SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Econder Uluslararası Akademik Dergi / 2026 / Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1

Sunk Cost Effect: Being a Prisoner of Past Decisions

Batık Maliyet Etkisi: Geçmiş Kararların Mahkûmu Olmak

Gökben Bayramoğlu(Hitit Üniversitesi)0000-0002-6880-6903
Pages
72–93
Publication Date
2020-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, the intention to avoid wasting resources was found to be effective in the sunk cost effect.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:If the conditions have changed, changing the decision may increase future benefit.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In Scenario 1, 64% of the participants made a rational decision and chose the Bodrum Holiday.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, the intention to avoid wasting resources was found to be effective in the sunk cost effect.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:: Maliyet · Batık Maliyet · Karar

Abstract

If the conditions have changed, changing the decision may increase future benefit. However, people allow the influence of current decisions from previous investments. This is described as sunk costs. The aim of this study is to explain the sunk cost effect. Two hundred ninety-four managers working in the public/private sectors were reached by easy sampling. Participants were asked about three hypothetical scenario. Chi-square and correlation analyze were used in the analyzes. In Scenario 1, 64% of the participants made a rational decision and chose the Bodrum Holiday. In Scenario 2 and 3, the participants were observed to be affected by the sunk-cost effect. In the case of a high level of investment, 91.8% of the participants decided to continue the project by sunk cost effect while in the case of low-level investment 46% of the participants decided to stop the investment. In addition, the intention to avoid wasting resources was found to be effective in the sunk cost effect.

Özet

Şartlar değiştiyse kararı değiştirmek gelecekteki faydayı arttırabilir. Ancak insanlar genellikle önceki yaptıkları yatırımlarının, şu andaki kararlarını etkilemelerine izin vermektedir. Bu durum “batık maliyet” olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, “batık maliyet” etkisini açıklamaktır. Araştırma kapsamında, kamu/özel sektörde yönetici olan 294 kişiye kolayda örneklem yoluyla ulaşılmıştır. Katılımcılara, kullanım/karar gelişimine ilişkin varsayımsal 3 senaryo sorulmuştur. Analizlerde ki-kare ve korelasyon analizlerinden yararlanılmıştır. Senaryo 1’de katılımcıların %64’ü rasyonel bir karar vererek daha çok eğleneceklerini düşündükleri Bodrum Tatilini tercih etmiştir. Senaryo 2 ve 3’te katılımcıların batık maliyet etkisinde kaldıkları gözlemlenmiştir. Yüksek yatırım düzeyinde, katılımcıların %91,8’i batık maliyet etkisi altında kalarak projeyi devam ettirirken; düşük yatırım düzeyinde katılımcıların %46’sı yatırımı durdurma kararı vermiştir. Ayrıca batık maliyet etkisinin ortaya çıkmasında “kaynakları israf etmiş olmamak” niyetinin çok etkili olduğu tespit edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bayramoğlu, G. (2020). Sunk Cost Effect: Being a Prisoner of Past Decisions. Econder Uluslararası Akademik Dergi, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 1, 72–93. https://doi.org/10.35342/econder.671750

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (33)

  1. Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The Psychology of Sunk Cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 124-140.
  2. Bornstein, B. H., & Chapman, G. B. (1995). Learning Lessons from Sunk Costs. Learning of Experimental Psychology, 1(4), s. 251-269.
  3. Braverman, J. A., & Blumenthal-Barby, J. (2012). Assessment of the Sunk-Cost Effect in Clinical Decision-Making. Social Science& Medicine, 75, s. 186-192. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.03.006
  4. Coleman, M. D. (2010). Sunk Cost, Emotion, and Commitment to Education. Curr Psychol, 29, s. 346-356. doi:10.1007/s12144-010-9094-6
  5. Cunha Jr., M., & Caldieraro, F. (2009). Sunk-Cost Effects on Purely Behavioral Investments. Cognitive Science, 33, s. 105-113. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2008.01005.x
  6. Drucker, P. F. (2009). Büyük Değişimler Çağında Yönetim. (Z. Dicleli, Çev.) İstanbul: Optimist Yayınları.
  7. Duxbury, D. (2012). The British Accounting Review, 44, s. 144-156. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2012.07.004
  8. Emich, K. J., & Pyone, J. S. (2018). Let It Go: Positive Affect Attenuates Sunk Cost Bias by Enchancing Cognitive Flexibility. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(4), s. 578-596. doi:10.1002/jcpy.1030
  9. Fujino, J., Fujimoto, S., Kodaka, F., Camerer, C. F., Kawada, R., Tsurumi, K.,. Takahashi, H. (2016). Neural Mechanisms and Personality Correlates of the Sunk Cost Effect. Scientific Reports. doi:0.1038/srep33171
  10. Garland, H., & Conlon, D. E. (1998). Too Close to Quit: The Role of Project Completion in Maintaining Commitment. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28(22), s. 2025-2048.
  11. Haita-Falah, C. (2017). Sunk-Cost Fallacy and Cognitive Ability in Individual Decison Making. Journal of Economic Psychology, 58, s. 44-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2016.12.001 adresinden alındı
  12. Haller, A., & Schwabe, L. (2014). Sunk Costs in the Human Brain. Neurolmage, 97, s. 127-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.04.036 adresinden alındı
  13. Hammond, J. S., Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (2006, Januvary). The Hidden Traps in Decision Making. 11 01, 2018 tarihinde Harvard Business Review: https://hbr.org/2006/01/the-hidden-traps-in-decision-making adresinden alındı
  14. Heath, C. (1995). Escalation and De-escalation of Commitment in Response to Sunk Cost: The Role of Budgeting in Mental Accounting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62(1), s. 38-54.
  15. Jarmolowicz, D. P., Bickel, W. K., Sofis, M. J., Hatz, L. E., & Mueller, E. T. (2016, October). Sunk Costs, Psychological Symptomatology, and Help Seeking. Springerplus, 5(1). doi:10.1186/s40064-016-3402-z
  16. Kahneman, D. (2011). Hızlı ve Yavaş Düşünme (4. Baskı b.). (O. Ç. Deniztekin, & F. N. Deniztekin, Çev.) İstanbul: Varlık Yayınlar.
  17. McAfee, R. P., Mialon, H. M., & Mialon, S. H. (2010, April). Do Sunk Costs Matter? Economic Inquiry, 48(2), s. 323-336.
  18. Navarro, A. D., & Fantiona, E. (2009). The Sunk-Time Effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22, s. 252-270. doi:10.1002/bdm.624
  19. Parayre, R. (1995). The Strategic Implications of Sunk Cost: A Behavioral Perspective. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, s. 417-442.
  20. Pehlivanoğlu, F., & İnce, M. R. (2018, Aralık). Batık Maliyet, Potansiyel Rekabet ve Yarışabilirlik: Denizyolu Taşımacılığı Piyasası Örneği. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(3). doi:10.30798/makuiibf.425245
  21. Rego, S., Arantes, J., & Magalhaes, P. (2018). Is There a Sunk Cost Effect in Committed Relatioanships. Curr Psychol, 37, s. 508-519. doi:10.1007/s12144-016-9529-9
  22. Roth, S., Robbert, T., & Straus, L. (2015). On the Sunk Effect in Economic Desicion-Making: A Meta-Analytic. Business Research, 9, s. 99-138.
  23. Sofis, M. J., Jarmolowicz, D. P., Hudnall, J. L., & Reed, D. D. (2015). On Sunk Cost and Escalation. Psychol Rec, 65, s. 487-494. doi:10.1007/s40732-015-0124-5
  24. 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, s. 27-44.
  25. Steinman, R. B., & Jacobs, E. (2015). Sunk Cost Effects on Consumer Choice. Business Management Dynamics, 4(11), 25-30.
  26. 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), s. 650-654.
  27. Strough, J., Schlosnagle, L., & DiDonato, L. (2011). Understanding Decisions About Sunk Costs From Older and Younger Adults' Perspectives. The Journal of Gerontolgy, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 66(6), s. 681-686. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbr057
  28. Strough, J., Schlosnagle, L., Karns, T., Lemaster, P., & Pichatatothin, N. (2014). No Time to Waste: Restring Life-Span Temporal Horizons Decreases the Sunk-Cost Fallacy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 27, s. 78-94.
  29. Thaler, R. (1980). Toward a Positive Theory of Consumer Choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 39-60.
  30. Thames, E. A. (1996). The Sunk-Cost Effect: The Importance of Context. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11(4), s. 817-826.
  31. Whyte, G. (1993). Escalating Commitment in Individual and Group Decision Making: A Prospect Theory Approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, s. 430-455.
  32. Zeng, J., Zhang, Q., Chen, C., Yu, R., & Gong, Q. (2013). An fMRI Study on Sunk Cost Effect. Brain Research(1519), s. 63-70. doi:dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2013.05.001
  33. Fujino, J., Fujimoto, S., Kodaka, F., Camerer, C. F., Kawada, R., Tsurumi, K.,. Takahashi, H. (2016). Neural Mechanisms and Personality Correlates of the Sunk Cost Effect. Scientific Reports. doi:0.1038/srep33171