The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Understanding Behavior in Escalation Situations
Abstract
Everyday observation reveals that both individuals and organizations often become overly committed to losing courses of action; in a sense, throwing good money after bad. More than 10 years of research on this escalation problem shows that persistence is associated with at least four major classes of determinants: project, psychological, social, and organizational variables. The influence of these four sets of variables evolves over time, forming a dynamic model of behavior in escalation situations.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · Cited by 4,583
Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 · Cited by 2,573
Knee-deep in the big muddy: a study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action
Staw, B. M. (1976) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2 · Cited by 2,061
Self-citationThe Escalation of Commitment To a Course of Action
Staw, B. M. (1981) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1981.4285694 · Cited by 1,693
Self-citationOrganizational Decision Making as a Political Process: The Case of a University Budget
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1974) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393885 · Cited by 798
The Bases and Use of Power in Organizational Decision Making: The Case of a University
Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1974) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391803 · Cited by 705
The Art & Science of Negotiation
Raiffa, H. (1983) · Harvard Law Review · doi:10.2307/1340912 · Cited by 420
Biased evaluation and persistence in gambling.
Gilovich, T. D. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.44.6.1110 · Cited by 408
Cited by
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
The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors.
Hinsz, V. B., Tindale, R. S., & Vollrath, D. A. (1997) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.43 · Cited by 1,428
Motivated Information Processing in Group Judgment and Decision Making
De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad, B. A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868307304092 · Cited by 754
BIASES IN THE INTERPRETATION AND USE OF RESEARCH RESULTS
MacCoun, R. J. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.259 · Cited by 417
A Behavioral Study on Abandonment Decisions in Multistage Projects
Long, X., Nasiry, J., & Wu, Y. (2020) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2018.3270 · Cited by 45
Metadata
- Authors
- Staw, B. M., & Ross, J.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 1989-10-13
- Volume
- 246
- Issue
- 4927
- Pages
- 216-220
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W1541559377
- Cited by
- 274
- References
- 24
- FWCI
- 1.50
- 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: Understanding Behavior in Escalation Situations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.246.4927.216
- The paper
- Staw, B. M., & Ross, J. (1989). Understanding Behavior in Escalation Situations. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.246.4927.216
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.
