Main Article Content

Abstract

A general economic principle is that when evaluating the costs of a decision, sunk costs should not be considered and that the decision-maker should consider only those costs that are incurred as a result of making that decision. However, both anecdotal and empirical evidence has shown that when making decisions, people are influenced by sunk costs, thereby committing the sunk-cost fallacy. A corpus of research has established that this fallacy occurs among different nations and cultures to differing extents or degrees. However, none of the previous research was conducted on Nigerians. This study, therefore, investigates whether Nigerians, too, commit this fallacy and then identifies factors that affect Nigerians’ susceptibility to the fallacy. Employing a binary logit model, it was found that about 49 per cent of the respondents to questions based on a decision-making vignette committed the sunk-cost fallacy. The results also showed that locus of cost responsibility (whether the cost was borne by the decision maker or another person on behalf of the decision maker) and ethnicity (whether the decision maker is Yoruba or not) were significant determinants of susceptibility to sunk-cost fallacy. This suggests that in Nigeria sunk-cost fallacy is intrapersonal and more prevalent among the Yorubas than among the Hausas or the Igbos. Therefore, the sunk-cost fallacy is ubiquitous and more likely in personal decisions than decisions made on behalf of others.

Keywords

Nigeria Self-justification Theory Sunk Cost Sunk-cost Effect Sunk-cost Fallacy

Article Details

How to Cite
Biala, M. I. (2022). Determinants of Susceptibility to Sunk-Cost Fallacy: A Nigerian Case Study. Management & Economics Research Journal, 4(2), 83-105. https://doi.org/10.48100/merj.2022.231
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX
Share  
Copyright & License  

Copyright (c) 2022 Musa Ilias Biala

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Management & Economics Research Journal is licensed under a (CC BY-NC 4.0).

The following guidelines apply to all users:

  • 1-Individuals may view, download, print, or save Journal content for the purposes of research and teaching.
  • 2-Any use and/or copies of this Journal in whole or in part must include the customary bibliographic citation, including author attribution, date, article title, the Journal name, and its website address.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a (CC BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share and adapt the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

b) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. 

c) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Where authors include such work in an institutional repository or on their website, we request that they include a statement that acknowledges the Management & Economics Research journal including the name of the journal, the volume and issue, and a web link to the journal item.

Author Biography  
Musa Ilias Biala, Department of Economics and Development Studies, Kwara State University, Malete (Nigeria)

PhD

Cited by
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Akinbobola, O. I., & Ehigie, B. O. (2012). Influence of decision responsibility and consequence on escalation of commitment in corporate investment. International Journal of Applied Psychology, 2(5), 119-125. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ijap.20120205.07
  2. Arkes, H. R., & Ayton, P. (1999). The sunk cost and Concorde effects: Are humans less rational than lower animals? Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 591-600. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.591
  3. Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes, 35(1), 124–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4
  4. Aronson, E. 1968. Dissonance theory: Progress and problems. In R. Abelson, E. Aronson, W. McGuire, T. Newcomb, M. Rosenberg & P. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook, 5–27. Chicago: Rand McNally.
  5. Astebro, T., Jeffrey, S. A., & Adomdza, G. K. (2007). Inventor perseverance after being told to quit: The role of cognitive biases. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20(3), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.554
  6. Baron, J., Granato, L., Spranca, M., & Teubal, E. (1993). Decision-making biases in children and early adolescents: Exploratory studies. Merrill–Palmer Quarterly, 39, 22–46.
  7. Bazerman, M. H., Beekun, R. I., & Schoorman, F. D. (1982). Performance evaluation in a dynamic context: A laboratory study of the impact of a prior commitment to the ratee. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67(6), 873–876. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.6.873
  8. Besanko, D., & Braeutigan, R. R. (2011). Microeconomics (4th ed.). New York: John Wiley.
  9. Bernard, H. R. (2006). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (4th Ed.). Oxford: AltaMira Press.
  10. Biala, M. I. (2022, in press). Do decision-making professionals commit the sunk-cost fallacy? Malete Journal of Accounting and Finance, 3(1).
  11. Bornstein, B. H., & Chapman, G. B. (1995). Learning lessons from sunk costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1(4), 251-269. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.1.4.251
  12. Brockner, J. (1992). The escalation of commitment to a failing course of action: Toward theoretical progress. The Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 39-61. https://doi.org/10.2307/258647
  13. Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125 (3), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.3.367
  14. Chow, C. W., Harrison, P., Lindquist, T., & Wu, A. (1997). Escalating commitment to unprofitable projects: Replication and cross-cultural extension. Management Accounting Research, 8(3), 347-361. https://doi.org/10.1006/mare.1996.0046
  15. Conlon, D. E., & Garland, H. (1993). The role of project completion information in resource allocation decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 36(2), 402–413. https://doi.org/10.5465/256529
  16. Davis, M., & Bobko, P. (1986). Contextual effects on escalation processes in public sector decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(1), 121-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(86)90048-8
  17. Dawkins, R., & T. R. Carlisle. (1976). Parental investment, mate desertion and a fallacy. Nature, 262(5564), 131–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/262131a0
  18. Falchetta, G. (2015). The sunk cost fallacy: A literature review and an empirical test. (Unpublished bachelor thesis). School of Economics and Management, Free University of Bolzano.
  19. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503620766
  20. Forrest, V., & Hasseldine, J. (2016). Escalating commitment: business investments and CSR. Honors Theses and Capstones. 281. https://scholars.unh.edu/honors/281
  21. Garland, H. (1990). Throwing good money after bad: The effect of sunk costs on the decision to escalate commitment to an ongoing project. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(6), 728-731. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.6.728
  22. Garland, H., & Newport, S. (1991) Effects of absolute and relative sunk costs on the decision to persist with a course of action. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48(1), 55-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90005-E
  23. Geiger, S. W., Robertson, C. J., & Irwin, J. G. (1998). The impact of cultural values on escalation of commitment. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 6(2), 165-176. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb028883
  24. Heng, C. S., Tan, B. C. Y., & Wei, K. K. (2003). De-escalation of commitment in software projects: Who matters? What matters? Information & Management, 41(1), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(03)00030-2
  25. Jeffrey, C. (1992). The relation of judgment, personal involvement, and experience in the audit of bank loans. Accounting Review, 67, 802–819.
  26. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
  27. Keil, M., Tan, B. C. Y., Wei, K.-K., Saarinen, T., Tuunainen. V., & Wassenaar, A. (2000). A cross-cultural study on escalation of commitment behavior in software projects. MIS Quarterly, 24(2), 299-325. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250940
  28. Klaczynski, P. (2001). Framing effects on adolescent task representations, analytic and heuristic processing, and decision making: Implications for the normative/descriptive gap. Applied Developmental Psychology, 22(3), 289–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0193-3973(01)00085-5
  29. Larrick, R. P., Nisbett, R. E., & Morgan, J. N. (1993). Who uses the cost-benefit rules of choice? Implications for the normative status of microeconomic theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 56(3), 331-347. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1993.1058
  30. Maréchal, J.-C. (2010). Editor’s message: the sunk cost fallacy of deep drilling. Hydrogeology Journal 18, 287–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-009-0515-2
  31. Nash, J. S. (2017). The Sunk cost effect: Short-term behavioural evidence in adults. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). The University of Queensland.
  32. Navarro, A. D. & Fantino, E. (2008). The sunk-time effect: An exploration. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22(3), 252-270. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.624
  33. Olivola, C. Y. (2018) The interpersonal sunk-cost effect. Psychological Science, 29(7),1072-1083. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0956797617752641
  34. Parfit, D. (1984). Reasons and persons. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  35. Pattison, K. F., Zentall, T. R., & Watanabe, S. (2012). Sunk cost: pigeons (Columba livia), too, show bias to complete a task rather than shift to another. Journal of comparative psychology (Washington, D.C.: 1983), 126(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023826
  36. Peterson, R. A. (2001). On the use of college students in social science research: insights from a second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 28(3), 450–461. https://doi.org/10.1086/323732
  37. Rego, S., Arantes, J., & Magalhães, P. (2016). Is there a sunk cost effect in committed relationships? Current Psychology, 37, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9529-9
  38. Roth, S., Thomas, R. & Straus, L. (2015). On the sunk-cost effect in economic decision-making: A meta-analytic review. Business Research, 8, 99-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-014-0014-8
  39. Soman, D. (2001). The mental accounting of sunk time costs: Why time is not like money. Journal of Behavioural Decision Making, 14(3), 169-185. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.370
  40. Schreiber-Gregory, D, & Bader, K. (2018). Logistic and linear regression assumptions: Violation recognition and control. Southeast SAS User Group (SESUG). Conference Paper 247, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341354759.
  41. Schmidt, J. B., & Calantone, R. J. (2002). Escalation of commitment during new product development. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 30, 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/03079459994362
  42. Schulz, A. K. D., & Cheng, M. M. (2002). Persistence in capital budgeting reinvestment decisions – personal responsibility antecedent and information asymmetry moderator: A note. Accounting and Finance, 42(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-629X.00004
  43. Sleesman, D. J., Conlon, D. E., McNamara, G., & Miles, J. E. (2012). Cleaning up the big muddy: A meta-analytic review of the determinants of escalation of commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 541–562. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.0696
  44. Sleesman, D. J., Lennard, A. C., McNamara, G., & Colon, D. E. (2018). Putting escalation of commitment in context: A multilevel review and analysis. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 178–207. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0046.
  45. Staw, B. M. (1976). Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(1), 27-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2
  46. Staw, B. M. (2016). Stumbling toward a social psychology of organizations: An autobiographical look at the direction of organizational research. The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062524
  47. Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1989). Understanding behavior in escalation situations. Science, 246(4927), 216-220. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.246.4927.216
  48. Strough, J., de Bruin, W. B., Parker, A. M., Karns, T., Lemaster, P., Pichayayothin, N., & Stoiko, R. (2016). What were they thinking? Reducing sunk-cost bias in a life-span sample. Psychology and Aging, 31(7), 724-736. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000130
  49. Strough, J., Mehta, C. M., Mcfall, J. P., & Schuller, K. L. (2008). Are older adults less subject to the sunk-cost fallacy than younger adults? Psychological Science, 19(7), 650-652. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02138.x
  50. Sweis, B. M., Abraham, S. V., Schmidt, B. J., Seeland, K. D., MacDonald, A. W., Thomas, M. J., & Redish, A. D. (2018). Sensitivity to “sunk costs” in mice, rats, and humans. Science, 361(6398), 178–181. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar8644
  51. Thaler, R. (1980). Toward s positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization, 1(1), 39-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7
  52. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453-458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683
  53. Webley, P., & Plaisier, Z. (1998). Mental accounting in childhood. Citizenship, Social and Economic Education, 3(2), 55-64. https://doi.org/10.2304/csee.1998.3.2.55
  54. Whyte, G. (1993). Escalating commitment in individual and group decision making: A prospect theory approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54(3), 430–455. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1993.1018
  55. Whyte, G. (1986). Escalating commitment to a course of action: A reinterpretation. The Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 311-321. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1986.4283111
  56. Wong, K. (2005). The role of risk in making decisions under escalation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(4), 584-607. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00236.x
  57. Wooldridge, J. M. (2006). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (3rd ed.) Mason: Thomson South-Western
  58. Yoder, C. Y., Mancha, R. & Agrawal, N. (2014). Culture-related factors affect sunk cost bias. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 19(4), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0101086
  59. Zhang, L., & Baumeister, R. F. (2006). Your money or your self-esteem: Threatened egotism promotes costly entrapment in losing endeavors. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(7), 881–893. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167206287120
  60. Zeng, J., Zhang, Q., Chen, C., Yu, R., & Gong, Q. (2013). An fMRI study on sunk cost effect. Brain Research, 1519, 63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2013.05.001

Article Sidebar

Issue
Vol. 4 No. 2 (2022): September, in progress
Article History
Submitted 09 June 2022
Accepted 21 July 2022
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 117 Download : 49

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.