influences

Often people They cling to jobs that they no longer satisfy them – or that, directly, They do not support-, but they resist leaving it moved by the fear of losing everything they have invested to get to where they are: time, effort or training. Although it may seem strange, this behavior responds to a psychological bias called sunk cost fallacy. This bias can delay decision making to leave a job and perpetuate itself in an unfavorable work situation that can even affect mental health .. What is the sunk cost fallacy? Psychologists Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem coined for the first time In 1972 the idea of ​​cognitive bias psychologists such as Daniel KahnemanNobel Prize in 2002, were based on the work of Tversky and Kahneman To demonstrate The profound influence of this bias on business and personal decision making, being relatively easy to be trapped in that immobility situation. Richard Thaler presented for the first time The practical concept of the fallacy of the sunk cost, concluding that people have a greater tendency to use a certain good or service when they have previously invested money in them. According Research From the University of Ohio (USA), the fallacy of the sunk cost refers to the trend that people have to continue an activity or remain in a certain situation because resources have already been invested in it, although these resources are unrecoverable and the logical decision would be to abandon it. In labor decision making, falling into the fallacy of the sunk cost – or of unrecoverable cost – implies postponing indefinitely the decision to change jobs Just because we do not want to “lose” what has cost us to reach the current position. The bias in important decisions This thought error causes people to stagnate in jobs that do not motivate them and are even restricting their professional potential, even when there are evidence of other more beneficial and rational options. The bias is based on a determining psychological factor such as loss aversion. For example, the personal feeling of responsibility for the resources already invested, or the fear to seem like a “wasteful” to others, can make someone stay years in a job that no longer provides satisfaction or professional growth. In Psychological researchit has been proven that the change of work is postponed, although the alternative is clearly better. This paralysis is produced by this aversion to the psychological loss that supposes that all the effort made in the past has fallen into a broken bag. Trapped in their own trap A study carried out by the researchers at the University of Kansas with more than 1,000 participants showed that, who fall into this fallacy, have greater symptoms of anxiety and postpone the search for professional help. Recent research From the Department of Psychology and Economics of the University of California in San Diego, they reflect that “the fact that you have dedicated unrecoverable resources to a project does not mean that you have to sink with the ship,” said their authors. The scientific evidence It reveals that, to avoid making irrational decisions, it is essential to identify this cognitive bias and learn to make decisions based on objective data and future possibilities, not in what has cost you to reach the point where you are. Recognizing the fallacy of the sunk cost is the first step to overcome it In labor decisions. If this awareness does not occur, there is a risk of continuing to invest resources, even more intensely, falling into a vicious circle that will be increasingly complicated to leave. Such and as they highlight From Asana, it is important not to get carried away by immobility and make decisions based on objective data and take an external perspective, not get carried away by fears and investments of the past. In Xataka | We thought to choose among more options would make us freer. The “choice paradox” says no Image | Unspash (Marco Kaufmann)