Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

The sunk-cost or escalation effect leads a decision maker to continue a course of action into which an initial investment of time, thought, or expense has been “sunk,” even after that particular course of action has proven to be a suboptimal choice. Like most cognitive heuristics, maintaining an unsuccessful course of action is often adaptive, as positive outcomes can take time to accrue, and there are always costs involved in switching. However, it can be counterproductive when the decision is based solely (or primarily) on the mere fact of having made a large prior investment instead of on an objective appraisal of current and future prospects.

Sunk Costs in Medical Decisions

Every day, medical practitioners are faced with making decisions where no clearly right or wrong answers exist. These decisions frequently involve weighing evidence in evaluating competing hypotheses, estimating probabilities, and predicting uncertain outcomes—for example, which test should be ordered to confirm or eliminate a particular diagnosis; should a patient continue with a given medication or switch to an alternative one; do the signs and symptoms presented indicate Disease A, Disease B, or no disease at all? Research has shown that in making these sorts of decisions, physicians behave in a manner very similar to that of expert decision makers in other domains (e.g., physics, logic, chess); that is to say, rather than using time- and labor-intensive computational procedures, they rely on rules of thumb or heuristics. In doing so, they are able to apply a wealth of accumulated knowledge relatively quickly and efficiently. These heuristics are generally an effective way of allocating limited cognitive resources in dealing with uncertain situations, but they can also introduce reasoning biases that adversely affect a decision. The sunk-cost effect is one example of how heuristics can lead to biased decisions in medical decision making.

This effect has been studied extensively in the fields of economics and behavioral decision making, where numerous studies show that decision makers' commitment to a decision increases as a function of the amount of their initial investment, in money, effort, or time. A number of variables can affect individuals' susceptibility to the sunk-cost effect, including personality. Of particular relevance to medical decision making, individuals with a Type A personality—a disposition shared by many physicians—are more likely to demonstrate the effect. In medical decision making, the sunk-cost effect can have important diagnostic or therapeutic implications on an individual-patient level and perhaps even on a national level when looking at the system of delivering medical care.

Individual-Patient Level

An example of the sunk-cost effect at the patient level is one where the physician recommends that the patient continue with further courses of the same medication even after the patient fails to improve on that medication because of the time and money that the patient has invested or the time and energy that the physician has invested in coming up with the present, apparently inaccurate diagnosis or ineffective treatment plan. Research addressing the sunk-cost effect in physicians' reasoning has asked physicians (medical residents) to evaluate different responses to scenarios where an initial diagnosis or treatment is suspect, as a function of the amount of time and/or money that had already been invested (by varying, e.g., the cost of medication). The results showed that residents were surprisingly good at not allowing the sunk costs to affect their decisions in evaluating medical treatment scenarios, but they were no better than laypeople at preventing the sunk cost bias from affecting their decisions in everyday situations outside the medical realm. Although physicians were not susceptible to the sunk-cost bias in judging medical scenarios, they nonetheless considered it more important to continue the original treatment for purposes of consistency when they, as opposed to another physician, had made the original decisions.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading