Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Commitment bias

Commitment bias:
What motivates escalation of commitment even it does not lead to desirable outcomes?

Multimedia presentation (3 min)

Overview

Commitment bias, also known as the escalation of commitment, is the continued commitment to past behaviors or actions, especially those which are exhibited publicly, even when they do not have positive benefits or desirable outcomes (Sleesman, Lennard, McNamara, & Conlon, 2018). This psychological phenomenon is deeply rooted in human nature and often operates beneath the surface, making it challenging for individuals to recognise when it is occurring.

While it can be difficult to personally identify when Commitment Bias is occurring, its impact can be far-reaching and pervasive, as it can affect various areas of life. The consequences of Commitment Bias can negatively impact both the physical and psychological well-being of a person who experiences it. This bias can lead to persistence in unhealthy habits, relationships, or projects, all of which can take a toll on one's overall quality of life.

Understanding the nature of commitment bias is essential, as it can empower individuals to challenge their own decisions and behaviors, fostering a more adaptive approach to commitment. By recognising when Commitment Bias is occurring and actively seeking ways to navigate it, individuals can make choices that are better aligned with their well-being and long-term goals, ultimately leading to improved personal and interpersonal outcomes.

Commitment bias

What is the problem?

Commitment bias can be problematic in that a person would continue harmful or undesirable behaviours due to concern of public opinion or biased attitudes rather than an actual want to continue with the behaviour, regardless of benefits. As the key problem with experiencing Commitment Bias is the persistent and objectively irrational tendency for individuals to continue investing resources, such as time, money, effort, and emotional energy, into a chosen course of action, relationship, or project, even when evidence, especially through repeated experience, suggests that it is unlikely to lead to success or desirable outcomes.

An area of life where Commitment Bias can be especially prominent is in romantic relationships, in situations where a person is unhappy or trapped in an abusive relationship, they may find themselves escalating their commitment to staying with their partner as the reality of their satisfaction in the relationship worsens (Joel, MacDonald, & Shimotomai, 2011). This can result in a cycle of emotional and physical harm, as the fear of change and the emotional investment in the relationship overrides their better judgment (Feldman, & Wong, 2018).

Commitment Bias is not limited to romantic relationships or other interpersonal relationships, and can extend to any harmful behaviours or habits. For instance, individuals who are struggling with an addiction may continue with substance abuse or other harmful behaviours despite the known detrimental effects on their health and well-being. In these cases, an individual's commitment to the addictive behaviour or habit can stem from a combination of social stigma, fear of judgment, and belief that it's too late to change (Sleesman, Lennard, McNamara, & Conlon, 2018).

Ultimately, Commitment Bias can distort an individual's perception of reality (Carpenter, 2019), particularly through continuing to act against their better judgement and negatively impacting their health or overall well-being. When people have invested substantial time, effort, or resources into a particular relationship or action, they may continue to see it positively or hold onto the potential of this venture, even when evidence strongly suggests otherwise (Steinkühler, Mahlendorf, & Brettel, 2014). This can lead to poor decision-making, as individuals downplay or completely ignore negative outcomes, clinging to the hope that their commitments will eventually yield positive results (Sleesman, Lennard, McNamara, & Conlon, 2018).

Why does this happen?

One explanation for Commitment Bias is found in Cognitive Dissonance Theory, as Carpenter (2019) suggests that when people make initial commitments, they develop a psychological attachment to those commitments. When they are faced with evidence that contradicts their initial views of a choice, they can experience Cognitive Dissonance - which is a discomfort arising from the inconsistency between their beliefs and actions. In order to alleviate this discomfort, individuals tend to escalate their commitment to their initial decision, as changing their stance abruptly would involve admitting that they had made a wrong choice, where fear of public judgement and personal pride can play a key role in this aversion to correcting behaviour (Steinkühler, Mahlendorf, & Brettel, 2014).

Another explanation for the prevalence of Commitment Bias is Ego-Involvement, as proposed by Tran, Judge, and Kashima (2019), can also play a significant role in Commitment Bias. When individuals are deeply emotionally invested in a decision or a relationship, their ego becomes intertwined with that commitment. Admitting failure or making a change becomes a threat to their self-esteem, leading them to persist with their action or behaviour even when it is deemed irrational to do so.

Why is it important?

Commitment Bias is a crucial concept to understand and address because it allows individuals to differentiate between a genuine desire to continue with a behavior or commitment and the influence of external factors, such as fear of public opinion, social pressures, or the reluctance to abandon an investment of time and effort, even when there are no tangible rewards for doing so.

In the context of personal relationships, Commitment Bias can blur the line between a healthy, fulfilling relationship and an unhealthy or even abusive one (Tran, Judge, & Kashima, 2019). Through recognising and addressing when Commitment Bias is in action, individuals can better evaluate the authenticity of their commitment to a relationship. This understanding can enable them to distinguish between the desire to nurture a loving connection and the inclination to stay in a relationship out of fear or perceived societal expectations.

As Commitment Bias often occurs when individuals are motivated by extrinsic factors, such as external validation or the desire to conform to societal norms (Schultze, Pfeiffer, & Schulz-Hardt, 2012), these motivations can obscure an individual's better judgment and lead to decision making which does not align with their intrinsic needs and desires. Understanding Commitment Bias can help individuals identify when they are making choices based on extrinsic motivations and external pressures rather than pursuing what genuinely brings them fulfillment and satisfaction.

Commitment Bias can stem from a lack of self-awareness and an insufficient understanding and consideration of one's own intrinsic needs and core values (Lee, Keil, & Wong, 2018). People may become committed to a particular behavior or course of action without considering whether it authentically aligns with their core values and long-term goals. Through understanding the impact and role of Commitment Bias, individuals can gain clarity about their intrinsic needs and make decisions that are more congruent with their authentic selves, without the pressure of societal expectations or a fear of external judgement (Jones, & Roelofsma, 2000).

Social and Behavioural Perspective

Investment Model of Commitment

An example of Commitment Bias is when an individual continues to pursue a failing relationship despite clear signs of dissatisfaction or unhappiness. This can be explained with the Investment Model of Commitment (Back, 2010), where an individual's level of commitment in a relationship is determined several factors, including:

1. Satisfaction: The individual's degree of contentment and happiness within the relationship. If they experience satisfaction, it can positively reinforce their relationship commitment.
2. Perceived Quality of Alternatives: The perception of the availability and desirability of alternative relationships or lifestyles. If an individual perceives positive, better, or safe alternatives to be scarce or non-existent, their commitment to the relationship may increase.
3. Value of Investments: The emotional, material, and temporal investments that have been made in the relationship. These investments can range from shared experiences and positive memories, to shared or dependent financial resources and past or future time commitments. As the perceived value of these investments increases, so does an individual's commitment to maintaining the relationship (Back, 2010).

However, Commitment Bias can cloud an individual's judgment and lead to the continuation of a relationship that may not be in their best interest. When external factors, such as the anticipated public or personal backlash, outweigh the potential benefits of ending the relationship, individuals may choose to continue a relationship, even when doing so may cause them further harm (Tran, Judge, & Kashima, 2019). This decision is often driven by fear of judgment, the stigma associated with relationship breakdown, or the reluctance to acknowledge that the investments made in the relationship may have been futile (Tran, Judge, & Kashima, 2019).

Theories

Self-Justification Theory

Self-Justification Theory plays a pivotal role in understanding why individuals often exhibit Commitment Bias, and persist with failing tasks or ventures even when they receive negative feedback or face unfavourable outcomes (Steinkühler, Mahlendorf, & Brettel, 2014). This theory is driven by the concept of Cognitive Dissonance, where an individual experiences a psychological discomfort that occurs when a person's beliefs or attitudes conflict with their actions or external feedback (Carpenter, 2019) .

When individuals initiate a task or venture that they initially perceive as good or promising, they often invest time, effort, and resources into it. This investment becomes a psychological commitment, creating a personal attachment to the success of the endeavour (Steinkühler, Mahlendorf, & Brettel, 2014). However, as an individual garners negative feedback or undesirable outcomes, Cognitive Dissonance can emerge. The individual is confronted with the stark contradiction between their initial positive beliefs about the task and the accumulation of evidence suggesting that it is not as successful as they had expected (Carpenter, 2019).

To resolve the experience of Cognitive Dissonance and reduce psychological discomfort, individuals may engage in Self-Justification. This cognitive process involves an individual rationalising their prior decisions and actions, convincing themselves that their commitment to the failing task is still necessary, and that the positive benefits or outcomes they had initially imagined will eventually come to fruition (Steinkühler, Mahlendorf, & Brettel, 2014). Self-Justification reinforces an individual's Commitment Bias, culminating in a continued commitment to a failing task or venture.

Case study example: Romantic Relationship Consider the case of a failing romantic relationship to illustrate the concept of Self-Justification and its connection Commitment Bias. Initially, two individuals enter a relationship with high hopes, believing it will be both personally fulfilling and last long-term, meeting what they had imagined they would receive from a romantic partnership. However, as time passes, they encounter conflicts, dissatisfaction, and blatant signs of fundamental incompatibility and personal differences. Cognitive Dissonance begins to emerge as their perception of the relationship clashes with the growing evidence of its challenges. To reduce this experience of dissonance, the couple may engage in Self-Justification. Each partner may convince themselves that the initial excitement and love they felt are still valid and occurring, and that with more effort, time, and investment, the relationship can return to its earlier positive state. They might downplay or ignore negative feedback from friends and family, attributing this to misunderstanding or misjudgment, or even jealousy. This Self-Justification perpetuates and escalates their commitment to the relationship, despite its inherent failing nature. The couple continue to invest emotional energy and time in the hope that their initial positive beliefs will be eventually validated, even as the relationship continues to deteriorate. In this case study, Self-Justification serves as a powerful instrument which sustains Commitment Bias in the face of rapidly mounting evidence of relationship dissatisfaction and fundamental personality differences. It illustrates how individuals can become further entangled in failing situations due to their psychological need to maintain congruence with their initial beliefs about a venture, and their current actions, leading to what can become a vicious cycle of escalating commitment.

Motivated Reasoning Theory

Motivated Reasoning Theory is a key psychological concept that explains why individuals often commit to subjectively undesirable endeavors or actions, especially when their true desires or motivations may not align with those pursuits (Kahan, 2013). This theory posits that individuals are emotionally motivated to seek out information which aligns with their preexisting beliefs, wants, or desires (Kahan, 2013). It explains that people tend to form opinions, make judgements and decisions that reinforce what they want to believe, regardless of whether they genuinely desire to pursue a particular course of action or engage in a behaviour (Carpenter, 2019).

Motivated Reasoning Theory can be linked to Commitment Bias when examining how individuals form opinions and make commitments. When people initially engage in a task, project, or relationship, an individual will often hold the expectation that the outcomes of the venture will be positive or produce desirable outcomes (Carpenter, 2019). This expectation can create a motivation to pursue the endeavor, even if the underlying desire to engage is not particularly strong or logically considered.

As Motivated Reasoning Theory explains that individuals are likely to seek Confirmation Bias, which is when a person is selective in their collection and interpretation of information which supports and confirms their existing beliefs or expectations, while simultaneously ignoring or downplaying any conflicting information they receive (Keil, Depledge, & Rai, 2007). The cognitive bias experienced through Motivated Reasoning can influence Commitment Bias as it prevents individuals from critically evaluating whether the perceived benefits of continuing an action truly align with their fundamental desires and motivations, or simply are a byproduct of motivated reasoning (Carpenter, 2019).

Sunk Cost Fallacy

The Sunk Cost Fallacy is a cognitive bias which occurs when individuals factor in irretrievable investments (sunk costs) when they are making decisions about whether to continue or discontinue a standing commitment (Feldman, & Wong, 2018). In experiencing this bias, the imagined future rewards of the behaviour or investment outweigh the real losses a person is experiencing from the continuation of the venture. This occurs when an individual considers the resources they have already committed to a task, relationship, or goal, such as time or money, as a just reason for continuing with a failing or unprofitable action or commitment (Feldman, & Wong, 2018).

This can contribute to Commitment Bias, as the Sunk Cost Fallacy can lead to poor decision-making, where individuals will continue pouring additional resources into, or escalate their commitment to, a failing endeavour simply because they have already invested heavily (Feldman, & Wong, 2018). This perpetuates Commitment Bias, as an individual can often be unwilling to disengage or abandon a project, relationship, or goal due to their perceived permanent loss of their initial or continuous investment/s (Kelly, & Milkman, 2013).

Figure 1. A couple holding hands where the hand of one person is almost comically smaller than their partner. A representation of the clinging to an imagined love exhibited in the experience Commitment Bias.

How to Eliminate Commitment Bias

Eliminating Commitment Bias is a challenging but important endeavour for an individual to be able to make rational, considered, and effective decisions which support their well-being and life satisfaction overall.

1. Make an Objective Assessment: Through regularly assessing the progress and outcomes of your commitments and ensuring you have clear and measurable goals in place. This could be written to increase objectivity which is sometimes not found in unspoken thought. If you begin to notice signs of diminishing returns or evidence of failure, be willing to acknowledge them objectively. As it can be difficult to assess commitments in this way, as emotional motivators play a key role in continuing commitments, it can be helpful here to imagine a close friend of yours was engaging in the commitment you are, and what you would recommend they do if they were in your situation. It is important to avoid the temptation to justify or downplay the negative outcomes, simply writing things factually as they have occurred, with no emotional aspect will be most beneficial in making an objective assessment.
2. Create a Structured Decision Criteria: By determining your own goals, values, and beliefs, and comparing these to the commitments you are currently engaged in. This will assist in noting where current commitments fall out of alignment with what is satisfactory to you, and your desired outcomes in life. Then, before committing to a project or course of action, refer to this established criteria to check if this aligns with what you know of yourself, and are willing to engage in. In addition to this, determine before beginning a task, or relationship, the conditions under which you would continue or absolutely discontinue the commitment. This creates a structured approach to decision-making and reduces the influence of emotions and cognitive biases, as it can be easy to become swept up in a commitment once it has begun.
3. Seek Diverse Input: Encourage and actively seek input from others who are not emotionally or financially invested in the decision. This should not exclusively come from close friends or family, or business partners when relating to business decisions. Objectivity can be crucial here, though it is equally important to involve your support network in situations where you feel you may be making a poor decision. Diverse perspectives can provide valuable insights and help challenge any biases or tunnel vision you may have developed in continuing commitments. This can also assist with making an Objective Assessment, if you have found it difficult to do so.
4. Have an Exit Plan: It can be particularly beneficial to have exit strategies in place for all commitments, especially those you feel are no longer serving you, or you anticipate may become destructive in future. Knowing how to gracefully disengage from a commitment when necessary can reduce the fear of loss that often drives Commitment Bias. Having or being aware of the actions that you could take in order to exit a commitment, and exploring these strategies thoroughly can make the decision to withdraw from a commitment less emotionally challenging.
5. Regularly Reevaluate Commitments: Even legally binding commitments do not have to be life-sentences, and oftentimes the commitments an individual is detrimentally engaging with is not of this nature. By regularly reevaluating your decisions and commitments in light of new information or changing circumstances, you will be able to assess whether a previously beneficial commitment has soured or is no longer in alignment with your values, or what you would like to be achieving from it. This requires an openness to adjusting your course of action when it becomes clear that this venture is no longer the best option.

Eliminating Commitment Bias requires self-awareness, discipline, community, and a commitment to making rational and evidence-based decisions for the overall and long-term betterment of self. The ability to cut losses and abandon projects, goals, or relationships which do not nourish you long-term is a strength, despite opinions that may lead you to think otherwise. By implementing these strategies and continuously refining your decision-making processes, you can reduce the impact of Commitment Bias and make more effective and desirable choices in both personal and professional settings.

Conclusion

Commitment Bias is a complex cognitive bias that can be pervasively damaging in the way it affects individuals and organisations in various aspects of life. Understanding its underlying theories and employing strategies to correct this bias is essential for making more rational, adaptive, and personally-aligned decisions. When the negative aspects of a commitment outweigh the positive ones, it becomes imperative to establish an elimination process to review biases, evaluate outcomes, and align commitments with personal and collective well-being. Ultimately, adopting a positive and realistic perspective on commitment can lead to improved health, well-being, and decision-making, allowing individuals and groups to navigate life's complexities more effectively.

See also

• Commitment bias (Book chapter, 2022)
• Escalation of Commitment (Wikipedia)
• Sunk Cost Fallacy (Wikipedia)
• Cognitive Dissonance (Wikipedia)
• Motivated Reasoning (Wikipedia)
• Self-Justification (Wikipedia)
• Investment Model of Commitment (Wikipedia)

References

Back, I. H. (2010). Commitment bias: Mistaken partner selection or ancient wisdom?. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(1), 22-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.006

Carpenter, C. J. (2019). Cognitive dissonance, ego-involvement, and motivated reasoning. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2018.1564881

Feldman, G., & Wong, K. F. E. (2018). When action-inaction framing leads to higher escalation of commitment: A new inaction-effect perspective on the sunk-cost fallacy. Psychological Science, 29(4), 537-548. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617739368

Joel, S., MacDonald, G., & Shimotomai, A. (2011). Conflicting pressures on romantic relationship commitment for anxiously attached individuals. Journal of Personality, 79(1), 51-74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00680.x

Jones, P. E., & Roelofsma, P. H. (2000). The potential for social contextual and group biases in team decision-making: Biases, conditions and psychological mechanisms. Ergonomics, 43(8), 1129-1152. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130050084914

Kahan, D. M. (2013). Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(4), 407-424. http://doi:10.1017/S1930297500005271

Keil, M., Depledge, G., & Rai, A. (2007). Escalation: The role of problem recognition and cognitive bias. Decision Sciences, 38(3), 391-421.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2007.00164.x

Kelly, T. F., & Milkman, K. L. (2013). Escalation of commitment. Encyclopedia of management theory, 1, 257-259.

Lee, J. S., Keil, M., & Wong, K. F. E. (2018). Does a tired mind help avoid a decision bias? The effect of ego depletion on escalation of commitment. Applied Psychology, 67(1), 171-185. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12109

OpenAI. (2023). ChatGPT (Oct 7 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat

Schultze, T., Pfeiffer, F., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2012). Biased information processing in the escalation paradigm: Information search and information evaluation as potential mediators of escalating commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024739

Sleesman, D. J., Lennard, A. C., McNamara, G., & Conlon, D. E. (2018). Putting escalation of commitment in context: A multilevel review and analysis. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 178-207. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2016.0046

Steinkühler, D., Mahlendorf, M. D., & Brettel, M. (2014). How self-justification indirectly drives escalation of commitment. Schmalenbach Business Review, 66(2), 191-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03396905

Tran, P., Judge, M., & Kashima, Y. (2019). Commitment in relationships: An updated meta‐analysis of the investment model. Personal Relationships, 26(1), 158-180. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12268

External links

• TEDEd: Decision Making Deconstructed - Understanding the Role of Bias