Non-Rational Escalation of Commitment: On Any Given

Non-Rational Escalation of Commitment: On any given day individuals have to make decisions that commit them to a particular course of actions in the pursuit of their desired goals. Since few goals in life are achieved through smooth sailing; unexpected and unfavorable circumstances commonly arise during such pursuits. Such eventualities force upon the goal-seeker the need to make decisions on the next course of action.

Non-rational escalation of commitment can be described as the tendency of an individual or group to escalate their commitment to a previously selected course of action beyond the rational model of decision making. A common case of non-rational escalation of commitment is observable in a determined gambler after he loses money. Prior to leaving his home and heading to his preferred gambling spot, the gambler is full of the excitement and anticipation of winning.

A gambler maybe convinced they have devised a dependable system to win and might even carefully budget his bets before hitting their favorite gambling casino or track. He usually sets out confident that should he hit any kind of losing streak he will not let things get out of hand. Surprisingly, such mentally rehearsed plans are quickly abandoned when he actually begins to lose his hard earned money (Dawson, 2009). The likelihood of an individual to escalate his commitment tends to increase with this level of actual and perceived costs.

It seems that non-rational escalation is sparked by the experience of painful loss and the determination to justify previous expenditures by pressing on to a profitable end. Once a gambler commits resources to winning, all such expenditure is considered their sunk cost. To the gambler loss of sunk costs is more readily acceptable while they are calmly planning at home than when adrenaline is rushing through their veins at the betting table.

At the table acceptable losses are no longer justifiable, winning is the only option as the sunk cost suddenly seems an unbearable loss. The gambler subconsciously shifts his state from wanting to win within a specific limit to having to win at any cost. The sunk cost effect shows that an individual, in this case the gambler, will irrationally continue placing bets because he becomes preoccupied with justifying the costs he has already devoted to entering a winning streak.

In the heat of the moment the gambler will readily throw good money after bad and mistakenly feel that allocating additional resources (when previous allocations have failed) will eventually lead to his catching a break. The sunk cost effect blinds the gambler from rationally questioning whether or not he is better off stopping or continuing. The impact of such escalation of commitment is that individuals are apt to endure consecutive negative outcomes and still plow on to spend more resources on a course of action that is essentially hopeless.

Heavy emotional, financial and psychological losses are often incurred once individuals are caught in the vice of such a negative escalation of commitment. The other impact of non-rational escalation of commitment is that it can occur in other areas in the person's life through negative effects on his/her level of utility (Lau, 2002). Conclusion: We all essentially become gamblers once we determine to invest our emotional, financial or psychological resources towards attaining a particular goal. Whether our goal is a successful.