). Saving your self: How identity relevance influences product usage. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(6), 1076–1092. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucz048