04-003 · EVIDENCE B · LOW-RISK READING

When deciding whether to continue, only consider future investments and future returns — not what has already been invested.

决定是否继续时,只看未来投入和未来回报,不看已投入多少

Source cost

No cost involved. The difficulty lies in accepting that time already invested cannot be recovered.

Source return

Money and time already spent make people more inclined to keep going. Across 98 datasets, this tendency remains consistent. Therefore, when deciding whether to continue, only factor in future investments and expected returns; past expenditures should be excluded from consideration.

Evidence grade

B

THE LOW-ROI DETOURSatire, not advice

Move “When deciding whether to continue, only consider future investments and future returns — not what has already been invested.” to Future Me's calendar

The excuse

Future Me has a clearer calendar, more patience, and apparently the same responsibilities.

What feels good now

Today I keep a few minutes, a bit of persistence and avoid interrupting my default routine.

What the source says

The source summarizes the return this way: “Money and time already spent make people more inclined to keep going. Across 98 datasets, this tendency remains consistent. Therefore, when deciding whether to continue, only factor in future investments and expected returns; past expenditures should be excluded from consideration.” Evidence grade B. The original states the population, caveats, and sources; this is not a personal forecast.

THE ENGLISH EDITION

Original recommendation and evidence

Source commit a994b6a0c905

3. When deciding whether to continue, only consider future investments and future returns — not what has already been invested.

Cost: No cost involved. The difficulty lies in accepting that time already invested cannot be recovered.

In plain terms: Money and time already spent make people more inclined to keep going. Across 98 datasets, this tendency remains consistent. Therefore, when deciding whether to continue, only factor in future investments and expected returns; past expenditures should be excluded from consideration.

Benefit: Prior investments of money, effort, and time increase the likelihood of continued engagement. This is known as the sunk cost effect in psychology. Analysis of 98 datasets confirms this tendency is stable. Avoiding this bias prevents people from continuing to invest time solely to avoid “wasting” what they have already spent.

Evidence grade: B

Sources: Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 124–140. <https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4>; Roth, S., Robbert, T., & Straus, L. (2015). On the sunk-cost effect in economic decision-making: A meta-analytic review. Business Research, 8(1), 99–138. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-014-0014-8>

Notes: This is exactly what Arkes and Blumer demonstrated in their theater experiment. The Ohio University Theater sold season tickets at three price points: full price ($15), $13, and $8. In the first half of the season, ticket holders who paid full price attended an average of 4.11 shows, compared to 3.32 and 3.29 shows for the other two groups. No significant differences emerged between the groups in the second half of the season. Roth and colleagues found this effect diminishes over time and is less pronounced among older individuals.

Read the complete Chinese source and notes

3. 决定是否继续时,只看未来投入和未来回报,不看已投入多少

成本: 不花钱。难在要接受一件事:之前投进去的时间已经没了,拿不回来。

说人话: 已经投进去的钱和时间,会让人更想接着干下去。98 组数据合起来算,这个倾向稳定存在。所以判断要不要继续,只算往后还要投多少、还能拿回多少。已经花掉的那些,不要算进去。

收益: 已经投入的钱、精力和时间,会让人更想继续做下去。这在心理学里叫沉没成本效应。把 98 组数据合起来算,分析确认这种倾向稳定存在。避开这种倾向,就不会为了「不想浪费」继续往里投时间。

证据等级: B

来源: Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985). The psychology of sunk cost. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 35, 124–140. <https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4>;Roth, S., Robbert, T., & Straus, L. (2015). On the sunk-cost effect in economic decision-making: A meta-analytic review. Business Research, 8(1), 99–138. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-014-0014-8>

备注: Arkes 和 Blumer 那项剧院实验是这样做的。俄亥俄大学剧院卖季票,随机给买票的人原价 15 美元、便宜 2 美元、便宜 7 美元三种价。前半季,原价那组平均看了 4.11 场,另两组是 3.32 和 3.29 场。后半季三组就没有明显差别了。Roth 等人发现,这种影响会随时间变淡,年纪大的人受影响更小。

Author's scope notes: Arkes 和 Blumer 那项剧院实验是这样做的。俄亥俄大学剧院卖季票,随机给买票的人原价 15 美元、便宜 2 美元、便宜 7 美元三种价。前半季,原价那组平均看了 4.11 场,另两组是 3.32 和 3.29 场。后半季三组就没有明显差别了。Roth 等人发现,这种影响会随时间变淡,年纪大的人受影响更小。

YOUR PRIVATE LIST

Choose what to do with this idea

Original content by eternity4719 under CC BY 4.0. English translation is credited in the source notes. HowToLiveWorse adds a clearly labeled satirical response.

Full source and adaptation notes