Effects of process and outcome accountability on escalating commitment: A two-study replication.

Area of Science:

• Decision Science
• Organizational Behavior
• Social Psychology

Background:

• Escalating commitment is a bias where decision-makers persist in failing ventures.
• Previous research suggested accountability for decision processes reduces, while outcome accountability increases, this bias.

Purpose of the Study:

• To extend prior findings on escalating commitment by testing interactive effects of process and outcome accountability.
• To investigate the robustness of Simonson and Staw's (1992) seminal findings on accountability and escalating commitment.

Main Methods:

• Two experiments were conducted, closely resembling the original study's materials and procedures.
• The second experiment employed a stronger accountability manipulation and an increased sample size.
• Participants' decision-making behavior related to escalating commitment was assessed under different accountability conditions.

Main Results:

• Neither experiment successfully replicated the original findings regarding the effects of accountability on escalating commitment.
• No statistically significant effects of accountability for decision processes or outcomes were observed in either experiment.
• The results indicate a potential lack of robustness in the original study's conclusions.

Conclusions:

• The findings question the replicability and generalizability of previous research on accountability interventions for escalating commitment.
• Further research is needed to understand the boundary conditions and mechanisms underlying escalating commitment and accountability.
• Decision-making research should critically evaluate the robustness of established effects.