TY - JOUR
T1 - Attenuating the Escalation of Commitment to a Faltering Project in Decision-Making Groups
T2 - An Implementation Intention Approach
AU - Wieber, Frank
AU - Thürmer, J. Lukas
AU - Gollwitzer, Peter M.
N1 - Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the German Research Foundation [DFG, GO 387/14-3].
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2015.
PY - 2015/7/5
Y1 - 2015/7/5
N2 - When groups receive negative feedback on their progress toward a set goal, they often escalate rather than temper their commitment. To attenuate such escalation, we suggest initiating a self-distancing response (i.e., taking the perspective of a neutral observer) by forming implementation intentions when, where, and how to act (i.e., making if-then plans). Implementation intentions should help groups to translate a self-distancing intention into action. In line with this reasoning, only groups that had added implementation intentions to their goal to make optimal investment decisions reduced their high levels of investment (Study 1) or maintained their moderate levels of investment (Study 2) after negative feedback. Groups that had merely formed goal intentions, however, escalated even when their decision goal was supplemented with self-distancing instructions (Study 1), and they escalated as much as control groups without such a goal (Study 2). Implications for improving group decision making by implementation intentions are discussed.
AB - When groups receive negative feedback on their progress toward a set goal, they often escalate rather than temper their commitment. To attenuate such escalation, we suggest initiating a self-distancing response (i.e., taking the perspective of a neutral observer) by forming implementation intentions when, where, and how to act (i.e., making if-then plans). Implementation intentions should help groups to translate a self-distancing intention into action. In line with this reasoning, only groups that had added implementation intentions to their goal to make optimal investment decisions reduced their high levels of investment (Study 1) or maintained their moderate levels of investment (Study 2) after negative feedback. Groups that had merely formed goal intentions, however, escalated even when their decision goal was supplemented with self-distancing instructions (Study 1), and they escalated as much as control groups without such a goal (Study 2). Implications for improving group decision making by implementation intentions are discussed.
KW - escalation of commitment
KW - goals
KW - group decision making
KW - implementation intention
KW - self-regulation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84930427260&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84930427260&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1948550614568158
DO - 10.1177/1948550614568158
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84930427260
SN - 1948-5506
VL - 6
SP - 587
EP - 595
JO - Social Psychological and Personality Science
JF - Social Psychological and Personality Science
IS - 5
ER -