Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2019/Sunk cost fallacy motivation

Related terms
Choice-supportive bias or post-purchase rationalisation are some related terms. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 11:11, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Heading casing
-- Jtneill - Talk - c 03:34, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Feedback
Your page is looking seriously fantastic at the moment and is a really interesting read.


 * under the heading Combining the theories; I made a flow chart to demonstrate the process as you described it. If you think this can be improved you can make your own using www.draw.io or send me a message on my user discussions page.


 * under the heading qualitative research; you begin by discussing the physiological effects of SCF. I don't think this belongs here and could be its own heading.


 * under the heading qualitative research; you discuss Braverman and Blumentahl-Barby (2012) you could expand this and discuss the implications of the study.


 * A way to structure the heading examples and evidence would be to separate it into 2 headings;

Evidence Examples
 * Physiological effects
 * quantitative research
 * The concord effect
 * Gambling addiction


 * under the heading conclusion; you do not have any references to support what you are saying, make sure to support what you say even if you have explained with references earlier. This is applicable to you whole page; when you read through next look for places you can add references to support what you are saying.


 * Under the heading References; really fantastic APA! there was one duplicate reference aside from that it looks really good.

--U3172958 (discuss • contribs) 22:03, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello!
I would be interested in learning more about the effects of sunk costs motivation from a individual level. Is there any case studies involving interviews with business leaders or government officials who fell victim to this cognitive bias? Perhaps a section on loss-aversion or the effects of framing effects could be interesting when examining this topic?

Was an interesting read so far and thank you for your efforts here

Regards CMIV

CMIV (discuss • contribs) 05:35, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

This is a really good chapter, however I feel it would be better if the combination of theories proceeding the individual components as I feel they are better explained when you have a clear idea of how they all interact, or at the least have the components under headings of cognition and behaviour so it's more evident of what goes where. Also under optimism I'm not sure whether you meant to use overestimate or whether you meant underestimate whilst talking about the potential for negative effects --Haylzw (discuss • contribs) 03:02, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

this looks like a seriously good book chapter - you should be very happy with it! My one suggestion would be with the conclusion. My understanding is that no new information should be displayed in the conclusion - and as such no use of subheading or references. I do like how you are using the space to answer your focus question though! all the best --U3100384 (discuss • contribs) 05:20, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 09:52, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:08, 18 November 2019 (UTC)