[
Arkes, H. R. (1996). The psychology of waste. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9(3), 213-224.10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199609)9:3<213::AID-BDM230>3.0.CO;2-1
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Arkes, H. R., & Ayton, P. (1999). The sunk cost and Concorde effects: Are humans less rational than lower animals?. Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 591-600.10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.591
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35(1), 124-140.10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Arkes, H. R., & Hutzel, L. (2000). The role of probability of success estimates in the sunk cost effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(3), 295-306.10.1002/1099-0771(200007/09)13:3<295::AID-BDM353>3.0.CO;2-6
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Armstrong, J. S., Coviello, N., & Safranek, B. (1993). Escalation bias: Does it extend to marketing?. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 21(3), 247-253.10.1177/0092070393213008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Augenblick, N. (2016). The sunk-cost fallacy in penny auctions. The Review of Economic Studies, 83(1), 58-86.10.1093/restud/rdv037
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Białek, M., Bergelt, M., Majima, Y., & Koehler, D. J. (2019). Cognitive reflection but not reinforcement sensitivity is consistently associated with delay discounting of gains and losses. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 12(3-4), 169-183.10.1037/npe0000111
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Białek, M., Domurat, A., Meyers, E. A. (2021). Decision-making. In: V. P. Glăveanu (Ed.), The Palgrave encyclopedia of the possible. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98390-5_157-110.1007/978-3-319-98390-5_157-1
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Białek, M., & Pennycook, G. (2018). The cognitive reflection test is robust to multiple exposures. Behavior Research Methods, 50(5), 1953-1959.10.3758/s13428-017-0963-x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Brockner, J. (1992). The escalation of commitment to a failing course of action: Toward theoretical progress. Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 39-61.10.2307/258647
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Brockner, J., Greenberg, J., Brockner, A., Bortz, J., Davy, J., & Carter, C. (1986). Layoffs, equity theory, and work performance: Further evidence of the impact of survivor guilt. Academy of Management Journal, 29(2), 373-384.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cheng, J., & Janssen, C. (2019). The relationship between an alternative form of cognitive reflection test and intertemporal choice. Studia Psychologica, 61(2), 86-98.10.21909/sp.2019.02.774
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cokely, E. T., Galesic, M., Schulz, E., Ghazal, S., & Garcia-Retamero, R. (2012). Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin numeracy test. Judgment and Decision Making, 7(1), 25-47.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671-684.10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Evans, J. S. B., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223-241.10.1177/1745691612460685
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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), 537-548.10.1177/0956797617739368
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25-42.10.1257/089533005775196732
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Friedman, D., Pommerenke, K., Lukose, R., Milam, G., & Huberman, B. A. (2007). Searching for the sunk cost fallacy. Experimental Economics, 10(1), 79-104.10.1007/s10683-006-9134-0
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Meyers, E. A., Białek, M., Fugelsang, J. A., Koehler, D. J., & Friedman, O. (2019). Wronging past rights: The sunk cost bias distorts moral judgment. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(6), 721-727.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Meyers, E. A., Walker, A. C., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2020). Reducing the number of non-naïve participants in Mechanical Turk samples. Methods in Psychology, 3, 100032.10.1016/j.metip.2020.100032
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Meyer, A., Zhou, E., & Frederick, S. (2018). The non-effects of repeated exposure to the Cognitive Reflection Test. Judgment and Decision Making, 13(3), 246-259.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Negrini, M., Riedl, A., & Wibral, M. (2020). Still in search of the sunk cost bias. (CESifo Working Paper No. 8623).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Olivola, C. Y. (2018). The interpersonal sunk-cost effect. Psychological Science, 29(7), 1072-1083.10.1177/0956797617752641
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pedell, B., Rötzel, P., & Seethamraju, R. (2017). Information load, escalation of commitment and culture-an experimental study. (Proceedings of the 23rd Americas Conference on Information Systems No. 6).
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2015a). Everyday consequences of analytic thinking. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24(6), 425-432.10.1177/0963721415604610
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pennycook, G., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2015b). What makes us think? A three-stage dual-process model of analytic engagement. Cognitive Psychology, 80, 34-72.10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.05.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Raoelison, M. T. S., Thompson, V. A., & De Neys, W. (2020). The smart intuitor: Cognitive capacity predicts intuitive rather than deliberate thinking. Cognition, 204, 104381.10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104381
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ronayne, D., Sgroi, D., & Tuckwell, A. (2021). Evaluating the sunk cost effect. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 186, 318-327.10.1016/j.jebo.2021.03.029
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schoorman, F. D., Mayer, R. C., Douglas, C. A., & Hetrick, C. T. (1994). Escalation of commitment and the framing effect: An empirical investigation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(6), 509-528.10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994.tb00596.x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sleesman, D. J., Conlon, D. E., McNamara, G., & Miles, J. E. (2012). Cleaning up the big muddy: A meta-analytic review of the determinants of escalation of commitment. Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 541-562.10.5465/amj.2010.0696
]Search in Google Scholar
[
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), 178-207.10.5465/annals.2016.0046
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sobkow, A., Olszewska, A., & Traczyk, J. (2020). Multiple numeric competencies predict decision outcomes beyond fluid intelligence and cognitive reflection. Intelligence, 80, 101452.10.1016/j.intell.2020.101452
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stanovich, K. E., Toplak, M. E., & West, R. F. (2016). The rationality quotient: Toward a test of Rational thinking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262034845.001.0001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2008). On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(4), 672-695.10.1037/0022-3514.94.4.672
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Staw, B. M. (1976). Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(1), 27-44.10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Thompson, V. A., Turner, J. A. P., & Pennycook, G. (2011). Intuition, reason, and meta-cognition. Cognitive Psychology, 63(3), 107-140.10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.06.001
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Turpin, M. H., Meyers, E. A., Fugelsang, J. A., Friedman, O., & Białek, M. (2019). Sunk cost bias and withdrawal aversion. The American Journal of Bioethics, 19(3), 57-59.10.1080/15265161.2018.1563653
]Search in Google Scholar
, 