CAIRN-INT.INFO : International Edition
Issue
74
format_quote Cite share Share

Full-text

It is often said that the only thing that is constant in life is change. The ability to effectively and efficiently change orientation and make decisions in response to an evolving situation is unanimously considered key to survival. Charles Darwin put it very clearly “It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change” (see Mogale (2018), p. 1). From this perspective, challenging usual procedures and acting beyond routines to cope with the continuous turbulence of the global markets (Frese & Fay, 2001; Parker et al., 2006) is regarded as a very valuable behavioral feature. This active, ultimately pro-active behavior is considered very important for organizations (Morrison & Milliken, 2000) either in terms of performance or well-being (Cangiano et al., 2016; Thomas et al., 2010). Moreover, at the individual level, daring to change implies generating inspiration and a desire for self-starting activities that put individuals on new paths of new experiences.
Despite its vital importance, people and organization are inclined to stick to the no-change default option. This preference for the current situation, called status quo bias (SQB), is widespread and acts in an unreflective manner; yet exhibiting difficulties in moving toward change ultimately implies having difficulties in meeting the condition of individual and organizational survival. From this perspective, studying hindrances to change becomes a privileged axis of research…

Abstract

English

A growing literature has emerged to report the impact of the status quo bias on the most real decisions. However, previous studies do not provide direct evidence on the effect of the status quo by considering the distinction between a gain frame and a loss frame. Thus, we investigate whether the extent of the status quo choice is frame-dependent. We use a between-subjects design experiment based on lottery choices in a gain-framing versus a loss-framing. Our experimental results show the existence of the status quo in both frames. However, the status quo option is significantly more observed in the gain frame than in the loss frame. Our findings are consistent with the observation that, in the loss domain, individuals tend to be more risk-seeking. Our paper presents implications for research and practice. In particular, the examination of status quo bias, gain-loss framing, and the interplay between the two, contributes to the management and organization literature. Nevertheless, higher amounts, more choices, and more ranges of ages may be used to investigate the robustness of our findings.

  • loss aversion
  • status quo
  • experiment
  • logistic regression
  • Poisson regression
Français

Statu quo et aversion à la perte : les gens sont-ils moins conservateurs pour éviter une perte ?

Une littérature de plus en plus abondante fait état de l’impact du biais de statu quo dans les décisions réelles. Cependant les études antérieures ne fournissent pas de preuves directes de l’effet du SQ en considérant la distinction entre le cadre de gain et le cadre de perte. Ainsi cherchons-nous à déterminer si l’étendue du choix du statu quo dépend de l’effet de cadrage. Nous utilisons une expérience de conception inter-sujets basée sur des choix de loterie dans un cadrage de gain versus un cadrage de perte. Nos résultats concordent avec l’observation selon laquelle, dans le domaine des pertes, les individus ont plus tendance à chercher les risques. Notre article présente les implications pour la recherche et la pratique. En particulier l’examen du biais de statu quo, de l’effet de cadrage (gain-perte) et de l’interaction entre les deux, contribue à la littérature sur la gestion et l’organisation. Néanmoins, des sommes d’argent plus importantes, plus de choix et plus de tranches d’âges peuvent être utilisés pour étudier la robustesse de nos résultats.

  • aversion de perte
  • statu quo
  • expérience
  • régression logistique
  • régression de Poisson

Outline

  1. 1 - Introduction
  2. 2 - Literature review
  3. 3 - Status quo bias
  4. 4 - Framing and loss-gain framing
  5. 5 - The potential interplay between status quo bias and loss-gain framing
  6. 6 - Method
  7. 7 - Procedure and materials
  8. 8 - Results
  9. 9 - SQ per time
  10. 10 - Status quo and loss-gain framing
  11. 11 - Status quo as a binary variable
  12. 12 - Status quo as a count variable
  13. 13 - Discussion
  14. 15 - Conclusion

Authors

Sana El Harbi
Sana EL HARBI is currently a professor at the Institute of Higher Commercial Studies of Sousse (IHEC Sousse).
University of Sousse (Tunisia), IHEC, LaREMFiQ
sanaharbi@gmail.com
Oumeima Toumia
Oumeima TOUMIA is currently a contractual assistant at the Institute of Higher Commercial Studies of Sousse (IHEC Sousse). She earned her Ph.D. degree in management (Specialty: Business Administration) from the Higher Institute of Management of Sousse and her master’s degree in actuarial and finance from the IHEC Sousse. Her research focuses on the impact of the status quo on decision-making.
University of Sousse (Tunisia), IHEC, LaREMFiQ
toumiaoumeima@yahoo.fr
This is the latest publication of the author on cairn.
This is the latest publication of the author on cairn.
You still have to read 96% of this article
Purchase full-text 5,00€ 18 pages, electronic only
(html and pdf) add_shopping_cart Add to cart
Other option
Member of a subscribed institution ? business Authenticate
Uploaded on Cairn-int.info on 30/11/-0001
Cite
Distribution électronique Cairn.info pour ESKA © ESKA. Tous droits réservés pour tous pays. Il est interdit, sauf accord préalable et écrit de l’éditeur, de reproduire (notamment par photocopie) partiellement ou totalement le présent article, de le stocker dans une banque de données ou de le communiquer au public sous quelque forme et de quelque manière que ce soit.
keyboard_arrow_up
Chargement
Loading... Please wait