Sunk costs and sunk benefits: A re-examination of re-investment decisions

Abstract Prior experimental studies supporting the prospect theory explanation of the sunk-cost effect manipulate the framing of the initial investment, describing it either in neutral terms or as a prior loss. This paper subjects the prospect theory explanation to further examination, but takes an alternative experimental approach based on the differential risk taking behaviour predicted by prospect theory’s S-shaped value function. The experiments manipulate whether an initial investment produces a sunk cost (prior loss) or a sunk benefit (prior gain) and investigate the impact of this on the likelihood of authorising an incremental investment held constant across treatment conditions. To ensure the results are robust to the type of incremental investment, two experiments are conducted across which the outcomes of the incremental investment are manipulated to produce poor or good investment opportunities. In all cases the results fail to support a higher likelihood of authorising the incremental investment following a sunk cost than a sunk benefit. In isolation, therefore, prospect theory is unable to explain fully the sunk-cost effect.

[1]  John Dickhaut,et al.  Escalation Errors and the Sunk Cost Effect: An Explanation Based on Reputation and Information Asymmetries , 1989 .

[2]  P. Slovic,et al.  Relative importance of probabilities and payoffs in risk taking , 1968 .

[3]  Bruce E. McCain.  Continuing Investment Under Conditions of Failure: A Laboratory Study of the Limits to Escalation , 1986 .

[4]  H. Lindman.  Analysis of variance in complex experimental designs , 1974 .

[5]  Hal R. Arkes,et al.  The role of probability of success estimates in the sunk cost effect , 2000 .

[6]  Glen Whyte,et al.  Escalating Commitment in Individual and Group Decision Making: A Prospect Theory Approach , 1993 .

[7]  Kimberly K. Moreno,et al.  The Impact of Affective Reactions on Risky Decision Making in Accounting Contexts , 2002 .

[8]  Chee W. Chow,et al.  Escalating Commitment to Unprofitable Projects: Replication and Cross-Cultural Extension , 1997 .

[9]  William T. Harbaugh,et al.  Risk Attitudes of Children and Adults: Choices Over Small and Large Probability Gains and Losses , 2002 .

[10]  D. Soman.  The mental accounting of sunk time costs: Why time is not like money. , 2001 .

[11]  Z. Shapira.  Risk Taking: A Managerial Perspective , 1995 .

[12]  H. Garland.  Throwing Good Money After Bad: The Effect of Sunk Costs on the Decision to Escalate Commitment to an Ongoing Project , 1990 .

[13]  B. Huberman,et al.  Searching for the sunk cost fallacy , 2007 .

[14]  J. Frank Yates,et al.  The risk construct. , 1992 .

[15]  Richard M. S. Wilson,et al.  ENTRAPMENT AND ESCALATING COMMITMENT IN INVESTMENT DECISION MAKING: A REVIEW☆ , 1997 .

[16]  B. M. Staw.  The Escalation of Commitment To a Course of Action , 1981 .

[17]  Amar Cheema,et al.  The Effect of Windfall Gains on the Sunk-Cost Effect , 2001 .

[18]  Marinus J. Bouwman.  Expert vs novice decision making in accounting: A summary☆ , 1984 .

[19]  Chris Carr,et al.  EXPERTISE AND LEARNING: AN ALTERNATIVE PERSPECTIVE ON THE THEORY–PRACTICE DEBATE , 1998 .

[20]  Hun-Tong Tan,et al.  Sunk Cost Effects: The Influences of Instruction and Future Return Estimates , 1995 .

[21]  G. Northcraft,et al.  Opportunity costs and the framing of resource allocation decisions , 1986 .

[22]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[23]  Kevin Keasey,et al.  Mental accounting and decision making: Evidence under reverse conditions where money is spent for time saved , 2005 .

[24]  H. Arkes,et al.  The Psychology of Sunk Cost , 1985 .

[25]  John W. Payne,et al.  Relation of perceived risk to preferences among gambles. , 1975 .

[26]  William Remus,et al.  Graduate students as surrogates for managers in experiments on business decision making , 1986 .

[27]  R. Thaler.  Toward a positive theory of consumer choice , 1980 .

[28]  R. Ashton,et al.  Students As Surrogates In Behavioral Accounting Research - Some Evidence , 1980 .

[29]  Mandy M. Cheng,et al.  Persistence in Capital Budgeting Reinvestment Decisions - Personal Responsibility Antecedent and Information Asymmetry Moderator: A Note , 2002 .

[30]  Barry M. Staw,et al.  Knee-deep in the Big Muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. , 1976 .

[31]  Budgeting decisions as a function of framing: an application of prospect theory's reflection effect , 1991 .

[32]  Gregory A. Liyanarachchi,et al.  Comparing the investment decisions of accounting practitioners and students: an empirical study on the adequacy of student surrogates , 2005 .

[33]  Glen Whyte,et al.  Escalating Commitment to a Course of Action: A Reinterpretation , 1986 .

[34]  David J. Sharp,et al.  Project Escalation and Sunk Costs: A test of the International Generalizability of Agency and Prospect Theories , 1997 .

[35]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[36]  Hun-Tong Tan,et al.  Financial Budgets and Escalation Effects , 2002 .

[37]  Peter Booth,et al.  The Effects of Hurdle Rates on the Level of Escalation of Commitment in Capital Budgeting , 2003 .

[38]  The Sunk-Time Effect: An Exploration. , 2009, Journal of behavioral decision making.

[39]  Christine A. Denison.  Real Options and Escalation of Commitment: A Behavioral Analysis of Capital Investment Decisions , 2009 .

[40]  M. W. Nelson,et al.  Experimental Research in Financial Accounting , 2001 .

[41]  S. Sitkin,et al.  Determinants of Risky Decision-Making Behavior: A Test of the Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions and Propensity , 1995 .

[42]  M. Zeelenberg,et al.  A reverse sunk cost effect in risky decision making: Sometimes we have too much invested to gamble , 1997 .

[43]  R. Thaler,et al.  Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: the effects of prior outcomes on risky choice , 1990 .