Full text: Semantics of ownership

not produce objects that are prime examples of things that 
are owned. Subjects involved in enterprises that produce 
items more typical of owned things might have responded 
differently. Second, the semantic method used in the study 
necessarily constrained the responses of the subjects. As 
individuals and as a group, the subjects may have more 
information and knowledge about the semantics of ownership 
that were not allowed expression by the method used in this 
Other qualifications are more specific. For example, 
questionnaire studies are necessarily limited to, and biased 
by, their wordings. Efforts were made in pilot studies to 
eliminate or modify vague or unusual wordings, particularly 
those involving the ownership criteria. However, with only 
a label and a single sentence example expression to 
represent a criterion, it appears in retrospect that some 
wordings may have been vague, and, as a result, differences 
between some criteria diminished. For example, for some 
subjects, the criterion, Aesthetics: "I really like it.", 
may have appeared synonymous with Desire: "I want it.", 
since the verb "to like" is commonly used in requests, e.g. 
"Td like some coffee." 
Wordings of instructions may also have allowed 
different interpretations. For example, the recall

Note to user

Dear user,

In response to current developments in the web technology used by the Goobi viewer, the software no longer supports your browser.

Please use one of the following browsers to display this page correctly.

Thank you.