Psychological ownership research in

family firms: A bibliometric overview

and future research directions

Keywords: Psychological Ownership, Family Firms, Bibliometric Analysis, Organizational

Behavior, Business Strategy.
Abstract: Psychological ownership (PO) might be crucial in aligning employees' interests with
organizational goals, especially in family-owned businesses. However, comprehensive research on
its development and impact in this context must be included. To address this gap, we conducted a
bibliometric analysis of 86 documents from the Web of Science database from early 2016 to 2024.
Our study mapped out PO's research landscape and thematic progression among family-owned
enterprises using performance analysis and science mapping techniques. We identified the leading
journals, major contributors, and primary themes while highlighting the significant concentrations
of research activity in Europe and the United States. Our research demonstrated the profound
impact of PO on strategic management and employee behavior in family businesses. However, we
also found gaps in our understanding of its effects on knowledge transfer and innovation. As a
result, we proposed several promising directions for future studies aimed at deepening our
empirical understanding of the nuanced impacts of PO across different cultural and operational
contexts in family businesses.
 a) Introduction
a. Psychological ownership in family firms
Psychological ownership has been analyzed throughout research, targeting its definition and how
it can be correlated to some aspects of the company, such as financial perennity. Ownership
behaviors in family-owned businesses positively impact economic performance, although specific
empirical research on this aspect is limited. (Berent-Braun et al., 2012). Psychological ownership
aligns the interests of employees' interests with the company's interests, enhancing financial
performance (Torp et al., 2018). To create a comprehensive summary of the concept of
psychological ownership (PO) across different disciplines, we will try to define it based on existing
literature. Psychological ownership is a state in which individuals feel as though the target of
ownership (material or immaterial) is "theirs" (Pierce et al., 2001a). This feeling can emerge even
in the absence of legal ownership, deriving from control over the object, intimate knowledge of it,
and the investment of the self into the object. Below is a summary table reflecting its definition
across psychology, education, business, and social studies:

Discipline Nomination Definition Author,

Year

Psychology Psychological Refers to the feelings of possessiveness and connection (Pierce et al.,
Ownership individuals develop towards objects, ideas, or spaces, 2001a)
often leading to a sense of responsibility and personal
identification with the target.

Education Educational It describes the state where people feel attached and (Muthu et al.,
Psychological possessive towards something, like an object or project, 2021)
Ownership viewing it as an extension of themselves. This feeling
satisfies basic human needs like self-improvement,
stability, and control. It involves several aspects,
including confidence in one's abilities (self-efficacy), a
sense of belonging, responsibility, and power.
Interestingly, it even includes a "protective" aspect, like
feeling territorial over your possessions.

Business Business Within a business context, psychological ownership (Mayhew et

Psychological describes employees' or stakeholders' feelings of al., 2007)
Ownership possession towards their work, projects, or the
organization, leading to increased commitment, job
satisfaction, and performance.

Social Studies Social Psychological This term describes the sense of ownership individuals (Sinclair et
Ownership or communities feel towards social concepts, cultural al., 2017)
heritage, or communal spaces, influencing social
identity and collective behavior.

To understand and better analyze the concept of PO, we will be discussing two of the first articles
that introduced the idea to the organizational level and then into the family business area: The
article "Toward a Theory of Psychological Ownership in Organizations" by Pierce, Kostova, and
Dirks explores the concept of psychological ownership within organizational contexts. It posits
that individuals can develop feelings of ownership towards their organization or its components,
driven by motives such as efficacy, self-identity, and having a place. Psychological ownership is
distinguished from related constructs like commitment and identification, emphasizing its unique
contribution to understanding employee behavior. The theory highlights routes through which
psychological ownership develops and discusses its implications for organizational effectiveness,
including potential positive effects like increased responsibility and negative consequences like
resistance to change (Pierce et al., 2001b). Exploring the dynamic nature of psychological
ownership in family businesses, mainly through the lens of a real-time exit process, Brundin et al.
conclude that psychological ownership among family business owners is individual, multifold,
enduring, and volatile, affected by contextual circumstances. Owners can cognitively and
emotionally liberate themselves from psychological ownership, challenging the notion that these
ties are unbreakable (Brundin et al., 2023). Psychological ownership is often represented via its
emotional and symbolic aspects (Stamm, 2012); this concept suggests that ownership is not just a
legal relationship but can also be emotionally charged, developing a symbolic meaning over time.
Psychological ownership reflects a state where the owned object, in this case, the family business,
becomes an integral part of the individual’s identity, essentially an extension of the self. This is
particularly significant in the context of family businesses, where the business often holds
sentimental value and represents a legacy or heritage (Madden et al., 2015; Melin et al., 2013;
Plana-Farran et al., 2021; Ramadani et al., 2020).
b. Theories explaining psychological ownership.
Psychological ownership (PO) in family firms is a multifaceted phenomenon driven by a complex
interplay of factors. Several theoretical perspectives shed light on its development, dynamics, and
consequences. PO theory posits that individuals develop feelings of ownership towards entities,
even without legal ownership, based on control, knowledge, and self-investment (Pierce et al.,
2001b). This sense of ownership is often amplified in family firms due to the close connection
between family identity and the business. Stewardship theory emphasizes the pro-organizational
behaviors of family owners and managers who act as stewards of the family legacy, prioritizing
long-term success over personal gain (Davis et al., 1997a). This stewardship mentality can foster
collective PO among family members. However, agency theory cautions about potential conflicts
of interest within family firms, where family members in management may prioritize their interests
over those of non-family stakeholders (Jensen et al., 1976). This highlights the importance of
aligning interests to ensure effective management and fair PO distribution. Finally, the
socioemotional wealth (SEW) theory explains the value family firms place on non-financial
aspects like family harmony and social status (Gómez-Mejía et al., 2007). Often intertwined with
PO, these factors influence decision-making and strategic choices, leading family firms to
prioritize goals beyond profit maximization.
c. Research questions.
We mainly strive to answer the following questions to gain more understanding and clearance on
the concept of psychological ownership in family businesses and how it can be correlated, or not,
with other vital elements such as knowledge transfer (Widjaja et al., 2023), succession (Heino et
al., 2019; Savolainen et al., 2013) or innovation (Baltazar et al., 2023).
• What are the most influential studies on psychological ownership in family firms?
• Who are the key authors contributing to this field?
• What are the main research orientations in this field?
• How has the research on this topic evolved?
 b) Methodology
Specificity
Alignment
Literature Research questions formulation Feasibility
examination (De Massis et al., 2014) Relevance
Flexibility

Literature Review (Webster et al., 2002)

Data Collection Data cleaning to Data Analysis

(Web of Science) resolve (Bibliometrix &
(Donthu et al., 2021) inconsistencies. VOSviewer)

Results analysis (performance, science mapping) (Cobo et al., 2010)

+ conclusions and future research paths
Figure 1: Flowchart of research design and procedure.

For a long time, bibliometric analysis has been a vital tool that permits the determination of the
research gap and explores undiscovered areas of a research domain (Abdullah et al., n.d.). It also
is used widely to quantitatively asses’ bibliographic data to understand the general orientation of
a disciplinary field (Lazarides et al., 2023). The method has been used in a variety of research
domains, such as human resources (Arora et al., 2023), Finance (Kashi et al., 2023), and even
sociology (Zhong et al., 2022). As the research on the topic of psychological ownership in the
context of family firms is relatively new (starting from the early 2000s), as Figure 1 demonstrates,
the deepening research was yet to be started by 2016 and forward, which complicates our task
further ever since our database is in it premature phase which will require further effort from our
part to interpret results and predict future research paths through the identification of gaps.
Our research began with a comprehensive review of literature to identify leading studies on
psychological ownership in family firms and gain an understanding of the overall body of research
available. The formulation of research questions is crucial in guiding the research design,
methodology, and analysis (De Massis et al., 2014). Clear, specific questions that align with
research objectives are essential to ensure focused study and relevant outcomes. Also, it's
important to consider feasibility, relevance, and flexibility to allow for exploration and adaptation
as the research progresses.
Literature review plays a critical role in research as it allows for identifying gaps in existing
research, establishing context for current studies, and validating research questions. It also helps
to synthesize existing knowledge, confirm what is known, and reveal any inconsistencies or areas
lacking sufficient research, providing a general orientation for the discussion (Webster et al., 2002).
Data collection, cleaning, and analysis were conducted simultaneously, using the Web of Science
database, filtering data for relevancy, and utilizing VOSviewer and Bibliometrix as tools (Donthu
et al., 2021). This approach allowed for more thorough data collection, resulting in higher quality
data with less error margin. Finally, a performance analysis and science mapping were conducted
to better understand the current state of research on psychological ownership and identify any gaps
yet to be discovered (Cobo et al., 2010).
Clarivate by Web of Science (WOS) was used to collect and primarily analyze data, permitting us
to characterize the knowledge in a three-metric chart (year, authors, and research areas). The Web
of Science database was widely used in conducting bibliometric analysis (Khosravi et al., 2023;
Sönmez, 2020; Vlase et al., 2023) and presents a powerful tool to help us characterize the collected
data. A performance analysis was then conducted to assess the research impact through citation
analysis, followed by science mapping to deepen our understanding of the structure and dynamics
of psychological ownership at an organizational level, specifically in the context of family firms.
Before starting the analysis, the construction of a representative search query was needed; for that,
some of the leading articles (Appendix 1) in the general context of psychological ownership in
family firms were thoroughly analyzed individually to obtain a list of keywords, which then were
classified following a scoring system based on their occurrence in the guise of receiving the final
research query which presents as follows:
TS = (“family business*” OR “family firm*” or “family own*” or “family control*” OR "family-
led*" OR "family-managed*" OR "Heterogeneous family firms*") AND TS = ("Psychological
ownership*" OR "Ownership feelings*" OR "Emotional attachment*" OR "Sense of control*" OR
"Knowledge hiding*" OR "Stewardship behavior*")
Our initial search returned 133 documents; after careful narrowing (limiting year of publication to
a range between 2016 and 2024, also only keeping 4 wos categories (Business, Management,
Psychology applied and Psychology multidisciplinary) we ended up with 95 documents, we also
ranged our focus to only Articles and Early Access to maintain a high relevance rate while
accessing timely information which provides a more comprehensive understanding of an
UpToDate trend, we finally ended up with over 86 documents and was the focus of our analysis.
c) Leveraging Bibliometrix and VOS Viewer
The choice of software tools can significantly impact the effectiveness of Bibliometrix analysis.
Bibliometrics and VOS Viewer were selected for their complementary functionalities and robust
capabilities in handling bibliometric data for this study. Utilizing Bibliometrix provided a
comprehensive analysis of citation networks from both the citing. It cited perspectives, allowing
us to uncover influential articles, authors, and thematic trends within the literature, facilitating a
deeper understanding of the intellectual structure and knowledge diffusion within the field (Aria
et al., n.d.). Additionally, Bibliometrix offers valuable features for exploring temporal trends, co-
citation networks, and bibliographic coupling, providing insight into the evolution of research
themes and the interconnectedness of scholarly works. VOS Viewer was also employed to conduct
co-occurrence analysis and generate keyword cluster maps, offering a visual representation of the
thematic landscape and relationships between key concepts within the literature, deepening our
understanding of the potential interdisciplinary connections (Eck et al., n.d.).
We adopted a comprehensive approach to bibliometric analysis by integrating these two software
tools. We combined quantitative insights from Bibliometrix with visual representations generated
by VOS Viewer to gain a holistic understanding of scholarly literature.
d) Results
a. Performance analysis
Performance analysis will help us comprehend how research topics develop within the research
field across time (Gardazi et al., 2023; Werbińska-Wojciechowska et al., 2023), which will provide
us with a clearer vision of trends revolving around the fundamental concept of psychological
ownership.
Standard performance analysis analytic measures, we find citation analysis coupled with the
number of publications of leading authors and journals, which concludes the impact of an author
and journal in the field (Galletta et al., 2022) and co-citation analysis which, by following its
coupling methodology, helps us identify the potential relationship between authors which may lead
us to a more specific area of the research within the field.
i. Publications per journal
When examining publications and citations across multiple journals, it becomes apparent that there
are distinct patterns in academic impact and research focus. Notably, the Journal of Family
Business Strategy and Journal of Business Research have demonstrated high effects, despite
having fewer publications, due to their significant influence within the academic community and
a notable number of citations. Conversely, journals like Entrepreneurship Research Journal and
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal have displayed lower impact, with fewer
citations than their publication count. Additionally, while some journals specialize in specific
topics, such as family business management or entrepreneurship in emerging economies, others
cover more general themes, like entrepreneurship theory and practice. Analyzing publication and
citation trends in those leading family business research journals reveals several essential insights.
Foremost, there is a growing interest in family business research, as evidenced by the increasing
number of publications and citations in these journals, which is likely due to the recognition of the
economic importance of family firms and the unique challenges they face. Second, researchers are
particularly interested in the strategic implications of family involvement in business, including
succession planning, diversification, and governance. While socioemotional wealth (SEW) has
gained traction in the field, more research is still needed on how psychological ownership (PO)
affects family firm behavior and performance, including developing less nuanced measures of PO
and exploring the interplay between different SEW dimensions.
Table 1: publication and citation analysis of leading journals

Journal ∑ Publications ∑ Citations

Journal of Family Business Management 13 89
Journal of Family Business Strategy 10 284
Journal of Business Research 6 211
Entrepreneurship theory and practice 3 89
Entrepreneurship research journal 3 15
Journal of small business and enterprise development 2 9
Human resource development international 2 18
European management journal 2 14
 Journal of entrepreneurship in emerging economies 2 20
International entrepreneurship and management journal 2 2

ii. Publications evolution

30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Figure 2: Evolution of research on the topic.

The concept under discussion is relatively new and was first introduced in Kraus et al.'s 2011
article titled "Family firm research: Sketching a research field." In this article, the authors
identified psychological ownership as a critical component in family firms, encompassing social,
legal, real, and psychological dimensions. The article emphasized the importance of further
research in this area. Since 2016, there has been a significant increase in the number of publications
related to this concept, as evidenced by an annual publication trend chart (Fig. 1). On average, nine
publications per year were produced, with the highest number of publications occurring in 2023,
totaling 24. The trend appears to be continuing, with four publications already made in 2024 at the
time of this analysis. These findings suggest that the academic and research community's attention
to this topic will likely persist and expand further.
iii. Publications’ impact
The analysis highlighted significant disparities in the publication and citation metrics across
various journals in business literature. The findings suggest that some journals, like the Journal of
Family Business Management (89) and Journal of Family Business Strategy (284), have a higher
number of publications but comparatively lower citation counts, indicating a lower impact within
the academic community. On the other hand, journals such as the Journal of Business Research
(211) exhibit a more balanced ratio between publications and citations, indicating a higher level of
scholarly influence. Notably, despite having fewer publications, journals like Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice (89) and the Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies (20) have
accumulated many citations, highlighting their importance in shaping academic discourse within
the entrepreneurship domain.
 iv. Countries' scientific production

Figure 3: Map of countries' scientific production.

The data regarding the scientific output in psychological ownership within family firms highlights
a pronounced aggregation of research endeavors, predominantly spearheaded by the United States,
which boasts 50 scholarly publications, representing a vigorous interest and, presumably, a
considerable allocation of funding and academic resources. Under the United States, European
nations display a significant engagement, with Italy, Sweden, and Germany contributing 18, 16,
and 15 publications respectively. This cluster of European countries suggests a regional preference
towards the complexities inherent in family-owned enterprises and the unique dynamics
introduced by psychological ownership. The United Kingdom also exhibits active participation
with 14 publications.
The contribution of 11 publications by China signals an escalating interest in Asia, mirroring the
region's participation in global academic discourses surrounding business and psychology. Lesser
European nations such as Spain and Belgium exhibit considerable involvement, with 10 and 9
publications further underscoring the extensive European implication in the subject. Notably,
despite being a relatively minor entity in terms of research output, Kosovo contributes eight
publications, indicating a specific local interest or nascent academic emphasis.
The data in hand illuminate the geographic locales where significant research is being conducted
and hint at avenues for potential growth and collaboration. Nations with lesser publication counts,
such as Kosovo and France, might benefit from augmented international cooperation to amplify
their visibility and impact within this research domain, including the specifications of the context
itself. In that matter, an analysis of citation impacts and collaboration networks will be conducted
to yield more profound insights into the quality of the research and the pivotal entities propelling
it.
b. Science mapping
The method of science mapping is a crucial aspect of bibliometric analysis, as it visualizes the
relationships between various research elements, such as documents, authors, journals, and
keywords (e.g. Malik et al., 2022; Murgado-Armenteros et al., 2015). By mapping out the
connections and proximity of concepts within a research field, science mapping reveals the
intellectual structure and evolution of the domain visually compellingly, which enables us to gain
valuable insights that may not be evident from a regular performance analysis alone. The maps
highlight how ideas are interconnected and clustered, exposing emerging trends, mainstream
research topics, and under-researched areas. Network analysis of the maps using metrics like
centrality and density further reinforces how core concepts are connected.
i. Most influential publications
Paper Author Total TC per Publication
Citations Year year

Psychological ownership, knowledge sharing, Pittino, Davide 110 15.71 2018

and entrepreneurial orientation in family firms:
The moderating role of governance heterogeneity

Tracing the Roots of Innovativeness in Family Filser, Matthias 108 15.43 2018
SMEs The Effect of Family Functionality and
Socioemotional Wealth

Are high-performance work practices essential in Pittino, Davide 68 7.56 2016

family SMEs? An analysis of the impact on
employee retention

Family Firm(s) Outcomes Model Structuring Holt, David T. 65 8.13 2017

Financial and Nonfinancial Outcomes Across the
Family and Firm

Strategic agility and international joint ventures Debellis, 63 15.75 2021

The willingness-ability paradox of family firms Federico

Appendix 2 summarizes the most influential article (depending on citation count) in our database;
following is an analysis of the main findings of these papers, the mobilized theoretical framework,
and some limitations that may serve as a general guideline of the trending and relevant areas of
research in the context of PO.
A recurring theme across these pivotal studies is the profound impact of psychological ownership
(PO) on various dimensions of family firms. Davide Pittino's 2018 study underscores PO's critical
role in enhancing entrepreneurial orientation (EO) through the mediating influence of knowledge
sharing. This work highlights governance heterogeneity as a nuanced layer influencing the PO-EO
dynamic, enriching the dialogue on stewardship and psychological ownership theories. Similarly,
Matthias Filser's 2018 exploration delves into the interplay between family functionality,
socioemotional wealth (SEW), and innovativeness, presenting SEW as a catalyst for innovation,
albeit with potential constraints tied to firm identification.
Pittino's 2016 investigation extends the discourse to human resource management, juxtaposing the
traditional reliance on high-performance work practices with family firms' unique, relationally
driven mechanisms. This study leverages social exchange theory to illuminate the nuanced
exchange dynamics fostering employee retention within the context of family governance.
David T. Holt's 2017 research introduces the Family Firm(s) Outcomes Model, accentuating the
multifaceted nature of success in family firms by integrating financial and non-financial outcomes.
This model emphasizes psychological ownership's profound influence on family cohesion and the
pursuit of legacy, framing it as a cornerstone concept in understanding family firm dynamics.
Federico Debellis's 2021 work on strategic agility and IJVs in family firms uncovers a willingness-
ability paradox, attributing strategic hesitance to emotional attachments while acknowledging
superior governance capabilities in IJVs. This study not only broadens the understanding of
strategic agility within family firms but also calls for empirical exploration to validate the proposed
models and deepen the insight into the strategic orientations of family firms.
Common across these influential studies is the central role of psychological ownership, acting as
a beacon guiding strategic, operational, and human resource practices within family firms. These
works underscore the critical interplay between emotional attachments, governance structures, and
entrepreneurial behaviors, shedding light on the unique fabric of family firms. Despite the rich
theoretical contributions, a call for empirical validation persists, underscoring the need to ground
these conceptual frameworks in practical realities across diverse contexts. Hence, the research
orientation persists toward understanding the nuanced mechanisms by which psychological
ownership shapes family firms' ethos, strategies, and outcomes. As such, the path forward requires
further empirical examination, cross-cultural investigations, and integrative theoretical
advancements to fully capture the diverse impact of psychological ownership on family firms'
legacy, innovation, and strategic agility.
 ii. Co-citation analysis
Co-citation analysis is a technique used to study the relationships between different sources cited
in research publications. It involves identifying references cited in the bibliographies of two or
more articles. By analyzing these co-cited references, we will gain insights into the structure and
critical components of the research area, psychological ownership. Fig2. Represents the general
co-citation network extracted from Vosviewer. The co-citation network has provided us with 3
clusters; the following is an analysis of each.

Figure 4: Co-citation Network.

1. Red cluster analysis: the multidimensionality of psychological
ownership in family firms
Examining the papers from the red cluster, we could identify the standard topic orientation of the
overall research corps. Foremost, papers addressed the multidimensionality of PO in family firms.
Family involvement, influence, and family-centered non-economic (FCNE) goals are distinct but
interrelated concepts contributing to PO (Chrisman et al., 2012). Family involvement, through
ownership, management, and generational participation, allows the family to influence the firm.
As reflected in transgenerational control intentions (TFCI) and family commitment, family
influence captures the family's willingness to use it to pursue particularistic goals. Finally, FCNE
goals, such as family harmony, social status, and identity linkage, represent the specific objectives
that the family may pursue through its influence in the firm. Exploring the interplay between these
dimensions may be beneficial in developing a more nuanced understanding of PO in family firms.
PO is a dynamic construct that evolves over time and across generations. As family firms mature
and transition through different ownership and management stages, the importance of different
SEW dimensions may change (Gomez-Mejia et al., 2011). For example, younger family firms may
prioritize growth and be more willing to relinquish some control to achieve it.
In comparison, older family firms may place a higher value on preserving SEW, even at the
expense of financial performance. Similarly, there is a need to integrate different theoretical
perspectives to understand PO in family firms fully. Agency theory, stewardship theory, resource-
based view (RBV), and SEW perspectives offer valuable insights into the motivations and
behaviors of family firm stakeholders. By integrating these perspectives, we can better understand
how PO affects family firm behavior, governance, and performance (Zellweger et al., 2012). For
example, agency theory can help explain potential conflicts of interest within family firms, while
stewardship theory can shed light on the pro-organizational behaviors of family owners and
managers. RBV can help identify family firms' unique resources and capabilities, while SEW can
explain how family firms value non-financial aspects of the business.
2. Green cluster analysis: the contingent nature of psychological
ownership in family firms
Through analyzing the second cluster (green), the topics are highlighted between three primary
interests: primarily, the complexity and heterogeneity of family firms, while some studies find
support for the stewardship perspective, emphasizing the pro-organizational behavior of family
owners and managers (Miller et al., 2008), others acknowledge the potential for agency problems
and conflicts of interest (Madison et al., 2016). This suggests that PO in family firms is not a
monolithic concept. Its effects on firm behavior and performance may vary depending on factors
such as family dynamics, ownership structure, and leadership style, emphasizing the idea that may
motivate future research to explore these contingencies in more detail to develop a more nuanced
understanding of PO in family firms. Second, both individual-level and firm-level factors influence
PO. At the individual level, family values, identification with the firm, and commitment to the
family's vision can shape PO (Davis et al., 1997b; Pearson et al., 2010). At the firm level, factors
like governance structures, leadership style, and organizational culture can also affect PO
(Chrisman et al., 2005; Madison et al., 2016). Lastly, integrating different theoretical perspectives
to fully understand PO in family firms, such as agency theory, stewardship theory, resource-based
view (RBV), and socioemotional wealth (SEW) perspectives, offers valuable insights into the
motivations and behaviors of family firm stakeholders. By integrating these perspectives,
researchers can better understand how PO affects family firm behavior, governance, and
performance (Chrisman et al., 2014).
3. Blue cluster analysis: the multifaced nature of PO, individual,
collective, and strategic implications
Several key themes emerge from the analysis of the papers of the blue cluster. On the first hand,
there is a clear consensus that PO, encompassing both individual-oriented (IPSO) and collective-
oriented (CPSO) dimensions, plays a crucial role in aligning the interests of family and non-family
employees with those of the family owners. This alignment fosters a stewardship mentality, where
individuals prioritize the well-being and long-term success of the firm (Bernhard et al., 2011;
Ramos et al., 2014a). Others emphasize the influence of leadership style, demonstrating that
transformational and transactional leadership positively impact IPSO and CPSO (Henssen et al.,
2014; Sieger et al., 2013). Additionally, Bernhard et al., 2011; Pierce et al., 2001 highlight the role
of work environment structure, suggesting that greater autonomy and control over work tasks
contribute to more substantial PO. Psychological ownership has also been proven to have positive
consequences of PO on employee attitudes and behaviors (Bernhard et al., 2011; Ramos et al.,
2014a); PO leads to increased extra-role behaviors and work engagement, indicating that
employees with stronger ownership feelings are more willing to go the extra mile and contribute
to the firm's success, a positive influence of PO on affective commitment and job satisfaction
(Bernhard et al., 2011; Sieger et al., 2013). A thorough examination of the moderating role of
family involvement in management and ownership has been conducted, revealing that the positive
effects of PO on knowledge sharing and work engagement are amplified when employees are
family members (Pittino et al., 2018; Ramos et al., 2014a), which suggests that family firms can
leverage the inherent sense of attachment and responsibility among family employees to enhance
the benefits of PO further. This cluster offers valuable theoretical and practical implications for
understanding and managing PO in family firms by demonstrating the critical role of PO in
aligning interests, fostering stewardship behavior, and ultimately driving positive organizational
outcomes. We note the importance of tailoring management practices to the specific context of the
family firm and leveraging the unique strengths of family involvement to maximize the benefits
of PO.
iii. Co-word analysis: Lexical network

Figure 5: Co-word analysis, lexical network.

Co-word analysis is a valuable bibliometric tool that reveals research fields' intellectual structure
and evolution by examining the co-occurrence of keywords, uncovering core themes, their
interrelationships, and how they shift over time(Börner et al., 2003; Callon et al., 1991). The co-
word analysis will permit us to visualize the landscape of knowledge domains, track emerging
trends (Chen, 2006), compare different research areas (Ronda-Pupo et al., 2012), and enhance the
discoverability of relevant articles within our datasets (Song et al., 2023) which will provide us
with an insight of how the scientific field has been developing over time, the interconnectedness
of concepts (e.g. psychological ownership, performance, family firms), and how research focus
transforms over time. The co-word lexical network has provided us with 5 clusters; the following
is an analysis of each.
1. Red cluster
This cluster treats the employee experience of psychological ownership (PO) within family firms.
The research investigates various factors that nurture an employee's sense of ownership, such as
empowering leadership styles (Luu, 2022; Mussolino et al., 2014), meaningful job design (Luu,
2022; Ramos et al., 2014b), and a supportive organizational culture where employees feel a sense
of belonging and impact (Mustafa et al., 2016). Studies within this cluster demonstrate the
profound link between PO and positive employee outcomes, including heightened commitment
(Luu, 2022), unwavering job satisfaction (Mustafa et al., 2016, 2023), and a willingness to go
above and beyond for the firm's success (Luu, 2022). Through analyzing this cluster, we highly
suggest a deeper exploration into how the unique dynamics of family firms, the evolution of PO
over time, and cross-cultural contexts might shape and influence employees' perceptions of
ownership.
2. Green cluster
The green cluster explores the relationship between agency, psychological ownership (PO), and
firm performance. The prominence of "agency" implies a focus on how PO can mitigate agency
problems often present in family firms, where there is a potential misalignment between owners
and managers (De Massis et al., 2018; Henssen et al., 2021a). Terms like "business performance"
and "firm performance" indicate research investigating whether PO enhances financial
performance, operational efficiency, and overall competitive advantage. Also, "employees' work
attitudes" hints at the potential mediating role of employee attitudes and behavior on the
relationship between PO and firm-level outcomes. Areas for further investigation might include
not exhaustively topics such as PO and innovation, investigating how a strong sense of family
values interacts with PO influences agency costs and firm performance (e.g., (Chi, 2023)) or
measuring the impact, if found, of PO on Environmental performance.
3. Blue cluster
The blue cluster centres around the core concept of psychological ownership (PO) within the
specific context of family firms, with prominent terms like "family firms", "family business", and
"ownership" reinforcing the core idea. It presumably represents research that explores the
fundamental nature of PO within family firms and how it manifests uniquely in this context (e.g.,
(Broekaert et al., 2018; Kuruppuge et al., 2017)). "Socioemotional wealth" indicates studies
examining how PO interacts with family members' emotional priorities and values, influencing
behaviour and decision-making. Also, the concept of "performance" within this cluster indicates
research into how PO impacts various aspects of firm performance, both financial and non-
financial. Additional areas for investigation might include longitudinal studies exploring how the
sense of PO evolves and changes across generations within a family firm and its potential impact
on the transfer of knowledge and leadership (e.g., Mahto et al., 2019), exploring the interplay
between PO and trust among family members and non-family stakeholders or developing and
refining instruments specifically tailored to measure psychological ownership within the complex
dynamics of family firms.
 4. Yellow cluster
Yellow cluster focuses on the interplay between psychological ownership (PO), entrepreneurial
aspects, and firm growth within family firms, with the dominance of terms like "entrepreneurial
orientation," "risk-taking," and "growth", indicating research investigating how PO fosters a spirit
of entrepreneurship, leading to increased innovation, risk tolerance, and ultimately, more
incredible firm growth (e.g., (Yttermyr et al., 2022)). Concepts like "determinants" and
"development investments" hint at studies exploring the factors that influence the development of
PO and its subsequent impact on entrepreneurial behavior within the family firm (e.g., (Henssen
et al., 2021b)). Additional exploration within this cluster could delve into investigating how a
strong sense of family legacy and responsibility instilled in family members can interact with PO
to drive entrepreneurial ventures and growth, PO and its correlation with digitalization and
examining how PO among family members and employees influences the decision to
internationalization of the family firm and the effectiveness of such strategies.
5. Purple cluster
The focus of the purple group is on the management and strategic aspects associated with the
psychological ownership (PO) of family businesses, research in this fragment examines how PO
shapes board dynamics, influences strategic decision-making, and impacts a family firm's overall
governance structure (e.g., (Mustafa et al., 2023)). The presence of terms such as "corporate
governance," "strategic management," and "family ownership" implies a concentration on how PO
could improve coordination between family proprietors and other stakeholders, thereby assisting
in long-term strategic planning. The use of the term "validation" suggests a possible examination
of how PO impacts the ways in which family businesses strive for external validation and
acceptance of their governance method. Additional exploration might address the role of PO in
succession planning or how PO among family members and board members influences risk-taking
behavior and strategic innovation (e.g., (Zahra, 2005)).
 iv. Hello

Figure 6: Co-word analysis, temporal network.

Temporal networks are crucial in bibliometric analysis as they offer insight into how scientific
fields evolve. Co-word analysis can provide a glance into important themes and relationships in a
given body of literature by examining word pairings (Ding et al., 2001). By adding a temporal
component, we can track changes in these themes and connections, identifying emerging trends,
shifts in research focus, and the potential decline of older concepts (Morris et al., 2008).
1. In the early stages (circa 2020)
There was a strong emphasis on establishing foundational concepts such as "family firms"
"governance" "socioemotional wealth" and "agency theory” which indicates that the research was
on its early stage trying to characterize the relationship between the psychological aspects through
analyzing concepts like socioemotional wealth and agency theory and their correlation with the
family firm and its governance; For example, a 2020 study titled "An Extension of the
Socioemotional Wealth Perspective: Insights from an Asian Sample" conducted by Irfan Saleem
et al., psychological ownership in family firms is closely linked with the broader concept of
socioemotional wealth. The research highlights how family members' emotional investments and
desires for control and identity preservation shape their engagement with the business and
decision-making processes. Interestingly, psychological ownership motivates behaviors that
prioritize preserving familial control and the firm's legacy over solely profit-driven actions,
underscoring SEW's crucial role (Saleem et al., 2020). Another example is the article entitled
"Mutualistic Symbiosis? Combining Theories of Agency and Stewardship through Behavioral
Characteristics," published by Jörn Obermann et al., which proposes an agency-stewardship
framework that takes into account psychological ownership as a moderator, which assists in
aligning the interests of managers (agents) with the organization (principals). The framework
fosters a sense of belonging and responsibility, boosting intrinsic motivation and promoting
positive stewardship behaviors when adequately balanced. Nevertheless, excessive psychological
ownership can cause behavior to shift back towards agency due to over-identification or
narcissistic tendencies (Obermann et al., 2020). There also was an exploration of determinants
through concepts like "heterogeneity," "risk-taking," and "behavioral agency" which unveiled a
deeper understanding of the factors that influence psychological ownership; In Manali Chatterjee
et al., article entitled "Ownership concentration, innovation, and firm performance: an Empirical
study in Indian Technology SME contexts," psychological ownership has been proven to be central
to understanding the overlap between agency and stewardship theories. The paper discusses how
psychological ownership impacts family members' and board members' behaviors, aligning their
interests more closely with the firm's long-term goals. Generally, psychological ownership can
reduce self-serving behaviors and enhance stewardship, ultimately benefiting the firm's
governance and performance (Chatterjee et al., 2020).
2. In the current stage of research (around 2021)
The role of family businesses in moderating psychological ownership and its outcomes is being
examined. Specifically, topics such as succession, future planning, and entrepreneurial exit are
being explored, there also is a growing interest in the perspective of employees, with concepts
such as work attitudes, organizational identification, and job satisfaction gaining more attention in
regard to psychological ownership within family firms.
The investigation led by Bart Henssen and Matti Koiranen in their article "CEOs' Joy of Working
for the Family Firm: The Role of Psychological Ownership and Stewardship Behavior" dives into
how psychological ownership, whether it be collective (CPO) or individual (IPSO), impacts the
happiness of CEOs who work in family businesses. Primarily, the study's discoveries reveal that
collective psychological ownership heightens the CEOs' contentment with their work by
stimulating stewardship behavior that prioritizes enduring benefits over immediate personal gains.
Meanwhile, psychological ownership also boosts job satisfaction through a more intimate sense of
control and connection with the company, increasing the CEO's performance and the company's
gain (Henssen et al., 2021c). According to the study conducted by Elias Hadjielias et al.., family
farms maintain a delicate balance between sharing and concealing knowledge. Family members
act as protectors, selectively sharing information with trusted parties like close relatives and expert
consultants while withholding it from external factors deemed as threats, such as far-off family
members and competitors. The critical determinants for granting access to knowledge are trust and
stewardship. Trustworthy people are given more detailed information, which helps with business
operations and innovation. Conversely, people who might misuse this knowledge are kept in the
dark, securing the competitive advantage of the business. While the study does not explicitly delve
into psychological ownership, it is an underlying concept that influences the observed governance
and stewardship practices, reflecting a profound feeling of connection and responsibility towards
the family business, which shapes knowledge-sharing and hiding practices, implying that
psychological ownership likely plays a crucial role in how knowledge is passed down from
generation to generation. Trust, stewardship, and psychological ownership all contribute to the
preservation of vital business knowledge within the family, which may support smooth
generational transitions and the long-term sustainability of the business (Hadjielias et al., 2021).
3. Extension of research (around 2022)
The interconnections between "leadership," "human resource management," "stewardship
behavior," and "employee ownership" are highlighted by the network, indicating the importance
of investigating how leadership and HR practices can encourage employee ownership, implying a
broader area of research than before, expanding the focus to consider the particular consequences
of psychological ownership, such as "intrinsic motivation," "corporate social responsibility," and
"knowledge sharing."
Psychological ownership is explored with the emotional attachment that top management teams,
specifically family owner-managers, have towards their company, which affects their decision-
making and risk perception regarding strategies such as internationalization, examining how this
sense of ownership impacts their commitment to international ventures and willingness to pursue
bold international strategies (de Groote et al., 2023). Although the paper mainly focuses on top
management teams, psychological ownership's motivational and engagement implications are
evident in all members, particularly family owner-managers, fostering a deeper emotional
investment in the company's success and leading to more committed and potentially riskier
internationalization efforts. This sense of ownership enhances motivation and engagement by
aligning the personal goals of TMT members with the firm's long-term strategic goals, particularly
in international expansion efforts. A thorough examination of the paper by Josep Llach et al. offers
a distinctive perspective on psychological ownership (PO) dynamics involving non-family
members (Llach et al., 2023). Psychological ownership is closely tied to workplace identity
(particularly loyalty), encouraging a sense of integration, which is crucial for developing
psychological ownership. This development plays a significant role in the expressive function of
workplace identity, demonstrating that effective communication is not just about what is said but
also about the tone and facial expressions used during interactions. Generally, PO has been proven
to positively impact employee motivation and performance by fostering a sense of belonging and
integration within the organization, increasing employees' commitment and desire to act in the
company's best interests. Interestingly, the study shows that loyalty, driven by a perception of
integration, is a fundamental condition for financial success, particularly in cases where loyalty is
statistically significant within the fsQCA analysis.
Additional avenues for exploration involve conducting comparative analyses to investigate the
variances in psychological ownership between family and non-family enterprises or across diverse
cultural contexts. Engaging in longitudinal research to trace the evolution of psychological
ownership over time and its potential enduring effects on individual and organizational outcomes
could also be fruitful. Additionally, examining the impact of technology and how technological
advancements may impact psychological ownership dynamics within family firms could be a
worthwhile endeavor.
 e) Discussion and contribution
Our bibliometric analysis permitted us to better understand the concept of psychological ownership
in family firms as a particular field of study. Psychological ownership (PO) has emerged as a
pivotal concept in family-owned businesses, profoundly influencing various facets such as
strategic decision-making, employee engagement, and innovation (e.g., Baltazar et al., 2023;
Chatterjee et al., 2020; Chi, 2023). The exploration of PO within family enterprises has seen a
significant surge in scholarly interest, particularly since 2016, with over 80 scientific articles
published between 2016 and 2024, indicating an expanding frontier in academic research.
Noteworthy journals such as the Journal of Family Business Strategy, Journal of Business
Research, and Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice have led the charge, each demonstrating
substantial influence through high citation counts, indicative of their pivotal role in the discourse
on PO. Interestingly, while journals like the Journal of Family Business Management and the
Journal of Family Business Strategy publish extensively, they often garner lower citation impacts,
signaling a potential gap in their broader academic influence. In contrast, despite fewer
publications, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice boasts significant citation numbers,
underscoring its major impact in shaping the field. These studies have illuminated how PO fosters
an entrepreneurial spirit, enhances knowledge sharing, spurs innovation, aids in retaining
employees, and boosts strategic agility within family firms. There is an ongoing academic dialogue
advocating for more empirical research to validate existing theoretical models and delve into PO's
manifestations across varied cultural and operational landscapes. This research landscape will be
discussed in detail in the ongoing section.
The centrality of psychological ownership (PO) in the landscape of family business research is
underscored by its multifaceted influence across several dimensions of business operations.
Science mapping has revealed intricate connections between PO and pivotal business aspects,
including entrepreneurial orientation, knowledge sharing, innovation, employee retention, and
strategic agility. This positions PO as a complex construct integral to the nuanced functioning of
family firms. The most influential publications identified through science mapping have
illuminated various themes pivotal to understanding PO's role, including studies exploring how
PO enhances entrepreneurial orientation through knowledge sharing (e.g., Pittino et al., 2018) and
others examining the interplay between PO, family functionality, and innovation (e.g.,Kuruppuge
et al., 2017; Mahto et al., 2019)—pinpointing socioemotional wealth as a potential innovation
driver yet acknowledging constraints due to firm identification. Another notable study delves into
the dynamics of employee retention in family businesses through the lens of social exchange
theory. At the same time, further analysis of strategic agility in international joint ventures exposes
a "willingness-ability paradox," where emotional attachments might impede decision-making,
even as family firms exhibit superior governance capabilities in these ventures.
Geographically, research on PO is predominantly concentrated in the United States and Europe—
with a notable focus in Italy, Sweden, and Germany—while also gaining traction in China,
suggesting a regional emphasis on studying PO within family businesses.
The evolution of research on psychological ownership (PO) in family firms reveals a fascinating
journey, starting around 2020 with a focus on laying the groundwork. Initially, researchers
concentrated on defining essential concepts like what constitutes a family firm, the roles of
governance, the impact of socioemotional wealth, and agency theory. They were keen on
illustrating how PO intertwines with these elements, especially highlighting family members'
emotional investments and desires for control. By 2021, the spotlight shifted towards how PO
uniquely influences family business scenarios, exploring how it affects succession planning and
employees' overall job satisfaction. As we moved into 2022, the scope widened even further as the
academic community began to examine the roles of leadership and HR practices in nurturing a
sense of ownership among employees, digging into how these efforts affect things like motivation
and corporate social responsibility. Nonetheless, there is a buzz around potential studies comparing
PO dynamics in family versus non-family businesses, understanding its evolution over time, and
even how modern technology might reshape these ownership feelings in the business realm.
a. Main theories explored in the context of PO in family firms.
There have been numerous theories in the context of psychological ownership in family firms,
either that being in positive or negative correlation with the concept in hand, the following table
summarizes the main theories and their implication.

Theory Author Publication date Main contribution

Theory of family Howard E. Aldrich and 2003 Excessive family control and support
embeddedness Jennifer E. Cliff hindered the entrepreneur's
psychological ownership, which is
crucial for motivation and firm success.
The theory sheds the light on the
negative aspects of being too embedded
in family ties, suggesting a need for
balance to foster true entrepreneurial
independence.

Psychological John Pierce, Tatiana 2001 Psychological ownership is described as

ownership theory Kostova, and Kurt Dirks a cognitive-affective state where
individuals feel that something, whether
a physical or immaterial object, is theirs.
This sense of ownership is grounded in
motives such as efficacy and effectance,
self-identity, and having a place, which
drive individuals to develop feelings of
ownership.

Transformational Bernard M. Bass 1985 Transformational leadership (TL)

leadership theory fosters a culture that emphasizes the
intrinsic value of achieving
organizational goals, which in turn,
cultivates psychological ownership
among non-family employees,
enhancing their commitment to strategic
change and innovation.

Stewardship theory James H. Davis, 1997 The theory argues that managerial
Rowland T. Quinn, and behaviors are influenced by
Susan A. Schoorman psychological factors, situational
factors, and the governance structures
that align managers' goals with those of
the organization. It assumes managers
are inherently motivated to act in the
 best interests of the principals (e.g.,
shareholders).

The interplay among family embeddedness, psychological ownership, transformational leadership,

and stewardship theories provides a rich theoretical tapestry for illuminating the complex
motivational and relational dynamics shaping individual experiences within family firms. These
theoretical perspectives offer two distinct analytical pathways. Firstly, they function as precise
lenses, allowing for focused interrogation of specific challenges within family firms. Agency
theory, for example, illustrates the potential conflicts of interest, whereas the theory of collective
psychological ownership (PO) explores shared ownership experiences. Alternatively, these
theories can be deployed as complementary building blocks, constructing a multi-dimensional
understanding of family enterprises' psychological and emotional landscape. This holistic
approach recognizes the potential friction between familial solid bonds and individual ownership
claims (family embeddedness), the motivational force stemming from psychological ownership,
the role of leadership paradigms in influencing that ownership, and the possible alignment of
stewardship principles with long-term, transgenerational ownership sensibilities.
b. Expanding the Scope of Psychological Ownership Research in Family
Firms
While research has significantly advanced our understanding of psychological ownership within
family firms, several avenues for expansion offer exciting new possibilities for both researchers
and practitioners. Here's an integrated exploration of those pathways:

Cross-Cultural The landscape of family business research is inseparably tied to cultural

Perspectives contexts. Cross-cultural studies explicitly investigating the construct of
psychological ownership across diverse settings offer the potential to
rigorously test the universality of existing theoretical frameworks or
necessitate their refinement. Comparisons between Western and non-
Western nations promise to expose how cultural forces may differentially
shape the development of ownership sentiments, consequently influencing
intrafamilial dynamics and critical business decisions.

Longitudinal The multi-generational nature of family firms makes them ideal candidates
Lens for longitudinal investigations focused on the evolution of psychological
ownership throughout their lifespan. Such research efforts hold the
potential to unveil invaluable insights into how shifting ownership
dynamics impact critical domains, including succession planning,
strategic decision-making, and the management of intrafamilial conflict.

Technological Emerging technologies are reshaping the business landscape. Targeted

Transformations research examining how these transformations influence psychological
ownership within the distinctive context of family firms is critically
essential. This line of inquiry could include investigations into the impact
of remote work arrangements on ownership sentiments or analyses of how
digital tools may either strengthen or attenuate the bonds between
employees, family and/or the firm.
 Methodological Integrating quantitative and qualitative methodologies offers the potential
Innovations for a richer and more nuanced understanding of the complex nature of
psychological ownership within family firms. While surveys and
experiments yield valuable quantitative insights, in-depth interviews and
case studies are essential for capturing the individual narratives and
experiential complexities that statistical summaries alone cannot convey.
Also, applying advanced analytical techniques, such as machine learning
or network analysis, promises to reveal latent patterns within datasets,
potentially exposing previously obscured factors that either facilitate or
hinder the development of psychological ownership.

Theoretical Merging psychological ownership with diverse theoretical frameworks

Advancements such as emotional intelligence, resilience theory, or innovation theories
promises to enrich our comprehension of family firm dynamics
significantly. These unexplored perspectives can clarify how family
members' affective and cognitive capacities shape decision-making
processes, adaptive capabilities, and the potential for long-term success.
Moreover, there is a critical need for researchers to develop theoretical
models tailored explicitly to the context of family firms. Such models
should incorporate distinctive elements like family governance structures,
succession planning mechanisms, and conflict resolution strategies to
address these enterprises' unique challenges and complexities.

Practical Research endeavors should prioritize the development of actionable

Implications guidelines for family businesses, with a specific focus on fostering
psychological ownership across generational factors and among non-
family employees. Strategies that promote inclusion, recognition, and
empowerment in alignment with long-term organizational goals will prove
invaluable to practitioners. Additionally, the creation of targeted
educational programs for family business owners can center on the
intricacies of psychological ownership, equipping leaders to navigate the
complexities of ownership sentiments within their family units and
facilitate business continuity.

Given the profound influence of psychological ownership (PO) on multiple facets of family firms,
it is beneficial to proceed to an examination through a multitude of complementary perspectives.
It is crucial to note that these areas emerge from a rigorous bibliometric analysis and a systematic
examination of the existing literature. These recommendations are intended to be partial, as
ongoing research in this domain may reveal new directions and unanticipated themes. A
comprehensive systematic review is necessary to validate the findings of this bibliometric analysis
further and provide a more definitive overview of the field. Promising avenues for future research
include:
1. Cross-Cultural Variations: Conduct in-depth investigations into how psychological
ownership (PO) manifests and is differentially expressed across diverse cultural contexts,
illuminating how cultural values shape family business dynamics, governance
mechanisms, and succession planning strategies.
2. Integration with Non-Family Members: Explore the complex dynamics of
psychological ownership among non-family employees, specifically examining its impact
on their commitment, job satisfaction, and performance outcomes.
3. Generational Transitions: Track the evolution of psychological ownership across
successive generations of family business leaders, yielding insights into its influence on
business continuity, conflict management practices, and potential shifts in strategic
orientation.
4. Technology and Digital Transformation: Assessment of how digitalization impacts
psychological ownership, focusing on how technologies enabling remote work, virtual
collaboration, and data-driven decision-making alter the sense of ownership among family
and non-family members alike.
5. Sustainability and Social Responsibility: Investigate the potential link between
psychological ownership and the commitment of family firms to sustainable practices and
corporate social responsibility initiatives, providing insightful perspective on how
ownership sentiments influence ethical decision-making and long-term value creation.
6. Innovation and Entrepreneurial Orientation: Examine the potential role of
psychological ownership in fueling innovation and entrepreneurial activities within family
businesses, determining whether strong ownership feelings can mitigate risk-aversion and
foster a more proactive and experimental approach to business development.
7. Methodological Advances: Promote the development and application of innovative
methodological approaches, including longitudinal designs, mixed methods, and advanced
statistical techniques, capturing the nuances, and evolving nature of psychological
ownership within family firms.
8. Theoretical Expansion: Foster the integration of psychological ownership with
complementary theoretical frameworks such as emotional intelligence, resilience theory,
and theories of innovation, enriching our understanding of the motivations and behaviors
within family businesses.
9. Governance and Strategic Decision-Making: Investigate the role of psychological
ownership in influencing governance structures and strategic decision-making processes
within family firms, particularly assessing how family members' ownership sentiments
interact with the perspectives and priorities of other stakeholders.
 f) Bibliographic references
Abdullah, K., Roslan, M., … N. I.-A. J. of, &
2023, undefined. (n.d.). Unearthing
hidden research opportunities through
bibliometric analysis: a review.
Myjms.Mohe.Gov.MyKH Abdullah, MF
Roslan, NS Ishak, M Ilias, R DaniAsian
Journal of Research in Education and
Social Sciences,
2023•myjms.Mohe.Gov.My. Retrieved
from
https://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/
ajress/article/view/21868
Aria, M., informetrics, C. C.-J. of, & 2017,
undefined. (n.d.). bibliometrix: An R-
tool for comprehensive science mapping
analysis. Elsevier. Retrieved from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/
article/pii/S1751157717300500?casa_t
oken=08y_YH-
XzeQAAAAA:l7Khziwn7OFpJOnW7
BPNJdW5NrbotZWCVLhjpjsT-
J31CpcYKrdnZzLiaWU4UX-
ZL1mwFZFL3qk
Arora, M., Prakash, A., Dixit, S., Mittal, A.,
& Singh, S. (2023). A critical review of
HR analytics: visualization and
bibliometric analysis approach.
Information Discovery and Delivery,
51(3), 267–282. doi: 10.1108/IDD-05-
2022-0038/FULL/XML
Baltazar, J. R., Fernandes, C. I., Ramadani,
V., & Hughes, M. (2023). Family
business succession and innovation: a
systematic literature review. Review of
Managerial Science, 17(8), 2897–2920.
doi: 10.1007/S11846-022-00607-
8/TABLES/3
Berent-Braun, M. M., & Uhlaner, L. M.
(2012). Responsible ownership
behaviors and financial performance in
family owned businesses. Journal of
Small Business and Enterprise
Development, 19(1), 20–38. doi:
10.1108/14626001211196389/FULL/X
ML
Bernhard, F., & O’Driscoll, M. P. (2011).
Psychological Ownership in Small
Family-Owned Businesses: Leadership
Style and Nonfamily-Employees’ Work
Attitudes and Behaviors.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/105960111140
2684, 36(3), 345–384. doi:
10.1177/1059601111402684
Börner, K., Chen, C., & Boyack, K. W.
(2003). Visualizing knowledge
domains. Annual Review of Information
Science and Technology, 37(1), 179–
255. doi: 10.1002/ARIS.1440370106
Broekaert, W., Henssen, B., Lambrecht, J.,
Debackere, K., & Andries, P. (2018).
Limits to psychological ownership in
the family business. Journal of Family
Business Management, 8(2), 196–216.
doi: 10.1108/JFBM-12-2017-
0042/FULL/XML
Brundin, E., McClatchey, I. S., & Melin, L.
(2023). Leaving the family business:
The dynamics of psychological
ownership. Journal of Family Business
Strategy, 14(2), 100555. doi:
10.1016/J.JFBS.2023.100555
Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., & Laville, F.
(1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for
describing the network of interactions
between basic and technological
research: The case of polymer
chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–
205. doi:
10.1007/BF02019280/METRICS
Chatterjee, M., & Bhattacharjee, T. (2020).
Ownership concentration, innovation
and firm performance: empirical study
in Indian technology SME context.
South Asian Journal of Business
Studies, 10(2), 149–170. doi:
10.1108/SAJBS-10-2019-
0185/FULL/XML
Chen, C. (2006). CiteSpace II: Detecting and
visualizing emerging trends and
transient patterns in scientific literature.
Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology,
57(3), 359–377. doi:
10.1002/ASI.20317
Chi, Y. L. (2023). The agency costs of family
ownership: Evidence from innovation
performance. Journal of Banking &
Finance, 148, 106737. doi:
10.1016/J.JBANKFIN.2022.106737
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., Pearson, A. W.,
& Barnett, T. (2012). Family
Involvement, Family Influence, and
Family–Centered Non–Economic Goals
in Small Firms.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2010.00407.x, 36(2), 267–293.
doi: 10.1111/J.1540-
6520.2010.00407.X
Chrisman, J. J., Chua, J. H., & Sharma, P.
(2005). Trends and Directions in the
Development of a Strategic
Management Theory of the Family
Firm. Https://Doi.Org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2005.00098.x, 29(5), 555–576.
doi: 10.1111/J.1540-
6520.2005.00098.X
Chrisman, J. J., Memili, E., & Misra, K.
(2014). Nonfamily Managers, Family
Firms, and the Winner’s Curse: The
Influence of Noneconomic Goals and
Bounded Rationality.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1111/Etap.12014,
38(5), 1103–1127. doi:
10.1111/ETAP.12014
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-
Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2010). An
approach for detecting, quantifying, and
visualizing the evolution of a research
field: A practical application to the
Fuzzy Sets Theory field. Journal of
Informetrics, 5, 146–166. doi:
10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson,
L. (1997a). Toward a Stewardship
Theory of Management. The Academy
of Management Review, 22(1), 20. doi:
10.2307/259223
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson,
L. (1997b). Toward a Stewardship
Theory of Management. The Academy
of Management Review, 22(1), 20. doi:
10.2307/259223
de Groote, J., Feninger, M., &
Kammerlander, N. (2023). Family firm
internationalization and top
management team collaboration: Roles,
emotional attachment, and risk
perceptions. Journal of World Business,
58(6), 101489. doi:
10.1016/J.JWB.2023.101489
De Massis, A., & Kotlar, J. (2014). The case
study method in family business
research: Guidelines for qualitative
scholarship. Journal of Family Business
Strategy, 5(1), 15–29. doi:
10.1016/J.JFBS.2014.01.007
De Massis, A., Kotlar, J., Mazzola, P.,
Minola, T., & Sciascia, S. (2018).
Conflicting Selves: Family Owners’
Multiple Goals and Self-Control
Agency Problems in Private Firms.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1111/Etap.12257,
42(3), 362–389. doi:
10.1111/ETAP.12257
Ding, Y., Chowdhury, G. G., & Foo, S.
(2001). Bibliometric cartography of
information retrieval research by using
co-word analysis. Information
Processing & Management, 37(6), 817–
842. doi: 10.1016/S0306-
4573(00)00051-0
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D.,
Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How
 to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An
overview and guidelines. Journal of
Business Research, 133, 285–296. doi:
10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2021.04.070
Eck, N. Van, scientometrics, L. W.-, & 2010,
undefined. (n.d.). Software survey:
VOSviewer, a computer program for
bibliometric mapping.
Akjournals.ComN Van Eck, L psychological Challenges of Succession
Waltmanscientometrics,
2010•akjournals.Com. doi:
10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Galletta, S., Mazzù, S., & Naciti, V. (2022).
A bibliometric analysis of ESG
performance in the banking industry:
from the current status to future
directions. Research In International
Business and Finance, 62. doi:
10.1016/J.RIBAF.2022.101684
Gardazi, S. S. N., Hassan, A. F. S., & Bello,
M. S. (2023). A BIBLIOMETRIC
ANALYSIS OF CORPORATE
SUSTAINABILITY PERFORMANCE:
CURRENT STATUS,
DEVELOPMENT AND FUTURE
TRENDS. International Journal of
Professional Business Review, 8(3). doi:
10.26668/BUSINESSREVIEW/2023.V
8I3.367
Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., &
de Castro, J. (2011). The Bind that Ties:
Socioemotional Wealth Preservation in
Family Firms. The Academy of
Management Annals, 5(1), 653–707.
doi: 10.1080/19416520.2011.593320
Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-
Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., &
Moyano-Fuentes, J. (2007).
Socioemotional Wealth and Business
Risks in Family-controlled Firms:
Evidence from Spanish Olive Oil Mills.
Https://Doi.Org/10.2189/Asqu.52.1.106
, 52(1), 106–137. doi:
10.2189/ASQU.52.1.106
Hadjielias, E., Christofi, M., & Tarba, S.
(2021). Knowledge hiding and
knowledge sharing in small family
farms: A stewardship view. Journal of
Business Research, 137, 279–292. doi:
10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2021.08.042
Heino, N., Tuominen, P., Tuominen, T., &
Jussila, I. (2019). The Socio-
in Family Firms: The Implications of
Collective Psychological Ownership.
The Palgrave Handbook of
Heterogeneity among Family Firms,
715–746. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-
77676-7_26
Henssen, B., & Koiranen, M. (2021a). CEOs’
Joy of Working for the Family Firm: The
Role of Psychological Ownership and
Stewardship Behavior.
Entrepreneurship Research Journal,
11(3), 191–218. doi: 10.1515/ERJ-
2019-0264/ASSET/GRAPHIC/J_ERJ-
2019-0264_FIG_001.JPG
Henssen, B., & Koiranen, M. (2021b). CEOs’
Joy of Working for the Family Firm: The
Role of Psychological Ownership and
Stewardship Behavior.
Entrepreneurship Research Journal,
11(3), 191–218. doi: 10.1515/ERJ-
2019-0264/ASSET/GRAPHIC/J_ERJ-
2019-0264_FIG_001.JPG
Henssen, B., & Koiranen, M. (2021c). CEOs’
Joy of Working for the Family Firm: The
Role of Psychological Ownership and
Stewardship Behavior.
Entrepreneurship Research Journal,
11(3), 191–218. doi: 10.1515/ERJ-
2019-0264/ASSET/GRAPHIC/J_ERJ-
2019-0264_FIG_001.JPG
Henssen, B., Voordeckers, W., Lambrechts,
F., & Koiranen, M. (2014). The CEO
autonomy–stewardship behavior
relationship in family firms: The
mediating role of psychological
 ownership. Journal of Family Business Luu, T. D. (2022). Non-family employee
Strategy, 5(3), 312–322. doi: strategic renewal in family firms:
10.1016/J.JFBS.2014.01.012 the transformational leadership role of
family board members and
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976).
psychological ownership. Journal of
Theory of the firm: Managerial
Family Business Management, 13(2),
behavior, agency costs and ownership
272–299. doi: 10.1108/JFBM-12-2021-
structure. Journal of Financial
0151
Economics, 3(4), 305–360. doi:
10.1016/0304-405X(76)90026-X Madden, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W., &
Eddleston, K. A. (2015). Family
Kashi, A., & Shah, M. E. (2023).
Business Emotions. Wiley Encyclopedia
Bibliometric Review on Sustainable
of Management, 1–4. doi:
Finance. Sustainability 2023, Vol. 15,
10.1002/9781118785317.WEOM03004
Page 7119, 15(9), 7119. doi:
2
10.3390/SU15097119
Madison, K., Holt, D. T., Kellermanns, F. W.,
Khosravi, H., Shafie, M. R., Hajiabadi, M.,
Raihan, A. S., & Ahmed, I. (2023). & Ranft, A. L. (2016). Viewing Family
Chatbots and ChatGPT: A Bibliometric Firm Behavior and Governance
Through the Lens of Agency and
Analysis and Systematic Review of
Stewardship Theories. Family Business
Publications in Web of Science and
Review, 29(1), 65–93. doi:
Scopus Databases. International
10.1177/0894486515594292/ASSET/I
Journal of Data Mining, Modelling and
MAGES/LARGE/10.1177_089448651
Management, 16(2). doi:
5594292-FIG1.JPEG
10.1504/ijdmmm.2024.10061138
Mahto, R. V., Chen, J. S., McDowell, W. C.,
Kuruppuge, R. H., & Gregar, A. (2017). The
& Ahluwalia, S. (2019). Shared Identity,
Power of Psychological Ownership in
Family Influence, and the
the Longevity of Family Businesses.
Transgenerational Intentions in Family
Journal of Innovation Management in
Firms. Sustainability 2019, Vol. 11,
Small and Medium Enterprises, 1–9.
Page 1130, 11(4), 1130. doi:
doi: 10.5171/2017.313978
10.3390/SU11041130
Lazarides, M. K., Lazaridou, I.-Z., &
Malik, R., Visvizi, A., Troisi, O., & Grimaldi,
Papanas, N. (2023). Bibliometric
M. (2022). Smart Services in Smart
Analysis: Bridging Informatics With
Cities: Insights from Science Mapping
Science.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/15347346231 Analysis. Sustainability 2022, Vol. 14,
Page 6506, 14(11), 6506. doi:
153538, 153473462311535. doi:
10.3390/SU14116506
10.1177/15347346231153538
Mayhew, M. G., Ashkanasy, N. M., Bramble,
Llach, J., Sanchez-Famoso, V., & Danes, S.
T., & Gardner, J. (2007). A Study of the
M. (2023). Unmasking nonfamily
Antecedents and Consequences of
employees’ complex contribution to
Psychological Ownership in
family business performance: A place
Organizational Settings. The Journal of
identity theory approach. Journal of
Social Psychology, 147(5), 477–500.
Family Business Strategy, 14(4),
doi: 10.3200/SOCP.147.5.477-500
100593. doi:
10.1016/J.JFBS.2023.100593
Melin, L., Sharma, P., & Nordqvist, M.
(2013). The SAGE Handbook of Family
Business. 1–696.
Miller, D., Le Breton-Miller, I., & Scholnick,
B. (2008). Stewardship vs. Stagnation:
An Empirical Comparison of Small
Family and Non-Family Businesses*.
Journal of Management Studies, 45(1),
51–78. doi: 10.1111/J.1467-
6486.2007.00718.X
Morris, S. A., & Van Der Veer Martens, B.
(2008). Mapping research specialties.
Annual Review of Information Science
and Technology, 42(1), 213–295. doi:
10.1002/ARIS.2008.1440420113
Murgado-Armenteros, E. M., Gutiérrez-
Salcedo, • M, Torres-Ruiz, F. J., Cobo, •
M J, Gutiérrez-Salcedo, Á. M.,
Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., & Cobo, M. J.
(2015). Analysing the conceptual
evolution of qualitative marketing
research through science mapping
analysis. SpringerEM Murgado-
Armenteros, M Gutiérrez-Salcedo, FJ
Torres-Ruiz, MJ CoboScientometrics,
2015•Springer, 102(1), 519–557. doi:
10.1007/s11192-014-1443-z
Mussolino, D., & Calabrò, A. (2014).
Paternalistic leadership in family firms:
Types and implications for
intergenerational succession. Journal of
Family Business Strategy, 5(2), 197–
210. doi: 10.1016/J.JFBS.2013.09.003
Mustafa, M., Labaki, R., & Henssen, B.
(2023). Psychological Ownership in
Heterogeneous Family Firms: A
Promising Path and a Call for Further
Investigation. Entrepreneurship
Research Journal, 13(3), 631–664. doi:
10.1515/ERJ-2022-
0156/ASSET/GRAPHIC/J_ERJ-2022-
0156_FIG_002.JPG
Mustafa, M., Martin, L., & Hughes, M.
(2016). Psychological Ownership, Job
Satisfaction, and Middle Manager
Entrepreneurial Behavior. Journal of
Leadership & Organizational Studies,
23(3), 272–287. doi:
10.1177/1548051815627360
Muthu, M., Vignesh, K., Nirmal, L., &
Felsypremila, G. (2021). Embracing
psychological ownership in dental
education: A potential game changer.
Contemporary Clinical Dentistry,
12(2), 205–207. doi:
10.4103/CCD.CCD_1023_20
Obermann, J., Velte, P., Gerwanski, J., &
Kordsachia, O. (2020). Mutualistic
symbiosis?: Combining theories of
agency and stewardship through
behavioral characteristics. Management
Research Review, 43(8), 989–1011. doi:
10.1108/MRR-07-2019-
0317/FULL/XML
Pearson, A. W., & Marler, L. E. (2010). A
Leadership Perspective of Reciprocal
Stewardship in Family Firms.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2010.00416.x, 34(6), 1117–1124.
doi: 10.1111/J.1540-
6520.2010.00416.X
Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T.
(2001a). Toward a Theory of
Psychological Ownership in
Organizations.
Https://Doi.Org/10.5465/Amr.2001.437
8028, 26(2), 298–310. doi:
10.5465/AMR.2001.4378028
Pierce, J. L., Kostova, T., & Dirks, K. T.
(2001b). Toward a Theory of
Psychological Ownership in
Organizations. The Academy of
Management Review, 26(2), 298. doi:
10.2307/259124
Pittino, D., Barroso Martínez, A., Chirico, F.,
& Sanguino Galván, R. (2018).
Psychological ownership, knowledge
sharing and entrepreneurial orientation
 in family firms: The moderating role of
governance heterogeneity. Journal of
Business Research, 84, 312–326. doi:
10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2017.08.014
Plana-Farran, M., & Gallizo, J. L. (2021).
The Survival of Family Farms:
Socioemotional Wealth (SEW) and
Factors Affecting Intention to Continue
the Business. Agriculture 2021, Vol. 11,
Page 520, 11(6), 520. doi:
10.3390/AGRICULTURE11060520
Ramadani, V., Memili, E., Palalić, R., &
Chang, E. P. C. (2020). Socioemotional
Wealth in Family Businesses. 101–119.
doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-47778-3_6
Ramos, H. M., Man, T. W. Y., Mustafa, M., &
Ng, Z. Z. (2014a). Psychological
ownership in small family firms: Family
and non-family employees’ work
attitudes and behaviours. Journal of
Family Business Strategy, 5(3), 300–
311. doi: 10.1016/J.JFBS.2014.04.001
Ramos, H. M., Man, T. W. Y., Mustafa, M., &
Ng, Z. Z. (2014b). Psychological
ownership in small family firms: Family
and non-family employees’ work
attitudes and behaviours. Journal of
Family Business Strategy, 5(3), 300–
311. doi: 10.1016/J.JFBS.2014.04.001
Ronda-Pupo, G. A., & Guerras-Martin, L. A.
(2012). Dynamics of the evolution of the
strategy concept 1962–2008: a co-word
analysis. Strategic Management
Journal, 33(2), 162–188. doi:
10.1002/SMJ.948
Saleem, I., Siddique, I., & Ahmed, A. (2020).
An extension of the socioemotional
wealth perspective: Insights from an
Asian sample. Journal of Family
Business Management, 10(4), 293–312.
doi: 10.1108/JFBM-04-2019-
0022/FULL/XML
Savolainen, S., & Kansikas, J. (2013). Non-
family employees in small family
business succession: the case of
psychological ownership. World Review
of Entrepreneurship, Management and
Sustainable Development, 9(1), 64–81.
doi: 10.1504/WREMSD.2013.050936
Sieger, P., Zellweger, T., & Aquino, K.
(2013). Turning Agents into
Psychological Principals: Aligning
Interests of Non-Owners through
Psychological Ownership. Journal of
Management Studies, 50(3), 361–388.
doi: 10.1111/JOMS.12017
Sinclair, G., & Tinson, J. (2017).
Psychological ownership and music
streaming consumption. Journal of
Business Research, 71, 1–9. doi:
10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2016.10.002
Song, Y., Sun, X., & Duan, W. (2023). Co-
Word Analysis of First-Authored
Publications Written by Top Cited
Scholars of Social Work.
Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/10497315221
148661, 33(8), 929–943. doi:
10.1177/10497315221148661
Sönmez, Ö. F. (2020). Bibliometric Analysis
of Educational Research Articles
Published in the Field of Social Study
Education Based on Web of Science
Database. Participatory Educational
Research, 7(2), 216–229. doi:
10.17275/PER.20.30.7.2
Torp, S., & Nielsen, B. B. (2018).
Psychological ownership and financial
firm performance: The interplay of
employee stock ownership and
participative leadership. Australian
Journal of Management, 43(3), 476–
492. doi: 10.1177/0312896218755517
Vlase, I., & Lähdesmäki, T. (2023). A
bibliometric analysis of cultural heritage
research in the humanities: The Web of
Science as a tool of knowledge
 management. Humanities & Social Zhong, F., Cheng, W., Guo, A., Song, X.,
Sciences Communications, 10(1), Cheng, Q., Ullah, A., & Song, Y. (2022).
1234567890. doi: 10.1057/S41599-023- Are Chinese social scientists concerned
01582-5 about climate change? A bibliometric
analysis and literature review.
Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002).
Environmental Science and Pollution
Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the
Research, 29(9), 12911–12932. doi:
Future: Writing a Literature Review.
10.1007/S11356-021-18010-
MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii.
3/FIGURES/13
Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/4132319
Werbińska-Wojciechowska, S., & Winiarska,
K. (2023). Maintenance Performance in
the Age of Industry 4.0: A Bibliometric
Performance Analysis and a Systematic
Literature Review. Sensors, 23(3), 1409.
doi: 10.3390/S23031409/S1
Widjaja, W., & Wijayadne, D. R. (2023).
Knowledge Hiding in Small Medium
Enterprise Owned by Family Business:
The Role of Knowledge Complexity,
Psychological Ownership and
Avoidance Motivation. Media Ekonomi
Dan Manajemen, 38(1), 15–32. doi:
10.56444/MEM.V38I1.3030
Yttermyr, O., & Wennberg, K. (2022).
Psychological ownership development
in new venture teams. International
Small Business Journal: Researching
Entrepreneurship, 40(3), 307–335. doi:
10.1177/02662426211023380/ASSET/I
MAGES/LARGE/10.1177_026624262
11023380-FIG1.JPEG
Zahra, S. A. (2005). Entrepreneurial Risk
Taking in Family Firms.
Http://Dx.Doi.Org/10.1111/j.1741-
6248.2005.00028.x, 18(1), 23–40. doi:
10.1111/J.1741-6248.2005.00028.X
Zellweger, T. M., Kellermanns, F. W.,
Chrisman, J. J., & Chua, J. H. (2012).
Family Control and Family Firm
Valuation by Family CEOs.
Organization Science, 23(3), 851–868.
doi: 10.1287/ORSC.1110.0665