🧪 This platform is in early beta. Features may change and you might encounter bugs. We appreciate your patience!
sunk_cost_fallacy
The sunk cost fallacy is the tendency to continue investing time, money, or effort into a project or decision because of what has already been invested, rather than evaluating the decision based on future costs and benefits. Rational decision-making should only consider prospective costs and benefits, but people feel compelled to 'justify' past investments by continuing.
A company continues developing a software product that market research shows customers do not want, because they have already spent two years and $5 million on it, reasoning that stopping now would 'waste' the investment.
A couple continues attending weekly couples therapy sessions they both privately agree are not helping, because they have already paid for and attended 20 sessions — telling themselves it would be a 'waste' to stop now rather than trying a different therapist or approach.
A student who dislikes their chosen university major and has poor grades in it refuses to switch fields in their second year, reasoning that they have already completed two semesters of coursework in it and cannot 'throw that away,' even though switching now would still leave three years to build a fulfilling career in something they enjoy.
Binary (yes/no) questions an LLM must answer to identify this aspect:
Has a significant investment (time, money, emotion) already been made?
Type: binaryIs the decision to continue based primarily on the past investment rather than future prospects?
Type: binaryWould a rational analysis (ignoring past costs) favor a different decision?
Type: binaryThe sunk cost fallacy is the tendency to continue investing time, money, or effort into a project or decision because of what has already been invested, rather than evaluating the decision based on future costs and benefits. Rational decision-making should only consider prospective costs and benefits, but people feel compelled to 'justify' past investments by continuing.
Loss aversion makes abandoning a failing investment feel like crystallizing a loss, which is psychologically painful. There is also a desire to appear consistent and to avoid admitting a mistake, reinforced by accountability pressure from others.
Ask the 'clean slate' question: 'If I were starting fresh today with no prior investment, would I choose this path?' Make decisions based solely on expected future value, not past expenditure.
Governments continue funding failing infrastructure projects, people sit through terrible movies because they paid for the ticket, and organizations resist restructuring because of prior investments in the current structure.
Stopping wastes prior effort; wasting is bad; therefore continue.
Retroactively ascribing positive attributes to an option already selected.
Stopping wastes prior effort; wasting is bad; therefore continue.
Use these tools to detect, analyze, or train this aspect.