<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p> </p>
    <p>
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <title></title>
      <meta name="generator" content="LibreOffice 26.2.3.2 (Linux)">
      <meta name="author" content="Glen Ropella">
      <meta name="created" content="2026-08-19T02:43:15.993779085">
      <meta name="changedby" content="Glen Ropella">
      <meta name="changed" content="2026-08-19T02:44:56.192795360">
      <style type="text/css">
                @page { size: 8.5in 11in; margin: 0.79in }
                p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 115%; background: transparent }
                h2 { margin-top: 0.14in; margin-bottom: 0.08in; background: transparent; page-break-after: avoid }
                h2.western { font-family: "Liberation Serif", serif; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold }
                h2.cjk { font-family: "Unifont"; font-size: 18pt; font-weight: bold }
                h2.ctl { font-size: 18pt; font-family: "Noto Sans"; font-weight: bold }
                td p { widows: 0; orphans: 0; background: transparent }
                th p { widows: 0; text-align: center; orphans: 0; font-weight: bold; background: transparent }
                strong { font-weight: bold }
                em { font-style: italic }
                a:link { color: #000080; text-decoration: underline }
        </style>
      <p><font color="#000000">FWIW, here's some AI slop for you.
          &gt;8^D</font></p>
    </p>
    <hr width="100%" size="2">
    <p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Evidence
          across social psychology and adjacent behavioral research
          shows a
          reliable tendency to value </font><strong><font
            color="#000000"><b>self-made
              products, ideas, and performances</b></font></strong><font
          color="#000000"> more
          positively than equivalent others\u2019 outputs, though the effect
          is
          not universal and depends on context (Norton et al., 2012;
          Pelled et
          al., 2025; Zheng &amp; Miller, 2019; John &amp; Robins, 1994).
          The
          strongest direct evidence comes from the </font><strong><font
            color="#000000"><b>IKEA
              effect</b></font></strong><font color="#000000"> literature,
          while self-enhancement and ownership-bias studies show related
          but
          more qualified forms of the same pattern (Norton et al., 2012;
          Pelled
          et al., 2025; Krueger et al., 2017; Zheng &amp; Miller, 2018).</font></p>
      <h2 class="western" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.17in"><font
          color="#000000">Preference
          for One\u2019s Own Work</font></h2>
      <table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2">
        <thead> <tr>
            <th style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">Evidence Strength</font></p>
            </th>
            <th style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">Claim</font></p>
            </th>
          </tr>
        </thead> <tbody>
          <tr>
            <td style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">Evidence strength: Strong (9/10)</font></p>
            </td>
            <td style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">People </font><strong><font
                    color="#000000"><b>pay more for self-made objects</b></font></strong><font
                  color="#000000"> than for identical objects made by
                  others, and a meta-analysis across 55 studies found a
                </font><strong><font color="#000000"><b>moderate overall
                      effect</b></font></strong><font color="#000000">
                  of self-assembly on valuation, </font><em><font
                    color="#000000"><i>d</i></font></em><font
                  color="#000000"> = 0.57 (Norton et al., 2012; Pelled
                  et al., 2025).</font></p>
            </td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">Evidence strength: Strong (8/10)</font></p>
            </td>
            <td style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">People often treat their </font><strong><font
                    color="#000000"><b>amateur creations</b></font></strong><font
                  color="#000000"> as comparable in value to experts\u2019
                  work and expect others to agree, showing overvaluation
                  rather than simple preference matching (Norton et al.,
                  2012; Norton et al., 2011).</font></p>
            </td>
          </tr>
          <tr>
            <td style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">Evidence strength: Moderate
                  (6/10)</font></p>
            </td>
            <td style="border: none; padding: 0in">
              <p><font color="#000000">Similar self-favoring bias
                  appears in </font><strong><font color="#000000"><b>idea
                      selection and self-evaluation</b></font></strong><font
                  color="#000000">, but it is more conditional: design
                  professionals favored their own low-value ideas, and
                  people rate their own performance somewhat more
                  positively than peers or staff do (Zheng &amp; Miller,
                  2019; Zheng &amp; Miller, 2018; John &amp; Robins,
                  1994).</font></p>
            </td>
          </tr>
        </tbody>
      </table>
      <p><strong><font color="#000000"><b>Figure 1:</b></font></strong><font
          color="#000000"> Strength
          of evidence for preferring one\u2019s own work</font></p>
      <h2 class="western" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.17in"><font
          color="#000000">Experimental
          Findings</font></h2>
      <p><font color="#000000">The classic experiments show that labor
          itself can raise valuation even when there is </font><strong><font
            color="#000000"><b>no
              customization</b></font></strong><font color="#000000"> and
          the
          product is mundane and utilitarian, such as assembled storage
          boxes
          (Norton et al., 2012). The same pattern extends to hedonic
          creations
          like origami and Legos, and people can value their own poorly
          made
          outputs as highly as expert-made ones (Norton et al., 2012;
          Marsh et
          al., 2017).</font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">This bias is not limited to adults or to
          one
          culture. It appears by about </font><strong><font
            color="#000000"><b>age
              5</b></font></strong><font color="#000000"> (Marsh et al.,
          2017), and British and Indian children both valued their own
          created
          toys over identical copies, whether they built alone or
          collaboratively (Marsh et al., 2022).</font></p>
      <h2 class="western" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.17in"><font
          color="#000000">Mechanisms
          and Limits</font></h2>
      <ul>
        <li>
          <p style="margin-bottom: 0in"><strong><font color="#000000"><b>Successful
                  completion matters</b></font></strong><font
              color="#000000">; when people fail to finish or must
              destroy what they built, the IKEA effect drops out (Norton
              et al., 2012; Norton et al., 2011).</font></p>
        </li>
        <li>
          <p style="margin-bottom: 0in"><font color="#000000">Feelings
              of </font><strong><font color="#000000"><b>competence and
                  pride</b></font></strong><font color="#000000"> appear
              to mediate higher valuation of self-made products (Mochon
              et al., 2012).</font></p>
        </li>
        <li>
          <p style="margin-bottom: 0in"><strong><font color="#000000"><b>Ownership
                  alone</b></font></strong><font color="#000000"> can be
              sufficient for some self-biases, as people prioritized a
              newly owned voice even without producing it themselves
              (Payne et al., 2024).</font></p>
        </li>
        <li>
          <p><font color="#000000">Evidence is </font><strong><font
                color="#000000"><b>mixed on mechanisms</b></font></strong><font
              color="#000000">; developmental work found ownership alone
              did not explain children\u2019s valuation of their own
              creations, and effort amount did not moderate the effect
              in 5- to 6-year-olds (Marsh et al., 2017).</font></p>
        </li>
      </ul>
      <h2 class="western" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.17in"><font
          color="#000000">Related
          Self-Enhancement Evidence</font></h2>
      <p><font color="#000000">In performance judgments, people are on
          average </font><strong><font color="#000000"><b>slightly more
              positive about themselves</b></font></strong><font
          color="#000000"> than
          peers or assessors are, and they are less accurate judging
          themselves
          than judging peers (John &amp; Robins, 1994). People also show
          self-enhancing attributions after success more reliably than
          self-protective attributions after failure, so the broader
          bias is
          real but not as general or symmetrical as folk wisdom suggests
          (Miller &amp; Ross, 1975).</font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">There is also evidence in creative
          domains:
          participants ranked </font><strong><font color="#000000"><b>self-made
              artworks</b></font></strong><font color="#000000"> as more
          self-relevant, more owned, and more liked than other-made
          paintings,
          although one study found questionnaire preference without a
          matching
          visual-attention effect for copied works (Straffon et al.,
          2022). In
          professional design, ownership bias was strongest for </font><strong><font
            color="#000000"><b>worse
              ideas</b></font></strong><font color="#000000">,
          suggesting that
          preferring one\u2019s own work can impair selection quality rather
          than
          track objective merit (Zheng &amp; Miller, 2019; Zheng &amp;
          Miller,
          2018).</font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Across these literatures, the evidence
          supports the proverb-like claim that people often </font><strong><font
            color="#000000"><b>praise
              their own pot</b></font></strong><font color="#000000">:
          they
          reliably overvalue their own creations, and they sometimes
          overrate
          their own ideas or performance relative to others. The
          clearest and
          strongest evidence is for </font><strong><font color="#000000"><b>self-made
              objects</b></font></strong><font color="#000000">, while
          evidence for
          broader self-favoring judgment is real but more conditional
          and
          mechanism-dependent.</font></p>
      <p><em><font color="#000000"><i>These search results were found
              and
              analyzed using Consensus, an AI-powered search engine for
              research.
              Try it at <a href="https://consensus.app./"
                target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://consensus.app.</a> ©
              2026 Consensus NLP, Inc. Personal, non-commercial use
              only;
              redistribution requires copyright holders\u2019 consent.</i></font></em></p>
      <h2 class="western" style="margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.17in"><font
          color="#000000">References</font></h2>
      <p><font color="#000000">John, O., &amp; Robins, R. (1994).
          Accuracy
          and bias in self-perception: individual differences in
          self-enhancement and the role of narcissism.. </font><em><font
            color="#000000"><i>Journal
              of personality and social psychology, 66 1</i></font></em><font
          color="#000000">,
          206-19. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.1.206"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.66.1.206</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Krueger, J., Heck, P., &amp; Asendorpf,
          J.
          (2017). Self-enhancement: Conceptualization and Assessment.
          28. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.91"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.91</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Marsh, L., Kanngiesser, P., &amp; Hood,
          B.
          (2017). When and how does labour lead to love? The ontogeny
          and
          mechanisms of the IKEA effect.. </font><em><font
            color="#000000"><i>Cognition,
              170</i></font></em><font color="#000000">,
          245-253. <a
            href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.10.012"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.10.012</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Marsh, L., Gil, J., &amp; Kanngiesser, P.
          (2022). The Influence of Collaboration and Culture on the IKEA
          Effect: Does Cocreation Alter Perceptions of Value in British
          and
          Indian Children?. </font><em><font color="#000000"><i>Developmental
              Psychology, 58</i></font></em><font color="#000000">, 662
          -
          670. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001321"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001321</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Miller, D. T., &amp; Ross, M. (1975).
          Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or
          fiction?. </font><em><font color="#000000"><i>Psychological
              Bulletin, 82</i></font></em><font color="#000000">,
          213-225. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076486"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076486</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Mochon, D., Norton, M., &amp; Ariely, D.
          (2012). Bolstering and restoring feelings of competence via
          the IKEA
          effect. </font><em><font color="#000000"><i>International
              Journal of Research in Marketing, 29</i></font></em><font
          color="#000000">,
          363-369. <a
            href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.05.001"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2012.05.001</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Norton, M. I., Mochon, D., &amp; Ariely,
          D.
          (2012). The 'IKEA Effect': When Labor Leads to Love. </font><em><font
            color="#000000"><i>Journal
              of Consumer Psychology, 22</i></font></em><font
          color="#000000">,
          453-460. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.002"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.08.002</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Norton, M., Mochon, D., &amp; Ariely, D.
          (2011). Author ' s personal copy Research Report The IKEA
          effect :
          When labor leads to love.</font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Payne, B., Addlesee, A., Rieser, V.,
          &amp;
          McGettigan, C. (2024). Self-ownership, not self-production,
          modulates
          bias and agency over a synthesised voice.. </font><em><font
            color="#000000"><i>Cognition,
              248</i></font></em><font color="#000000">,
          105804. <a
            href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105804"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105804</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Pelled, A., Demetriades, S. Z., &amp;
          Walter, N. (2025). Labor Leads to Love, Right? A Meta\u2010Analysis
          of
          the IKEA Effect. </font><em><font color="#000000"><i>Psychology
              &amp; Marketing, 43</i></font></em><font color="#000000">,
          388 -
          400. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.70064"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.70064</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Straffon, L., Agnew, G., Desch-Bailey,
          C.,
          Van Berlo, E., Goclowska, G., &amp; Kret, M. (2022). Visual
          attention
          bias for self-made artworks.. </font><em><font color="#000000"><i>Psychology
              of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the
              Arts</i></font></em><font color="#000000">. <a
            href="https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000451" target="_blank"
            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000451</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Zheng, X., &amp; Miller, S. R. (2019). Is
          Ownership Bias Bad? The Influence of Idea Goodness and
          Creativity on
          Design Professionals Concept Selection Practices. </font><em><font
            color="#000000"><i>Journal
              of Mechanical Design</i></font></em><font color="#000000">. <a
            href="https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4042081" target="_blank"
            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4042081</a></font></p>
      <p><font color="#000000">Zheng, X., &amp; Miller, S. R. (2018).
          Uncovering Ownership Bias: The Influence of Idea Goodness and
          Creativity on Design Professionals\u2019 Concept Selection
          Practices. </font><em><font color="#000000"><i>Volume 7: 30th
              International Conference on Design Theory and
              Methodology</i></font></em><font color="#000000">. <a
            href="https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2018-85964"
            target="_blank" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://doi.org/10.1115/detc2018-85964</a></font></p>
      <p style="line-height: 100%; margin-bottom: 0in"><br>
      </p>
      <br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/18/26 11:11 PM, Jochen Fromm
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:md5:SGoc6vfIyRzQFLPtS9dGGQ==">A
      shoe from your direction. Ouch. 
      <div dir="auto"><br>
      </div>
      <div dir="auto">FRIAM's Second Law in action: If a theory is
        suspiciously elegant, somebody on the <br>
        list will throw a shoe at it.</div>
      <div dir="auto"><br>
      </div>
      <div dir="auto">-J.</div>
      <div dir="auto"><br>
      </div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div dir="auto">
        <div>-------- Original message --------</div>
        <div>From: Frank Wimberly <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wimberly3@gmail.com">&lt;wimberly3@gmail.com&gt;</a> </div>
        <div>Date: 8/19/26 12:09 AM (GMT+01:00) </div>
        <div>To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
          <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">&lt;friam@redfish.com&gt;</a> </div>
        <div>Subject: Re: [FRIAM] New philosophy book </div>
        <div><br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div dir="auto">
        <div>I do not prefer my paintings to Van Gogh's.  You must mean
          something else. </div>
        <br>
      </div>
      <br>
    </blockquote>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="0">-- 
8647 \u22a5 \u0250\u05df\u05df\u01dddo\u0279 \u01dd u\u01dd\u05df\u0183
\u1f45\u03c4\u03b5 oi \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 \u03ba\u03cd\u03bd\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u1f10\u03c7\u03d1\u03c1\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ac\u03ba\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, \u1f10\u03b3\u1f70 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 \u03c6\u03af\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u03c3\u03ce\u03c3\u03c9.</pre>
  </body>
</html>