IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v108y2009i2p175-186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preference-based escalation: A new interpretation for the responsibility effect in escalating commitment and entrapment

Author

Listed:
  • Schulz-Hardt, Stefan
  • Thurow-Kröning, Birgit
  • Frey, Dieter

Abstract

A prominent finding in escalating commitment and entrapment research is the "responsibility effect": people invest more in a losing course of action or persist with it for longer if they themselves initiated this action (responsibility) as opposed to if it was assigned to them. We argue that this effect is driven by participants' preferences. Responsible participants usually prefer the chosen alternative since they have chosen it themselves. Non-responsible participants, in contrast, represent a mix of persons who either favor or disfavor the chosen alternative. In two experiments, we demonstrate that responsible participants favor the chosen course of action more strongly than non-responsible participants do, that these preferences facilitate reinvestment in and persistence with the chosen course of action, and that responsibility has no effect over and above this effect of preferences. Non-responsible participants preferring the chosen course of action made similar reinvestments and exhibited similar persistence as responsible participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Schulz-Hardt, Stefan & Thurow-Kröning, Birgit & Frey, Dieter, 2009. "Preference-based escalation: A new interpretation for the responsibility effect in escalating commitment and entrapment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 175-186, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:108:y:2009:i:2:p:175-186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749-5978(08)00108-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Betsch, Tilmann & Haberstroh, Susanne & Glockner, Andreas & Haar, Thomas & Fiedler, Klaus, 2001. "The Effects of Routine Strength on Adaptation and Information Search in Recurrent Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 23-53, January.
    2. Davis, Mark A. & Bobko, Philip, 1986. "Contextual effects on escalation processes in public sector decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 121-138, February.
    3. Axel K‐D. Schulz & Mandy M. Cheng, 2002. "Persistence in capital budgeting reinvestment decisions – personal responsibility antecedent and information asymmetry moderator: A note," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 42(1), pages 73-86, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sleesman, Dustin J., 2019. "Pushing through the tension while stuck in the mud: Paradox mindset and escalation of commitment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 83-96.
    2. Peter Gordon Roetzel & Burkhard Pedell & Daniel Groninger, 2020. "Information load in escalation situations: combustive agent or counteractive measure?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(5), pages 757-786, June.
    3. Ferry Koster & Mattijs Lambooij, 2018. "Managing Innovations: A Study of the Implementation of Electronic Medical Records in Dutch Hospitals," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 1-23, February.
    4. Schultze, Thomas & Schulz-Hardt, Stefan, 2015. "The impact of biased information and corresponding meta-information on escalating commitment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 108-119.
    5. Rick Hardcopf & Rachna Shah & Suvrat Dhanorkar, 2021. "The Impact of a Spill or Pollution Accident on Firm Environmental Activity: An Empirical Investigation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(8), pages 2467-2491, August.
    6. William Boulding & Abhijit Guha & Richard Staelin, 2017. "Do We Really Need to Change the Decision Maker? Counterintuitive Escalation of Commitment Results in Real Options Contexts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(10), pages 3459-3472, October.
    7. Besharat, Ali & Nardini, Gia, 2018. "When indulgence gets the best of you: Unexpected consequences of prepayment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 321-328.
    8. Martens, Nikolai & Orzen, Henrik, 2021. "Escalating commitment to a failing course of action — A re-examination," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    9. Alex B. Markle & Yuval Rottenstreich, 2018. "Simultaneous Preferences for Hedging and Doubling Down: Focal Prospects, Background Positions, and Nonconsequentialist Conceptualizations of Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(12), pages 5946-5959, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peter S. Riefer & Bradley C. Love, 2015. "Unfazed by Both the Bull and Bear: Strategic Exploration in Dynamic Environments," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-11, August.
    2. Jain, Gaurav & Gaeth, Gary J. & Nayakankuppam, Dhananjay & Levin, Irwin P., 2020. "Revisiting attribute framing: The impact of number roundedness on framing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 109-119.
    3. Freling, Traci H. & Vincent, Leslie H. & Henard, David H., 2014. "When not to accentuate the positive: Re-examining valence effects in attribute framing," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 95-109.
    4. Duxbury, Darren, 2012. "Sunk costs and sunk benefits: A re-examination of re-investment decisions," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 144-156.
    5. Betsch, Tilmann & Haberstroh, Susanne & Molter, Beate & Glockner, Andreas, 2004. "Oops, I did it again--relapse errors in routinized decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 93(1), pages 62-74, January.
    6. Gregory Owen Thomas & Wouter Poortinga & Elena Sautkina, 2016. "Habit Discontinuity, Self-Activation, and the Diminishing Influence of Context Change: Evidence from the UK Understanding Society Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-16, April.
    7. Anne-Sophie Chaxel & J. Edward Russo & Neda Kerimi, 2013. "Preference-driven biases in decision makers' information search and evaluation," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(5), pages 561-576, September.
    8. Levin, Irwin P. & Schneider, Sandra L. & Gaeth, Gary J., 1998. "All Frames Are Not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 149-188, November.
    9. Jensen, Are & Clausen, Tommy H., 2017. "Origins and emergence of exploration and exploitation capabilities in new technology-based firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 163-175.
    10. Daniella Laureiro‐Martínez & Stefano Brusoni, 2018. "Cognitive flexibility and adaptive decision‐making: Evidence from a laboratory study of expert decision makers," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 1031-1058, April.
    11. Daniella Laureiro-Martinez, 2014. "Cognitive Control Capabilities, Routinization Propensity, and Decision-Making Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1111-1133, August.
    12. Karevold, Knut Ivar & Teigen, Karl Halvor, 2010. "Progress framing and sunk costs: How managers' statements about project progress reveal their investment intentions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 719-731, August.
    13. Bragger, Jennifer DeNicolis & Bragger, Donald & Hantula, Donald A. & Kirnan, Jean, 1998. "Hyteresis and Uncertainty: The Effect of Uncertainty on Delays to Exit Decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 229-253, June.
    14. Mandy M Cheng & Habib Mahama, 2011. "The impact of capital proposal guidelines and perceived preparer biases on reviewers’ investment evaluation decisions," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 36(3), pages 349-370, December.
    15. Ku, Gillian, 2008. "Learning to de-escalate: The effects of regret in escalation of commitment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 221-232, March.
    16. Kathryn Kadous & Lisa M. Sedor, 2004. "The Efficacy of Third†Party Consultation in Preventing Managerial Escalation of Commitment: The Role of Mental Representations," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(1), pages 55-82, March.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:215-228 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Vincenzo Carrieri & Maria De Paola & Francesca Gioia, 2021. "The health-economy trade-off during the Covid-19 pandemic: Communication matters," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-25, September.
    19. Britta Herbig & Andreas Glöckner, 2009. "Experts and Decision Making: First Steps Towards a Unifying Theory of Decision Making in Novices, Intermediates and Experts," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2009_02, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    20. Quinn Andrew Wesley Keefer, 2021. "Did the 2011 Change to NFL Rookie Compensation Alter How Sunk Costs Affect Utilization?," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(4), pages 387-411, May.
    21. Peter Gordon Roetzel & Burkhard Pedell & Daniel Groninger, 2020. "Information load in escalation situations: combustive agent or counteractive measure?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(5), pages 757-786, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:108:y:2009:i:2:p:175-186. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.