Loss Aversion and Status Quo Label Bias
Avital Moshinsky, Maya Bar‐Hillel
Abstract
Avital Moshinsky, Maya Bar‐Hillel
Abstract
Many factors contribute to status quo perseverance, some justifiable, some not. We focus on an advantage accruing to a policy from just calling it status quo, which is that the mere label makes it look better. When comparing pros and cons of competing policies, labeling one status quo sets it up as the reference point with respect to which pros and cons are potentially either losses or gains. Since “losses loom larger than gains,” pros one has weigh more than pros one does not, while the reverse holds for cons, thereby tilting the overall balance of pros and cons in favor of the policy designated as status quo. Direct evidence for this account is presented by showing that: (a) A policy's attractiveness increases when it is labeled status quo; (b) A policy's attractiveness is predictable from its pros and cons; and (c) The magnitude of status quo enhancement is predictable from a quantitative model that measures aversion to potential losses (accruing to having it replaced). Alternative processes, which may be valid in other paradigms, are obviated in the present one.
OpenAlex reports 76 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Many factors contribute to status quo perseverance, some justifiable, some not. We focus on an advantage accruing to a policy from just calling it status quo, which is that the mere label makes it look better. When comparing pros and cons of competing policies, labeling one status quo sets it up as the reference point with respect to which pros and cons are potentially either losses or gains. Since “losses loom larger than gains,” pros one has weigh more than pros one does not, while the reverse holds for cons, thereby tilting the overall balance of pros and cons in favor of the policy designated as status quo. Direct evidence for this account is presented by showing that: (a) A policy's attractiveness increases when it is labeled status quo; (b) A policy's attractiveness is predictable from its pros and cons; and (c) The magnitude of status quo enhancement is predictable from a quantitative model that measures aversion to potential losses (accruing to having it replaced). Alternative processes, which may be valid in other paradigms, are obviated in the present one.
Key concepts: Status quo, Status quo bias, Attractiveness, Public economics, Loss aversion, Psychology, Economics, Positive economics