2,898
edits
Sunk Cost Fallacy: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:Sunk cost Fallacy.png|alt=Sunk cost Fallacy|thumb|'''Figure 1'''. The coins behind the coin pusher glass are a highly apparent sunk cost.]] | |||
'''The Sunk Cost Fallacy is when someone continues doing something because of the effort they already put in it, regardless of whether the additional costs outweigh the potential benefits.''' It is the psychological mechanism which perpetuates the gambling industry. | '''The Sunk Cost Fallacy is when someone continues doing something because of the effort they already put in it, regardless of whether the additional costs outweigh the potential benefits.''' It is the psychological mechanism which perpetuates the gambling industry. | ||
=== A simple example... === | === A simple example... === | ||
Picture yourself at a carnival, playing a coin pusher game ('''Figure 1'''). Each time you drop in a coin, you're dazzled by the potential winnings stacking up, rather than noticing the hidden magnet that's actually preventing the coins from falling your way. | |||
=== A famous example.. === | === A famous example.. === | ||
[[File:Concorde.png|alt=The Concorde as an example of sunk cost fallacy.|thumb|'''Figure | [[File:Concorde.png|alt=The Concorde as an example of sunk cost fallacy.|thumb|'''Figure 2'''. The Concorde as an example of sunk cost fallacy.]] | ||
The Concorde ('''Figure | The Concorde ('''Figure 2''') was a supersonic passenger airliner developed in the 1960's and 70's by British and French aviation companies. The project was launched with great excitement, as the Concorde promised to revolutionize air travel by making it possible to fly faster than the speed of sound. However, as the project progressed, it became clear that the costs of developing and operating the Concorde were much higher than anticipated. Despite these challenges, the project continued to move forward, and the Concorde was eventually built and put into service in 1976. This is a prime example of the sunk cost fallacy. | ||
The sunk cost fallacy is a cognitive bias that causes people to make decisions based on the amount of resources they have already invested in a project or activity, rather than on the potential benefits or risks of continuing with it. In other words, people tend to believe that if they have invested a lot of time, money, or effort in something, they should continue to invest in it, even if the costs and risks outweigh the potential benefits. | The sunk cost fallacy is a cognitive bias that causes people to make decisions based on the amount of resources they have already invested in a project or activity, rather than on the potential benefits or risks of continuing with it. In other words, people tend to believe that if they have invested a lot of time, money, or effort in something, they should continue to invest in it, even if the costs and risks outweigh the potential benefits. | ||