Construal level theory and escalation of commitment

Abstract

Escalation of commitment causes people to continue a failing course of action. We study the role of construal level in such escalation of commitment. Consistent with the widely held view of construal level as a primed effect, we employed a commonly used prime for manipulating this construct in a laboratory experiment. Our findings revealed that the prime failed to produce statistically significant differences in construal level, which was measured using the Behavior Identification Form (BIF). Furthermore, there was no effect of the prime on escalation of commitment, or on constructs that have previously been linked to construal level such as the perceived importance of feasibility considerations relative to desirability considerations, and the number of pros and cons that subjects can think of.Interestingly, however, subjects’ actual construal level scores on the BIF were found to significantly affect escalation. Specifically, our findings show that people with a low construal level are less willing to continue a failing project. This relation is mediated by the perceived importance of the feasibility of the project relative to its desirability. For people with a low construal level, the perceived importance of feasibility relative to desirability is higher, which in turn makes escalation of commitment less likely.Our findings are consistent with prior research suggesting that priming construal level may not always be effective. Thus, while construal level has typically been regarded as a state-like variable that can be primed, in this study, we show that construal level may also be considered as a trait.

Are social and traditional entrepreneurial intentions really that different?

“…Schindehutte and Morris, 2016) where students have real-life experiences in concrete contexts (Leitch et al, 2012, as in poverty; are particularly important for promoting psychological closeness and increasing the feasibility of a behavior or event (e.g. Benschop et al, 2020). By taking entrepreneurial action and practicing (Neck et al, 2014) in social and commercially oriented contexts, students decrease the temporal, spatial and hypothetical distance to entrepreneurship, learn to focus on details and thus develop their concrete entrepreneurial mindset.…”

Exploring the determinants of reinvestment decisions: Sense of personal responsibility, preferences, and loss framing

“…The incentivized poker-based task used in the present experiments has several advantages over standard EoC paradigms such as hypothetical investment scenarios (e.g., Staw, 1976;Garland and Newport, 1991;Schulz-Hardt et al, 2009;Feldman and Wong, 2018;Benschop et al, 2020;Lee et al, 2020), or paradigms using Doerflinger et al 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1025181 Frontiers in Psychology 16 frontiersin.org deception (e.g., Strube and Lott, 1984;Schulz-Hardt et al, 2009). The rules of the task are fully and transparently described to the participants.…”

Abstrair ganhos e concretizar perdas: quando a representação mental pode alterar o comportamento dos indivíduos

“…Entretanto, no âmbito geral da representação mental, diversos estudos recentes abordaram o nível de representação mental como um traço de personalidade, onde indivíduos são predispostos a adotar representações abstratas ou concretas com mais frequência (DOGAN;ERDOGAN, 2020;FERNÁNDEZ et al, 2018;MUKHERJEE;UPADHYAY, 2018). Para os fins de estudo da representação como traço, o Formulário de Identificação de Comportamento (VALLACHER; WEGNER, 1989) é frequentemente adotado como ferramenta para mensuração(BENSCHOP et al, 2020;KIRSHNER, 2020;LERMER et al, 2014), porém, a ferramenta foca na representação de ações, somente, e não integra a representação de objetos ou objetivos propriamente ditos. No âmbito deste trabalho, com enfoque comportamento do consumidor, a representação mental será adotada como um estado uma vez que o foco do estudo é estabelecer relações causais com produtos ou mensagens e propagandas que, quando transmitidas aos consumidores, podem induzi-los a diferentes níveis de representação.2.3.2 Nível de Representação Mental e Foco RegulatórioPara união consistente dos conceitos de autorregulação e nível de representação, considera-se, inicialmente, que o foco regulatório sugere que indivíduos com processos de autorregulação diferentes optam por diferentes estratégias e táticas para "cobrir a distância" entre um estado atual e o estado desejado(BADAAN et al, 2020;HIGGINS, 1998).…”