Let It Go: Positive Affect Attenuates Sunk Cost Bias by Enhancing Cognitive Flexibility

Abstract

Sunk cost bias is a pervasive problem in consumer decision making. It occurs when people continue to invest resources toward unsuccessful outcomes merely because they previously invested in them. This tendency exists because people devote too much attention to prior investments without considering how other factors may impact their decision outcome. While many suggested interventions to attenuate sunk cost bias involve altering cognitive processes, we examine an alternate affective route. Specifically, we propose that inducing positive affect attenuates sunk cost bias by naturally facilitating flexible thought processes. Across four studies, using hypothetical and real decision tasks, we find that positive affect induced in three different ways consistently attenuates sunk cost bias involving money, time, and effort investments. Further, we demonstrate that this occurs because people experiencing positive affect have enhanced cognitive flexibility. They consider more relevant decision factors and perceive sunk cost as having less of an influence on their decision outcomes. Then, in a fifth study, we show that a thought intervention promoting flexibility can attenuate consumers’ suboptimal commitment tendency in a field setting.

That’s why they didn’t let it go: exploring the roots of women entrepreneurs’ escalation of commitment

“…In general, escalation of commitment encompasses a wide range of business-related decisions, from decisions made by owner-managers of private family firms (Woods et al, 2012) to project management (Whyte, 1986), ethical decision-making processes (Street et al, 1997), new product development (Schmidt and Calantone, 2002) and consumers' decisions (Emich and Pyone, 2018). Furthermore, escalation is the result of ignoring negative feedback to continue a previously chosen strategy (Keil et al, 2007) and is influenced by feeling personal responsibility for negative consequences (Staw and Fox, 1977), environmental ambiguity and environmental complexity (Bowen, 1987), the allocated time and money (Åstebro et al, 2007) as well as the individual's assessment of the probability of success (Hung et al, 2011).…”

Addressing Cognitive Bias in Systems Engineering Teams

“…This effect is often observed in individual decision-making when people display a tendency to continue an effort after resources have been invested (Arkes & Blumer, 1985). This tendency has been shown to decrease with age (Strough et al, 2016) and is also negatively associated with optimism (Emich & Pyone, 2018). In systems engineering, utility theory says that it is rational in decision-making to disregard any state of the world that yields the same outcome regardless of one's choice (including past or current states).…”

Well, I feel differently: The importance of considering affective patterns in groups

“…This is important because group members have the opportunity to experience a multitude of different affectively laden stimuli over the course of the day. In this vein, the individual affect literature is built on laboratory experiments that provide consistent evidence that people's affective state changes when even briefly exposed to an affectively laden stimulus such as depressing music, a funny video, or thinking about past positive or negative experiences (Coan & Allen, ; Emich & Pyone, ; Gross & Levenson, ; Vincent, Emich, & Goncalo, ). People talk to their families and friends.…”