Skip to main content
Log in

The Sunk Cost Effect in Humans: Procedural Comparisons

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The Psychological Record Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The present study was designed to extend research by Pattison et al. (2012) and compare performance on behavior-based and hypothetical scenario-based sunk cost procedures. Participants (n = 25) completed behavior-based and hypothetical scenario-based tasks to investigate the effects of manipulating percent of task completed on sunk cost behavior. For the behavior-based task, participants played a video game and chose between continuing to engage an initial monster or switching to attack a new monster that arrived. For the hypothetical scenario-based tasks, participants were given a scenario in which continuing on a present course of action entailed losses or was otherwise non-optimal. They were asked at various points of completion how likely they were to invest the remaining funds in the project. Overall, participants responded optimally on the behavior-based task and engaged in sunk cost behavior for the hypothetical scenario-based tasks. One explanation for the difference between these tasks is that the behavior-based task may have more discriminable consequences; the consequences for the hypothetical tasks were unknown. Results from the present study align with previous studies suggesting that stimulus discriminability is a major determinant of non-optimal persistence on a task. It is possible that many supposed instances of the sunk cost effect are better conceptualized as behavior produced by contingencies in contexts with uncertain or probabilistic outcomes. In sunk cost procedures with human participants, verbal behavior appears to play an important role.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are available in the openICPSR repository, https://www.openicpsr.org/openicpsr/project/138943/version/V1/view

References

  • Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35(1), 124–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avila, R., Yankelevitz, R. L., Gonzalez, J. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2013). Varying the costs of sunk costs: Optimal and non-optimal choices in a sunk-cost task with humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 100(2), 165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunha Jr., M., & Caldieraro, F. (2009). Sunk-cost effects on purely behavioral investments. Cognitive Science, 33(1), 105–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Englmaier, F., & Schmöller, A. (2010). Determinants and effects of reserve prices in hattrick auctions (No. 326). SFB/TR 15 Discussion Paper.

  • Friedman, D., Pommerenke, K., Lukose, R., Milam, G., & Huberman, B. A. (2007). Searching for the sunk cost fallacy. Experimental Economics, 10(1), 79–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harman, J., Gonzalez-Valejjo, C., & Vancouver, J. (2020). Dynamic Sunk Costs: Importance matters when opportunity costs are explicit. Journal of Dynamic Decision Making, 6.

  • Ho, T. H., Png, I. P., & Reza, S. (2018). Sunk cost fallacy in driving the world’s costliest cars. Management Science, 64(4), 1761–1778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaskill, A. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2012a). Providing a reinforcement history that reduces the sunk cost effect. Behavioural Processes, 89(3), 212–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaskill, A. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2012b). The sunk cost effect with pigeons: some determinants of decisions about persistence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 97(1), 85–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macaskill, A. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2013). Optimal and nonoptimal choice in a laboratory‐based sunk cost task with humans: A cross‐species replication. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 100(3), 301–315.

  • Magalhães, P., & Geoffrey White, K. (2016). The sunk cost effect across species: A review of persistence in a course of action due to prior investment. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 105(3), 339–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magalhães, P., White, K. G., Stewart, T., Beeby, E., & van der Vliet, W. (2012). Suboptimal choice in nonhuman animals: Rats commit the sunk cost error. Learning & Behavior, 40(2), 195–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nash, J. S., Imuta, K., & Nielsen, M. (2019). Behavioral investments in the short term fail to produce a sunk cost effect. Psychological Reports, 122(5), 1766–1793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Navarro, A. D., & Fantino, E. (2005). The sunk cost effect in pigeons and humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 83(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Navarro, A. D., & Fantino, E. (2007). The role of discriminative stimuli in the sunk cost effect. Revista Mexicana de Análisis de la Conducta, 33(1), 19–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Navarro, A. D., & Fantino, E. (2009). The sunk-time effect: An exploration. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22(3), 252–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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, 126(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, S., Robbert, T., & Straus, L. (2015). On the sunk-cost effect in economic decision-making: a meta-analytic review. Business research, 8(1), 99–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, H. T., & Yates, J. F. (1995). Sunk cost effects: The influences of instruction and future return estimates. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63(3), 311–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yáñez, N., Bouzas, A., & Orduña, V. (2017). Rats behave optimally in a sunk cost task. Behavioural Processes, 140, 47–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded in part by a Graduate Student Research Grant awarded by Western Michigan University and in part by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amanda Devoto.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest

Ethical Approval

All the procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board at our institution, 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.

Code availability

Not applicable

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The first author conducted the study at Western Michigan University and is now at NIDA. This research was conducted in partial fulfillment of the first author’s doctoral degree at Western Michigan University. Thanks to Callum Smith and Dylan Veenkant for their help in data collection and to Jordan Bailey for help with coding the experimental task.

Appendix

Appendix

Hypothetical Scenarios

Radar Blank Plane Scenario

You are president of Aero-Flite Corporation, an airplane manufacturer. You have spent $[1/3/5/7/9] million of the $10 million budgeted for a research project to develop a radar-scrambling device that would render a plane undetectable by conventional radar (in effect, a radar blank plane). The project is [10/30/50/70/90]% complete. Another firm has begun marketing a similar device that takes up less space and is much easier to operate than Aero-Flite’s.

How likely is it (from 0 to 100) that if faced with this situation, you would decide to use the last $9 million dollars to complete this project? Click and drag the slider below to choose your answer.

Building Remodel Scenario

You are the owner and manager of Security Tower, and older downtown office building that overlooks several square blocks in an area that has been slated for urban renewal over the next three years. The City Council has indicated that it would like to create a “greenway” with grass, trees, and a small lake networked with bicycle and jobbing paths. You have begun remodeling your building, anticipating renewed interest in downtown offices, with convenient parking, good access to the cross-town freeway, and a nice view. You have spent $[10k, 30k, 50k,70k, 90k] of the approximately $100,000 you had budgeted for remodeling and the project is [10, 30, 50, 70, 90]% complete. You have just learned that the “greenway” plan has been voted down in favor of a sports stadium that will give all 15 floors of your building a view of cement walls and/or parking lots. Additionally, the increased traffic in the area will clog the freeway access for years, even with the plans to widen adjacent streets.

How likely is it (from 0 to 100) that if faced with this situation, you would decide to use the last $90,000 dollars to complete this project? Click and drag the slider below to choose your answer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Devoto, A., DeFulio, A. The Sunk Cost Effect in Humans: Procedural Comparisons. Psychol Rec 72, 275–283 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00499-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-021-00499-2

Keywords

Navigation