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

Volumn 100, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 165-173

  Avila, Raul ^a   Yankelevitz, Rachelle L ^b   Gonzalez, Juan C ^a   Hackenberg, Timothy D ^c  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^c REED COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Adult humans; Choice; Fixed ratio schedules; Monetary reinforcers; Sunk cost

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADULT HUMANS; ARTICLE; CHOICE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES; HUMAN; MALE; MONETARY REINFORCERS; PROBABILITY; REINFORCEMENT; REWARD; SUNK COST;

ADULT HUMANS; CHOICE; FIXED-RATIO SCHEDULES; MONETARY REINFORCERS; SUNK COST;

ADULT; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PROBABILITY; REINFORCEMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULE; REWARD;

EID: 84884596063     PISSN: 00225002     EISSN: 19383711     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jeab.42     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Arkes, H. R.,&Ayton, P. (1999). The sunk cost and concorde effects: are humans less rational than lower animals?. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 591-600.
2. Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 124-140.
3. Avila-Santibanez, R., Gonzalez-Montiel, J. C., Miranda-Hernandez, P., & Guzman-Gonzalez, M. D. (2010). Stimuli effects on optimal behavior in a sunk cost situation with pigeons. Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis, 36, 17-29.
4. Baker, F., & Rachlin, H. (2002). Teaching and learning in a probabilistic prisoner's dilemma. Behavioural Processes, 57, 211-226.
5. Bowen, M. G. (1987). The escalation phenomenon reconsidered: Decision dilemmas or decision errors?. Academy of Management Review, 12, 52-66.
6. Bragger, J. D., Bragger, D., Hantula, D. A., & Kirnan, J. (1998). Hysteresis and uncertainty: The effect of uncertainty on delays to exit decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74, 229-253.
7. Fantino, E., Kanevsky, I. G., & Charlton, S. R. (2005). Teaching pigeons to commit base-rate neglect. Psychological Science, 16, 820-825.
8. Fantino, E., & Stolarz-Fantino, S. (2005). Decision-making: context matters. Behavioural Processes, 69, 165-171.
9. Macaskill, A. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2012a). The sunk cost effect with pigeons: some determinants of decisions about persistence. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 97, 85-100.
10. Macaskill, A. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2012b). Providing a reinforcement history that reduces the sunk cost effect. Behavioural Processes, 89, 212-218.
11. Macaskill, A. C., & Hackenberg, T. D. (2013). Optimal and non-optimal choice in a laboratory-based sunk-cost task with humans: A cross-species replication. Manuscript submitted for publication.
12. McCain, B. E. (1986). Continuing investment under conditions of failure: A laboratory study of the limits to escalation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 280-284.
13. Magalhães, P., & White, K. S. (2013). Sunk cost and work ethic effects reflect suboptimal choice between different work requirements. Behavioural Processes, 94, 55-59.
14. Magalhães, P., White, K. S., Stewart, T., Beeby, E., & van der Vliet, W. (2012). Suboptimal choice in nonhuman animals: Rats commit the sunk cost error. Learning and Behavior, 40, 195-206.
15. Navarro, A. D., & Fantino, E. (2005). The sunk cost effect in pigeons and humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 83, 1-13.
16. Pattison, K. F., Zentall, T. R., & Watanabe, S. (2012). Pigeons (Columba livia), too, show bias to complete a task rather than shift to another. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126, 1-9.