Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 204

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Factors affecting entrapment in waiting situations: The Rosencrantz and Guildenstern effect.

Rubin, Jeffrey Z., Brockner, Joel·1975·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Abstract

Seventy-two undergraduates took part an experimental study of entrapment, which the passage of time could be viewed either as an investment (increasing the likelihood of goal attainment) or as an expense. Subjects were . given an opportunity to win a large sum of money (the jackpot), which decreased value over time. In order to win the jackpot, a series of crossword puzzle words had to be solved, some of which were so difficult that the use of a necessary, scarce resource (a crossword dictionary) was required. And order to obtain the use of this resource, subjects had to wait in until it became available—which it never did. Three variables were varied a 2X2X2 design: rate of decrement of the jackpot, availability of a chart providing continuous information about this decrement, and information concerning subjects' (presumed) position line for the dictionary. Entrapment this waiting conflict was found to be high overall, and was further heightened when (a) the size of the jackpot decreased slowly rather than rapidly, (b) when no payoff chart was made available, and (c) when subjects were told they were first rather than third line for the dictionary. We've traveled too far, and our momentum has taken over; we move idly towards eternity, without possibility of reprieve or hope of explanation. —Tom Stoppard, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead Social psychologists such as Deutsch (1973), Schilling (1960), and others have long been interested the circumstances underlying entrapment a variety of conflict situations. One type of conflict which entrapment commonly occurs, for example, is an auction, which bidding typically escalates at increasing cost to the participants. In the presence of others with whom they are competing for some desirable object or resource, bidders tend to increase the magnitude of their offers, often above and beyond the objective value of the object question. Indeed, Shubik (1971) has described an auction game which entrapment is so intense that a dollar bill may be auctioned off for considerably more than the one dollar at stake! Gambling, similarly, can be interpreted as a conflict situation which entrapment is likely to occur—particu larly when the gambler wishes to recoup losses he has already incurred and therefore decides to roll the dice just one more time,

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/h0076937

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 204

Metadata

Authors
Rubin, J. Z., & Brockner, J.
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
1975-06
Volume
31
Issue
6
Pages
1054-1063
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W2112397712
Cited by
204
References
0
FWCI
0.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Factors affecting entrapment in waiting situations: The Rosencrantz and Guildenstern effect. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/h0076937
The paper
Rubin, J. Z., & Brockner, J. (1975). Factors affecting entrapment in waiting situations: The Rosencrantz and Guildenstern effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076937

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.