Ownership of resources can be established by evolved competitive and cooperative mechanisms as explained by the target article. However, there is one aspect of ownership that is not captured by computational models which is important to identity, namely the role of owned items as components of “the extended self” hypothesis.

Our commentary challenges Boyer's model by arguing that the extended-self is a more likely basis for ownership psychology. We outline how self-based principles of investment and control might structure thinking about ownership and related rights. We end by expanding the extended-self account to include welfare, as a way of understanding the contexts under which ownership is upheld or violated.