Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims
Abstract
This study assesses the impact of accountability, the status quo, and anticipated costs and benefits on judgement of the acceptability of a drug in the US pharmaceuticals market. Several effects are documented: (1) subjects were more accepting of a drug, the lower the anticipated risks of side effects and the greater the anticipated benefits; (2) subjects were especially unwilling to accept risk when the drug was not yet on the market and when they felt accountable for their decisions; (3) accountable subjects confronted by an off‐the‐market drug that posed moderate or high risk were also especially likely to procrastinate, to buckpass, and to think in integratively complex ways about the problem, notwithstanding the fact that many more lives would be saved than lost. We explain these results by positing that perceptual‐cognitive processes (loss aversion) and political processes (blame avoidance) mutually reinforce each other when decision makers are accountable for choices that raise the possibility of changing the status quo in ways that impose losses on identifiable constituencies. We conclude by commenting on the complex normative issues that arise in labelling response tendencies as biases. Choices that look irrational within one ethical or political framework sometimes appear quite reasonable with another.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Causing harm by deviating from the status quo is blamed more than harming by default.
“and causing harm by deviating from the status quo is blamed more than harming by default 181,182 .”
From Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response (2020) · cites this paper as [182]
Facing a decision to hold others accountable prompts loss aversion and a status quo bias.
“Tetlock and Boettger (1994) explain that facing a decision to hold others accountable prompts loss aversion and a status quo bias.”
From How to study democratic backsliding (2024) · cites this paper as Tetlock and Boettger, 1994
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524 · see citing works
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,700 · see citing works
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Festinger, L. (1957) · doi:10.1515/9781503620766 · Cited by 24,241 · see citing works
A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance
Morvan, C., & O’Connor, A. (2017) · Macat Library eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781912282432 · Cited by 18,284 · see citing works
Research in Organizational Behavior.
Grimes, A. J., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392975 · Cited by 11,303 · see citing works
Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases
(1982) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477 · Cited by 8,240 · see citing works
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.4.341 · Cited by 6,544 · see citing works
Status quo bias in decision making
Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00055564 · Cited by 5,897 · see citing works
Chaiken, S. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.39.5.752 · Cited by 5,516 · see citing works
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (2013) · World Scientific handbook in financial economic series · doi:10.1142/9789814417358_0016 · Cited by 5,372 · see citing works
Judgment under uncertainty: List of contributors
Kahneman, D. J., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Cited by 4,630 · see citing works
Judgment under uncertainty: Causality and attribution
Kahneman, D. J., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Cited by 4,630 · see citing works
Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice Under Uncertainty
Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232669 · Cited by 4,042 · see citing works
Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment
(1978) · Evaluation and Program Planning · doi:10.1016/0149-7189(78)90042-3 · Cited by 3,954 · see citing works
Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1960) · University of Michigan Press eBooks · doi:10.3998/mpub.7687 · Cited by 3,604 · see citing works
Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives
Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.93.2.136 · Cited by 3,158 · see citing works
Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty
Bell, D. E. (1982) · Operations Research · doi:10.1287/opre.30.5.961 · Cited by 3,037 · see citing works
Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 · Cited by 2,573 · see citing works
Judgment in Managerial Decision Making
Bazerman, M. H. (1986) · Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) · Cited by 2,250 · see citing works
Riker, W. H., Buchanan, J. M., & Tullock, G. (1962) · Midwest Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2108773 · Cited by 2,071 · see citing works
Timid choices and bold forecasts: a cognitive perspective on risk taking.
Kahneman, D., & Lovallo, D. (1993) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.39.1.17 · Cited by 2,043 · see citing works
Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects
Simonson, I. (1989) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209205 · Cited by 1,812 · see citing works
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1982) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0182-160 · Cited by 1,699 · see citing works
Behavioral Decision Research: A Constructive Processing Perspective
Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1992) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.43.020192.000511 · Cited by 1,424 · see citing works
Conflict, Decision and Dissonance
L., J., & Festinger, L. (1965) · Revue Française de Sociologie · doi:10.2307/3318996 · Cited by 1,353 · see citing works
Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking
Kahneman, D. J., & Lovallo, D. P. (2000) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803475.023 · Cited by 1,304 · see citing works
Omission and commission in judgment and choice
Spranca, M. D., Minsk, E., & Baron, J. (1991) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-1031(91)90011-t · Cited by 1,046 · see citing works
Accountability and complexity of thought.
Tetlock, P. E. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.1.74 · Cited by 995 · see citing works
Self-citationThe Impact of Accountability on Judgment and Choice: Toward A Social Contingency Model
Tetlock, P. E. (1992) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60287-7 · Cited by 926 · see citing works
Self-citationA Contingency Model for the Selection of Decision Strategies
Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1978.4305717 · Cited by 922 · see citing works
Reluctance to vaccinate: Omission bias and ambiguity
Ritov, I., & Baron, J. (1990) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.3960030404 · Cited by 854 · see citing works
Accountability: A Social Check on the Fundamental Attribution Error
Tetlock, P. E. (1985) · Social Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3033683 · Cited by 777 · see citing works
Self-citationA value pluralism model of ideological reasoning.
Tetlock, P. E. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.4.819 · Cited by 708 · see citing works
Self-citationAccountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task.
Tetlock, P. E., & Kim, J. I. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.52.4.700 · Cited by 563 · see citing works
Self-citationTetlock, P. E., Skitka, L. J., & Boettger, R. D. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.4.632 · Cited by 541 · see citing works
Self-citationPsychological sources of ambiguity avoidance
Curley, S. P., Yates, J. F., & Abrams, R. A. (1986) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(86)90018-x · Cited by 523 · see citing works
Accountability and the Perseverance of First Impressions
Tetlock, P. E. (1983) · Social Psychology Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3033716 · Cited by 513 · see citing works
Self-citationImpression management versus intrapsychic explanations in social psychology: A useful dichotomy?
Tetlock, P. E., & Manstead, A. S. R. (1985) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.92.1.59 · Cited by 501 · see citing works
Self-citationRegret and Elation Following Action and Inaction
Landman, J. (1987) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167287134009 · Cited by 495 · see citing works
Crucial Decisions: Leadership in Policy-Making and Crisis Management
Field, R., & Janis, I. L. (1990) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258025 · Cited by 465 · see citing works
Accountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task.
Tetlock, P. E., & Kim, J. I. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.4.700 · Cited by 416 · see citing works
Self-citationAccountability: A social magnifier of the dilution effect.
Tetlock, P. E., & Boettger, R. D. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.3.388 · Cited by 400 · see citing works
Self-citationA Contingency Model for the Selection of Decision Strategies
Beach, L. R., & Mitchell, T. R. (1978) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/257535 · Cited by 248 · see citing works
Does having to justify one's judgments change the nature of the judgment process?
Hagafors, R., & Brehmer, B. (1983) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(83)90122-8 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
An Alternative Metaphor in the Study of Judgment and Choice: People as Politicians
Tetlock, P. E. (1991) · Theory & Psychology · doi:10.1177/0959354391014004 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Self-citationEthical ideology and judgments of social psychological research: Multidimensional analysis.
Forsyth, D. R., & Pope, W. R. (1984) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.6.1365 · Cited by 128 · see citing works
The counterfactual fallacy: Confusing what might have been with what ought to have been
Miller, D. T., & Turnbull, W. W. (1990) · Social Justice Research · doi:10.1007/bf01048532 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Informational Regulation of Consumer Health Risks: An Empirical Evaluation of Hazard Warnings
Viscusi, W. K., Magat, W. A., & Huber, J. C. (1986) · The RAND Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2555716 · Cited by 119 · see citing works
Some Implications of Cognitive Psychology for Risk Regulation
Noll, R. G., & Krier, J. E. (1990) · The Journal of Legal Studies · doi:10.1086/467870 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Regret and dissonance reduction as a function of postdecision salience of dissonant information.
Brehm, J. W., & Wicklund, R. A. (1970) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0028616 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
When Actions Speak Louder Than Prospects
Loomes, G. (1988) · American Economic Review · Cited by 36 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response
Bavel, J. J. V., Baicker, K., Boggio, P. S., Capraro, V., Cichocka, A., Cikara, M., Crockett, M. J., Crum, A. J., Douglas, K. M., Druckman, J. N., et al. (2020) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z · Cited by 4,964 · see citing works
Support theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability
Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.547 · Cited by 1,167 · see citing works
Accountability and automation bias
SKITKA, L. J., MOSIER, K., & BURDICK, M. D. (2000) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1006/ijhc.1999.0349 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
Grewal, R., Mehta, R., & Kardes, F. R. (2004) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.41.1.101.25090 · Cited by 229 · see citing works
“Leaving it to chance”—Passive risk taking in everyday life
Keinan, R., & Bereby-Meyer, Y. (2012) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500003259 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
How to study democratic backsliding
Druckman, J. N. (2024) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12942 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
- Authors
- Tetlock, P. E., & Boettger, R.
- Affiliations
- Texas Christian University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Tetlock, Philip E.
- ORCID
- Tetlock, Philip E.
- Venue
- Journal of Behavioral Decision Making
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1994-03
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-23
- ISSN
- 0894-3257 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-0771
- OpenAlex
- W2151577809
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 13.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Keywords
- accountability, status quo effect, risk acceptance, drug acceptability, loss aversion, blame avoidance, procrastination, adverse effects, drug regulation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
