The liberating influence of dashed hopes upon the status quo bias

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Garvey ◽  
Meg Meloy ◽  
Baba Shiv
Keyword(s):  
Status Quo ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
The Status

Negative affect and the status quo bias

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Riis ◽  
Norbert Schwarz
Keyword(s):  
Negative Affect ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
The Status

Numerical Information Format and Investment Decisions: Implications for the Disposition Effect and the Status Quo Bias

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrico Rubaltelli ◽  
Sandro Rubichi ◽  
Lucia Savadori ◽  
Marcello Tedeschi ◽  
Riccardo Ferretti
Keyword(s):  
Investment Decisions ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Disposition Effect ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
Numerical Information ◽  
The Status ◽  
Information Format

scholarly journals The status quo bias and the uptake of open access

First Monday ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa H. Cantrell ◽  
Lauren B. Collister
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Qualitative Methods ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Reliable Method ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Open Access Publishing ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
The Status ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Methods

In this paper we argue that the framing of open access through language adopted by a variety of stakeholders serves to inhibit the uptake of open access publishing through the mechanisms of complexity and cognitive load. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, we analyze both the language and tiers of decisions that confront authors seeking information online about open access. We conclude that this information is for the most part prohibitively complex and introduces contradictory interpretations and executions of open access that act to motivate a phenomenon known as the status quo bias. The only reliable method of counteracting this status quo bias in order to bolster the uptake of open access is to re-frame the language that is commonly employed in association with open access and to minimize the tiers of decisions expected of authors, which create a barrier rather than a gateway to open access engagement.

scholarly journals Switching from cash to mobile payment: what's the hold-up?

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiu-Ming Loh ◽  
Voon-Hsien Lee ◽  
Garry Wei-Han Tan ◽  
Keng-Boon Ooi ◽  
Yogesh K. Dwivedi
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Model ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Security And Privacy ◽  
Mobile Payment ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Perceived Security ◽  
The Status ◽  
Push Factor

PurposeThis paper explores the reasons behind the slow uptake of mobile payment (m-payment) from a switching intention (SI) perspective. The antecedents of SI from cash to m-payment were explored using an integrated conceptual model of the push-pull-mooring (PPM) framework and the status quo bias (SQB) perspective.Design/methodology/approachA self-administered survey was used to collect data, which are empirically tested using SmartPLS 3.0.FindingsThe push factor was found to have an insignificant effect on SI to m-payment whereas the pull factor was significant. Furthermore, the results revealed that the two mooring variables have contrasting results as trust is not a significant determinant of SI to m-payment while perceived security and privacy (PSP) is. Additionally, all SQB-related relationships were found to be statistically significantOriginality/valueThis study determined the factors that play vital roles in the consumers' decision-making to transition from cash to m-payment. This was done via a uniquely developed conceptual model that incorporated the PPM framework with the SQB perspective.

scholarly journals Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias

2006 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 175-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mercè Roca ◽  
Robin M. Hogarth ◽  
A. John Maule
Keyword(s):  
Status Quo ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
The Status

scholarly journals Ambiguity Seeking as a Result of the Status Quo Bias

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Merce Roca ◽  
Robin Hogarth ◽  
John Maule
Keyword(s):  
Status Quo ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
The Status

scholarly journals The Case Against Cognitive Enhancement: Responding to the Reversal Test

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Alice Monro
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Biases ◽  
Cognitive Enhancement ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Cognitive Capacity ◽  
Status Quo Bias ◽  
Unequal Distribution ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Reversal Test

<p>In this thesis I argue against the use of genetic technologies to enhance human cognitive capacities. More specifically, I respond to Nick Bostrom and Toby Ord's "Reversal Test", which they use to argue in favour of genetic cognitive enhancement. The Reversal Test is a burden of proof challenge designed to diagnose status quo bias in arguments against enhancement. By noting that most of those who oppose raisingintelligence would also oppose lowering intelligence, the Reversal Test puts the onuson opponents of enhancement to explain why both increases and decreases in our cognitive capacity would be worse than the status quo (our current level of intelligence). Bostrom and Ord claim that if no good reasons can be provided, this indicates that the opposition to enhancement is influenced by status quo bias. Since cognitive biases cannot provide a moral reason against enhancement, opposition to genetic cognitive enhancement shown to be affected by status quo bias canaccordingly be discounted. The aim of my thesis, then, is to overcome the Reversal Test' s burden of proof challenge by showing that my reasons for opposing cognitive enhancement are notinfluenced by status quo bias. However, I do not argue that enhanced intelligence could not be beneficial to the individual. Instead, I claim that the probable unequal distribution of enhancements between the best- and worst-off would be likely to cause serious injustices to those who are unable to afford them.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document