Psychological Ownership and Personal Learning Environments: Do possession and control really matter? - Presentation delivered at the PLE Conference 2012 in Aveiro, Portugal, 12 July 2012, #PLECONF
Personal Learning Environments and Psychological Ownership
1. Psychological Ownership and PLEs:
Do possession and control really matter?
http://data.whicdn.com/images/4809831/tumblr_lb5zer6mle1qd2tsxo1_500_thumb.jpg
Prof. Dr. Ilona Buchem
Digital Media Studies, Beuth University of Applied Sciences Berlin, Germany
PLE Conference 2012, 12.07.2012, Aveiro (Portugal)
Sunday, July 15, 2012
2. What ownership and control have to do with
Personal Learning Environments?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fVp9oiEsSIU/T2_TTN2FB5I/AAAAAAAACsA/hikr9gHRvQw/s1600/barefootbooks3.jpg
Ownership and control emerged as core concepts in the analysis of over 100
publications on Personal Learning environments based on the grounded theory:
Buchem, Ilona, Attwell, Graham & Torres, Ricardo (2011). Understanding Personal Learning
Environments:Literature review and synthesis through the Activity Theory lens. Proceedings of the
The PLE Conference 2011, 10th – 12th July 2011, Southampton, UK.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
3. Ownership and control as core categories
emerging from grounded theory
Buchem, Ilona, Attwell, Graham & Torres, Ricardo (2011). Understanding Personal Learning Environments: Literature review and
synthesis through the Activity Theory lens. pp. 1-33. Proceedings of the The PLE Conference 2011, Southampton, UK.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
4. Does a learning environment
become our PLE
when we feel we own and control it?
What does it mean to
own and control a learning environment?
Is there a theory, a scientific model we can use to
conduct research on ownership in relation to PLEs?
Sunday, July 15, 2012
5. The theory of
psychological ownership
1.Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., Dirks, K. (2001). Toward a theory of psychological
ownership in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26, p. 298–310.
2.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, p. 84– 107.
3.Van Dyne, L., Pierce, J.L. (2004). Psychological ownership and feelings of
possession: three field studies predicting employee attitudes and organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(4), p. 439-459.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
6. Psychological ownership
Psychological ownership means that a
person develops possessive feelings for
a target.
Targets encompass a range of “objects
of psychological attachment”, such as an
organization, a set of tools, design or
ideas.
Ownership relates to a psychological
sense of possession and control. It is a
cognitive-effective state: “It is mine!”
Sunday, July 15, 2012
7. Can we incorporate the concept of psychological
ownership from the organisational to educational context?
It is my
organisation!
It is my learning
environment!
commitment
satisfaction
self-esteem
performance
citizenship
Sunday, July 15, 2012
8. Theory of psychological ownership
Sense of responsibility
Sense of identity
Sense of accountability
Sense of self-efficacy
http://www.frontporchrepublic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/home-ownership.jpg
Sense of belongingness
Sunday, July 15, 2012
9. Sense of responsibility
When we feel we own
something, we feel responsible
for protecting it and defending
our rights.
When we protect our
possessions, we tend to make
improvements, control or limit
access by others.
When we feel responsible for a
target, we invest ourselves into it
through energy, time and
concern.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
10. Sense of identity
We establish, maintain and
reproduce self-identity through
interactions with tangible and
intangible targets, e.g. “this is my
profession”.
There are certain possession
rituals, e.g. displaying and
personalizing own possessions.
These rituals transform the
culturally prescribed meaning of
targets to self-identity.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
11. Sense of accountability
When we feel we own
something, we expect from
ourselves to be accountable for
these targets.
We also expect that others
hold us accountable for the
target.
We feel accountable for what
happens to and with targets,
especially when we perceive
the targets as extension of the
self. http://www.hrea.org/erc/Library/First_Steps/image4.gif
Sunday, July 15, 2012
12. Sense of self-efficacy
Sense of self-efficacy relates to
the belief in own competencies
enabling successful performance
in a specific task (Bandura, 1997).
When we feel we own
something, our self-efficacy may
become stronger, e.g. we believe
we can control/modify the target.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
13. Sense of belongingness
Belongingness is a fundamental
human need to belong, e.g. need
for a home.
When we feel we own
something, we feel attached to
it, e.g. to places, objects, people.
“Having a place” is one of the
strongest socio-emotional
needs. http://www.zazzle.de/i_liebe_gehoren_t_shirt-235692423549328379
Sunday, July 15, 2012
14. Questions of the study
1. How well can we measure psychological ownership related
to such learning environments as ePortfolios, with items
derived from the organizational context?
2. How is psychological ownership related to perceived control
over the elements of a learning environment?
3. Is psychological ownership related to how students develop
and use their ePortfolios? Is ePortfolio practice related to the
quality of learning?
Sunday, July 15, 2012
15. Conceptual model of the study
Used in the study on psychological ownership related to ePortfolios
The Antecedents-Consequences-Model (ACM) of the study
Sunday, July 15, 2012
16. Hypotheses
• Hypothesis 1: Design of ePortfolio will be related to
students’ perception of control over the LE.
• Hypothesis 2: Students’ perception of control will be
related to the feeling of ownership of LE.
• Hypothesis 3: Psychological ownership will be positively
related to ePortfolio practice.
• Hypothesis 4: ePortfolio practice will be related to the
quality of learning.
• Hypothesis 5: The perception of ePortfolios as PLEs will
be related to perceived ownership of the LE*.
*LE = Learning Environment, PLE = Personal Learning Environment
Sunday, July 15, 2012
17. Method of the study
• Online survey in February 2012
• Students from Beuth University
of Applied Sciences in Berlin
and Augsburg University
• Bachelor and master students
in three different courses with
integrated ePortfolio work
(based on Mahara, WordPress).
Sunday, July 15, 2012
20. • Question 1: How well can we measure
psychological ownership of a learning
environment (e.g. ePortfolio), with items
derived from the organizational context?
Sunday, July 15, 2012
21. Psychological ownership
α = .94 ::: high internal consistency of the scale indicates that
the proposed instrument can measure psychological ownership
of learning environments well.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
22. • Hypothesis 1: Design of ePortfolio will be
related to students’ perception of control
over the learning environment, such that
learner-centered ePortfolio design will be
positively related to perceived control over
the learning environment.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
23. Perceived control
m = 2.01 ::: high level of perceived control indicates that
learner-centered design of ePortfolios found its reflection in
students’ perception of control.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
24. • Hypothesis 2: Students’ perception of
control will be positively related to the
concept of psychological ownership, such as
the more students feel in control of their
ePortfolios, the stronger the feeling of
ownership of their ePortfolio.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
25. Perceived control:
tangible vs. intangible targets
Sunday, July 15, 2012
26. Control of tangible/intangible
targets and ownership
Correlation
Control of Ownership of Significant
intangible targets ePortfolio r = .642
Correlation
Control of Ownership of
Not significant!
tangible targets ePortfolio
The more students feel in control of intangible elements of
ePortfolios, the stronger the feeling of ownership.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
27. Does control of technology influence
the feeling of being an “owner”?
Model 1: Predictors: Control over tangible and intangible ePortfolio elements
Model 1I: Predictor: Control over intangible ePortfolio elements
Dependent variable: Ownership of ePortfolio
Control over intangible ePortfolio elements is a much better
predictor of ownership then control over tangible elements
(such as technology).
Sunday, July 15, 2012
28. • Hypothesis 3: Psychological ownership will
be positively related to ePortfolio practice,
such that the stronger the feeling of
ownership, the more time, energy and effort
is invested into ePortfolio practice.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
29. ePortfolio practice
m = 3.05 > middle values for ePortfolio practice
Sunday, July 15, 2012
30. Does feeling an “owner” influence
ePortfolio practice?
Model 1: Predictor: Ownership of ePortfolio, Dependent variable: ePortfolio practice
Psychological ownership is a very good predictor of
ePortfolio practice (71% variance).
Especially sense of responsibility, sense of self-identity and sense of
accountability are strong predictors of how much time is invested in
creating own ePortfolios.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
31. • Hypothesis 4: ePortfolio practice will be
positively related to the quality of
learning, such that the more time, energy
and effort was invested, the higher the
interest for the subject matter and
intrinsic motivation to learn.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
32. ePortfolio practice and learning?
ePortfolio practice is strongly related to the increase of
interest in subject matter, and the perceived value of
ePortfolio to present own competencies and demonstrate
learning own learning outcomes.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
33. • Hypothesis 5: The perception of
ePortfolios as PLEs will be positively
related to perceived psychological
ownership, such as the stronger the
feeling of ownership, the more likely it is
that the ePortfolio will be perceived as a
Personal Learning Environment.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
34. • Results of this study indicate that being able to determine
ePortfolio technology alone does not contribute much to
students’ perception of ePortfolio as “my own” learning
environment or Personal Learning Environment.
• It can be hypothesized further that in order for such
learning environments as ePortfolios to be perceived as
Personal Learning Environments, users have to feel in
control of such intangible elements as content, planning,
personal data and access rights.
• What seems to be more important for people to feel an
“owner” of a learning environment may be able to take
decisions about the way technologies are used for learning
rather than to be able to determine the choice of
technology itself.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
35. Thank you!
Buchem, Ilona (2012). Psychological Ownership and Personal Learning
Environments: Do possession and control really matter? Paper
presented at the PLE Conference 2012 in Aveiro, Portugal. 12.07.2012.
Sunday, July 15, 2012