Is there a Sunk Cost Effect in Committed Relationships?

Abstract

The sunk cost effect occurs when a prior investment in one option leads to a continuous investment in that option, despite not being the best decision. The aim of the present paper was to study the role of the sunk cost effect in committed relationships. In Experiment 1, participants (N = 902) were presented with an unhappy relationship scenario in which they needed to make a choice: to stay or end the relationship. Results showed that the likelihood of participants staying in the relationship was higher when money and effort, but not time, had been previously invested in that relationship. In Experiment 2, the time investment was manipulated and the sunk cost was evaluated using a different methodology. Specifically, instead of having a dichotomous decision, participants (N = 275) choose how much time they would be willing to invest in the relationship. Results revealed a sunk time effect, that is, participants were willing to invest more time in a relationship in which more time had already been invested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Arkes, H. R. (1996). The psychology of waste. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9, 213–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arkes, H. R., & Ayton, P. (1999). The sunk cost and Concorde effects: are humans less rational than lower animals? Psychological Bulletin, 125, 591–600. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.591.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 124–140. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bornstein, B. H., & Chapman, G. B. (1995). Learning lessons from sunk costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 251–269. doi:10.1037/1076-898X.1.4.251.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bornstein, B. H., Emler, C., & Chapman, G. B. (1999). Rationality in medical treatment decisions : is there a sunk-cost effect ? Social Science and Medicine, 49, 215–222. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2753.2001.00284.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Braverman, J. A., & Blumenthal-Barby, J. S. (2012). Assessment of the sunk-cost effect in clinical decision-making. Social Science & Medicine, 75, 186–192. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Carpenter, J., Mathews, P. H., & Brown, A. D. (2005). The determinants of sunk cost sensitivity in Students. Middlebury College Economics Discussion Paper NO05–24.

  8. Coleman, M. D. (2009). Sunk cost and commitment to dates arranged online. Current Psychology, 28, 45–54. doi:10.1007/s12144-009-9042-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Coleman, M. D. (2010). Sunk cost, emotion, and commitment to education. Current Psychology, 29, 121–134. doi:10.1007/s12144-010-9094-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cunha, M., & Caldieraro, F. (2009). Sunk-cost effects on purely behavioral investments. Cognitive Science, 3, 105–113. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2008.01005.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Eurostat Statistics Explained (2016). Marriage and divorce statistics. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Marriage_and_divorce_statistics#Further_Eurostat_information.

  12. Fennema, M. G., & Perkins, J. D. (2008). Mental budgeting versus marginal decision making: training, experience and justification effects on decisions involving sunk costs. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 225–239. doi:10.1002/bdm.585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Garland, H., Sandefur, C. A., & Rogers, A. C. (1990). De-escalation of commitment in oil exploration: when sunk costs and negative feedback coincide. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 721–727. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.75.6.721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Goddard, H. W. (2007). Commitment in healthy relationships. The Forum for Family and Consumer Issues [Online], 12 (1). Available from: http://ncsu.edu/ffci/publications/2007/v12-n1-2007-spring/index-v12-n1-may-2007.php.

  15. Goodfriend, W., & Agnew, C. R. (2008) Sunken costs and desired plans: examining different types of investments in close relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(12), 1639–1652.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Huston, T. L. (2009) What’s love got to do with it? Why some marriages succeed and others fail. Personal Relationships, 16(3), 301–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292. doi:10.2307/1914185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kalmijn, M. (2015). How childhood circumstances moderate the long-term impact of divorce on father-child relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77, 921938. doi:10.1111/jomf.12202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Keasey, K., & Moon, P. (2000). Sunk cost effects: a test of the importance of context. Economic Letters, 66, 55–58. doi:10.1016/S0165-1765(99)00179-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Klaczynski, P. A., & Cottrell, J. M. (2004). A dual-process approach to cognitive development: the case of children’s understanding of sunk cost decisions. Thinking & Reasoning, 10, 147–174. doi:10.1080/13546780442000042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Macaskill, A. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2012). Providing a reinforcement history that reduces the sunk cost effect. Behavioural Processes, 89, 212–218. doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2011.11.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Magalhães, P., & White, K. G. (2013). Sunk cost and work ethic effects reflect suboptimal choice between different work requirements. Behavioural Processes, 94, 55–59. doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2012.12.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Magalhães, P., & White, K. G. (2014). The effect of a prior investment on choice: the sunk cost effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Learning and Cognition, 40, 22–37. doi:10.1037/xan0000007.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Moon, H. (2001). Looking forward and looking back: integrating completion and sunk-cost effects within an escalation-of-commitment progress decision. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 104–113. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.1.104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Navarro, A. D., & Fantino, E. (2005). The sunk cost effect in pigeons and humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 83, 1–13. doi:10.1901/jeab.2005.21-04.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Navarro, A. D., & Fantino, E. (2007). The role of discriminative stimuli in the sunk cost effect. Mexican Journal of Behavior Anaylsis, 33, 19–29.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Navarro, A. D., & Fantino, E. (2009). The sunk-time effect: an exploration. Journal of Behavior Decision Making, 270, 252–270. doi:10.1002/bdm.624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rachlin, H. (2000). The science of self-control. Harvard University press.

  30. Skerrett, K., & Fergus, K. (2015). Couple resilience: emerging perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Soman, D. (2001). The mental accounting of sunk time costs : why time is not like money. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14, 169–186. doi:10.1002/bdm.624.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Staw, B. M., & Fox, V. F. (1977). Escalation: the determinants of commitment to a chosen course of action. Human Relations, 30, 431–450. doi:10.1177/001872677703000503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Staw, B. M., & Hoang, H. (1995). Sunk costs in the NBA: why draft order affects playing time and survival in professional basketball. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 474–494. doi:10.2307/2393794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 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, 650–652. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02138.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453–458. doi:10.1126/science.7455683.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions rational choice and the framing of decisions. The Journal of Business, 59, S251–S278. doi:10.1086/296365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Weaver, J. M., & Schofield, T. J. (2015). Mediation and moderation of divorce effects on children’s behavior problems. Journal of Family Psychology, 29, 39–48. doi:10.1037/fam0000043.

  38. Yoder, C. Y., Mancha, R., & Agrawal, N. (2014). Culture-related factors affect sunk cost bias. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 19, 105–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paula Magalhães.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rego, S., Arantes, J. & Magalhães, P. Is there a Sunk Cost Effect in Committed Relationships?. Curr Psychol 37, 508–519 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-016-9529-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Sunk cost effect
  • Time
  • Effort
  • Money
  • Committed relationships