IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v22y2005i4p1063-1092.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evidence of Choice Avoidance in Capital†Investment Judgements

Author

Listed:
  • Kimberly M. Sawers

Abstract

Evaluating capital†investment decisions is an important function of managerial accountants. There is anecdotal evidence, however, that managers avoid making decisions or delay decisions, which is costly in terms of time, effort, and lost opportunities. Prior research has shown that choice avoidance among nonprofessionals making personal decisions is associated with having to choose between alternatives with very different features or that require trade†offs of very important goals (choice difficulty). It is unclear, however, whether experienced managers, using the analytical decision tools at their disposal, respond in the same way as nonprofessionals when making accounting decisions. Hence, this study examines whether increased choice difficulty increases negative affect in the capital†investment decision†making process and, as a result, the tendency of managers to avoid choice even when analytical decision tools are used. In an experiment with 120 executives, participants facing more difficult decisions reported they felt more worried, nervous, uneasy, and anxious and had a greater desire to postpone making the decision than participants in a control group. Participants provided with a decision aid designed to help them focus their cognitive effort reported a lower desire to postpone making the decision than participants in the choice†difficulty conditions without the decision aid. I conclude by discussing the result's implications for managers and accountants.

Suggested Citation

  • Kimberly M. Sawers, 2005. "Evidence of Choice Avoidance in Capital†Investment Judgements," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(4), pages 1063-1092, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:22:y:2005:i:4:p:1063-1092
    DOI: 10.1506/2UKM-AW62-BNA6-0AP6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1506/2UKM-AW62-BNA6-0AP6
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1506/2UKM-AW62-BNA6-0AP6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Shujun Ding & Philip Beaulieu, 2011. "The Role of Financial Incentives in Balanced Scorecard‐Based Performance Evaluations: Correcting Mood Congruency Biases," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(5), pages 1223-1247, December.
    2. Lisa-Marie Wibbeke & Maik Lachmann, 2020. "Psychology in management accounting and control research: an overview of the recent literature," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 275-328, September.
    3. Stinshoff, Volker, 2020. "Selbst gemacht ist gut gemacht? Der Einfluss von Self-Service Reporting auf die Qualität von Managemententscheidungen," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 5(2), pages 223-245.
    4. Ferretti, Riccardo & Venturelli, Valeria & Pedrazzoli, Alessia, 2021. "Do multiple competing offerings on a crowdfunding platform influence investment behavior?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Narayanan, Venkateshwaran & Baird, Kevin & Tay, Richard, 2021. "Investment decisions: The trade-off between economic and environmental objectives," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    7. Blunden, Hayley & Steffel, Mary, 2023. "The downside of decision delegation: When transferring decision responsibility incurs interpersonal costs," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:coacre:v:22:y:2005:i:4:p:1063-1092. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.