IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/manrev/v73y2023i4d10.1007_s11301-022-00283-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to measure the status quo bias? A review of current literature

Author

Listed:
  • Marie-E. Godefroid

    (University of Siegen)

  • Ralf Plattfaut

    (South Westphalia University of Applied Sciences)

  • Björn Niehaves

    (University of Siegen)

Abstract

The Status Quo Bias (SQB) describes an individual's preference to avoid changes and maintain the current situation. In today’s world, technological advances require nearly constant change within organizations. Thus, SQB can become an issue when it hinders progress. Therefore, it is crucial to understand how this effect can be reliably measured and, even more importantly, what countermeasures to employ. Prior research has focused more on individual measuring approaches and less on countermeasures. As researchers across different research fields have studied this bias, we conduct a literature review spanning different scholarly fields. This broader research focus allows us to identify four measurement approaches and 13 countermeasures along the three aspects of cognitive misperception, rational decision making, and psychological commitment of SQB. Our overview consolidates existing knowledge and will hopefully be the starting point for researchers to start combating this bias where needed. Successful and proven countermeasures can, for example, increase the acceptance and adoption of digital innovations and technology in general and thereby allow organizations to capitalize on their investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Marie-E. Godefroid & Ralf Plattfaut & Björn Niehaves, 2023. "How to measure the status quo bias? A review of current literature," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 73(4), pages 1667-1711, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:manrev:v:73:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11301-022-00283-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11301-022-00283-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11301-022-00283-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11301-022-00283-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anis Khedhaouria & Roy Thurik & Calin Gurau & Eric Van Heck, 2016. "Customers' Continuance Intention Regarding Mobile Service Providers: A Status Quo Bias Perspective," Post-Print hal-02012305, HAL.
    2. Lin, Tung-Ching & Huang, Shiu-Li & Hsu, Chieh-Ju, 2015. "A dual-factor model of loyalty to IT product – The case of smartphones," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 215-228.
    3. Choudrie, Jyoti & Junior, Chike-Obuekwe & McKenna, Brad & Richter, Shahper, 2018. "Understanding and conceptualising the adoption, use and diffusion of mobile banking in older adults: A research agenda and conceptual framework," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 449-465.
    4. Feray Adigüzel & Mirella Kleijnen & B. Burçak Başbuğ Erkan & Ceylan Talu Yozgatligil, 2019. "Identifying Non‐Adopter Consumer Segments: An Empirical Study on Earthquake Insurance Adoption in Turkey," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 662-685, June.
    5. Dae Geun Kim & Chang Won Lee, 2021. "Exploring the Roles of Self-Efficacy and Technical Support in the Relationship between Techno-Stress and Counter-Productivity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Sven Heidenreich & Katrin Talke, 2020. "Consequences of mandated usage of innovations in organizations: developing an innovation decision model of symbolic and forced adoption," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 10(3), pages 279-298, December.
    7. Daeheon Choi & Chune Young Chung & Thou Seyha & Jason Young, 2020. "Factors Affecting Organizations’ Resistance to the Adoption of Blockchain Technology in Supply Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-37, October.
    8. Boeuf, Benjamin, 2019. "The impact of mortality anxiety on attitude toward product innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 44-60.
    9. Miriam Krieger & Stefan Felder, 2013. "Can Decision Biases Improve Insurance Outcomes? An Experiment on Status Quo Bias in Health Insurance Choice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    10. Qian Chen & Yaobin Lu & Yeming Gong & Qing Tang, 2019. "Why do users resist service organization’s brand mobile apps? The force of barriers versus cross-channel synergy," Post-Print hal-02312265, HAL.
    11. Inman, J.J. & Zeelenberg, M., 2002. "Regret in repeat purchase versus switching decisions : The attenuating role of decision justifiability," Other publications TiSEM 44060120-bd30-40e0-a97f-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Leong, Lai-Ying & Hew, Teck-Soon & Ooi, Keng-Boon & Wei, June, 2020. "Predicting mobile wallet resistance: A two-staged structural equation modeling-artificial neural network approach," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 51(C).
    13. Wiedmann, Klaus-Peter & Hennigs, Nadine & Pankalla, Lars & Kassubek, Martin & Seegebarth, Barbara, 2011. "Adoption barriers and resistance to sustainable solutions in the automotive sector," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 64(11), pages 1201-1206.
    14. Byungchan Ahn & Hyunchul Ahn, 2020. "Factors Affecting Intention to Adopt Cloud-Based ERP from a Comprehensive Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-27, August.
    15. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    16. Inman, J Jeffrey & Zeelenberg, Marcel, 2002. "Regret in Repeat Purchase versus Switching Decisions: The Attenuating Role of Decision Justifiability," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(1), pages 116-128, June.
    17. Han-Shen Chen & Bi-Kun Tsai & Chi-Ming Hsieh, 2018. "The Effects of Perceived Barriers on Innovation Resistance of Hydrogen-Electric Motorcycles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    18. Insaf Bekir & Faten Doss, 2020. "Status quo bias and attitude towards risk: An experimental investigation," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(5), pages 827-838, July.
    19. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    20. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    21. Inès Chouk & Zied Mani, 2019. "Factors for and against resistance to smart services: role of consumer lifestyle and ecosystem related variables," Post-Print hal-03711784, HAL.
    22. Nel, Jacques & Boshoff, Christo, 2021. "“I just don't like digital-only banks, and you should not use them either†: Traditional-bank customers' opposition to using digital-only banks," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    23. Alberto Alesina & Francesco Passarelli, 2019. "Loss Aversion in Politics," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(4), pages 936-947, October.
    24. Kuo, Ren-Zong, 2020. "Why do people switch mobile payment service platforms? An empirical study in Taiwan," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    25. Lieke Boonen & Frederik Schut & Bas Donkers & Xander Koolman, 2009. "Which preferred providers are really preferred? Effectiveness of insurers’ channeling incentives on pharmacy choice," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 347-366, December.
    26. Conor Keegan & Conor Teljeur & Brian Turner & Steve Thomas, 2019. "Switching benefits and costs in the Irish health insurance market: an analysis of consumer surveys," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 15-32, March.
    27. Linnerud, K. & Toney, P. & Simonsen, M. & Holden, E., 2019. "Does change in ownership affect community attitudes toward renewable energy projects? Evidence of a status quo bias," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 1-8.
    28. Sen Geng, 2016. "Decision Time, Consideration Time, And Status Quo Bias," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(1), pages 433-449, January.
    29. Anis Khedhaouria & Roy Thurik & Calin Gurau & Eric van Heck, 2016. "Customers' Continuance Intention Regarding Mobile Service Providers: A Status Quo Bias Perspective," Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), IGI Global, vol. 24(4), pages 1-21, October.
    30. Kim, Junghwan & Kim, Seongcheol & Nam, Changi, 2016. "User resistance to acceptance of In-Vehicle Infotainment (IVI) systems," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 919-930.
    31. Serah Shin & Hyungsoo Kim & Claudia J. Heath, 2019. "Narrow Framing and Retirement Savings Decisions," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 975-997, September.
    32. Carola Stryja & Gerhard Satzger, 2019. "Digital nudging to overcome cognitive resistance in innovation adoption decisions," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(15-16), pages 1123-1139, December.
    33. Heidenreich, Sven & Kraemer, Tobias, 2015. "Passive innovation resistance: The curse of innovation? Investigating consequences for innovative consumer behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 134-151.
    34. Mazhar Abbas & Muhammad Shahid Nawaz & Jamil Ahmad & Muhammad Ashraf, 2017. "The effect of innovation and consumer related factors on consumer resistance to innovation," Cogent Business & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(1), pages 1312058-131, January.
    35. Jae-Do Song & Young-Hwan Ahn, 2019. "Cognitive Bias in Emissions Trading," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, March.
    36. Jennifer S. Labrecque & Wendy Wood & David T. Neal & Nick Harrington, 2017. "Habit slips: when consumers unintentionally resist new products," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 119-133, January.
    37. Matsuo, Makoto & Minami, Chieko & Matsuyama, Takuya, 2018. "Social influence on innovation resistance in internet banking services," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 42-51.
    38. Andreea-Ionela Puiu & Anca Monica Ardeleanu & Camelia Cojocaru & Anca Bratu, 2021. "Exploring the Effect of Status Quo, Innovativeness, and Involvement Tendencies on Luxury Fashion Innovations: The Mediation Role of Status Consumption," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-18, May.
    39. Laukkanen, Tommi, 2016. "Consumer adoption versus rejection decisions in seemingly similar service innovations: The case of the Internet and mobile banking," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2432-2439.
    40. Chen, Qian & Lu, Yaobin & Gong, Yeming (Yale) & Tang, Qing, 2019. "Why do users resist service organization’s brand mobile apps? The force of barriers versus cross-channel synergy," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 274-282.
    41. Kuo Cheng Chung & Silvia Wan-Ju Liang, 2020. "Understanding Factors Affecting Innovation Resistance of Mobile Payments in Taiwan: An Integrative Perspective," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-19, October.
    42. Julia Blasch & Claudio Daminato, 2018. "Behavioral anomalies and energy-related individual choices: the role of status-quo bias," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 18/300, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    43. Jehane Simona-Moussa & Laura Ravazzini, 2019. "From One Recession to Another: Longitudinal Impacts on the Quality of Life of Vulnerable Groups," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 142(3), pages 1129-1152, April.
    44. Arkes, Hal R. & Blumer, Catherine, 1985. "The psychology of sunk cost," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 124-140, February.
    45. Heidenreich, Sven & Kraemer, Tobias & Handrich, Matthias, 2016. "Satisfied and unwilling: Exploring cognitive and situational resistance to innovations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 2440-2447.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Huang, Dan & Jin, Xin & Coghlan, Alexandra, 2021. "Advances in consumer innovation resistance research: A review and research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    2. Malodia, Suresh & Kaur, Puneet & Ractham, Peter & Sakashita, Mototaka & Dhir, Amandeep, 2022. "Why do people avoid and postpone the use of voice assistants for transactional purposes? A perspective from decision avoidance theory," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 605-618.
    3. Villanueva Orbaiz, María Luisa & Arce-Urriza, Marta, 2024. "The role of active and passive resistance in new technology adoption by final consumers: The case of 3D printing," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. Talwar, Shalini & Talwar, Manish & Kaur, Puneet & Dhir, Amandeep, 2020. "Consumers’ resistance to digital innovations: A systematic review and framework development," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 286-299.
    5. Chakraborty, Debarun & Singu, Hari Babu & Patre, Smruti, 2022. "Fitness Apps's purchase behaviour: Amalgamation of Stimulus-Organism-Behaviour-Consequence framework (S–O–B–C) and the innovation resistance theory (IRT)," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    6. Fu, Shihui & Xue, Kunkun & Yang, Mengya & Wang, Xiaona, 2023. "An exploratory study on users' resistance to mobile app updates: Using netnography and fsQCA," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    7. Gyutae Lee & Yunsik Kim, 2022. "Effects of Resistance Barriers to Service Robots on Alternative Attractiveness and Intention to Use," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(2), pages 21582440221, May.
    8. Faten Baklouti & Fayçal Boukamcha, 2024. "Consumer resistance to internet banking services: implications for the innovation resistance theory," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(2), pages 364-376, June.
    9. Loh, Xiu-Ming & Lee, Voon-Hsien & Leong, Lai-Ying & Aw, Eugene Cheng-Xi & Cham, Tat-Huei & Tang, Yun-Chia & Hew, Jun-Jie, 2023. "Understanding consumers’ resistance to pay with cryptocurrency in the sharing economy: A hybrid SEM-fsQCA approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    10. Hew, Jun-Jie & Lee, Voon-Hsien & Leong, Lai-Ying, 2023. "Why do mobile consumers resist mobile commerce applications? A hybrid fsQCA-ANN analysis," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    11. He, Xin & Mittal, Vikas, 2007. "The effect of decision risk and project stage on escalation of commitment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 225-237, July.
    12. Boeuf, Benjamin, 2019. "The impact of mortality anxiety on attitude toward product innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 44-60.
    13. Hew, Jun-Jie & Leong, Lai-Ying & Tan, Garry Wei-Han & Ooi, Keng-Boon & Lee, Voon-Hsien, 2019. "The age of mobile social commerce: An Artificial Neural Network analysis on its resistances," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 311-324.
    14. Ibrahim Filiz & Thomas Nahmer & Markus Spiwoks & Kilian Bizer, 2018. "Portfolio diversification: the influence of herding, status-quo bias, and the gambler’s fallacy," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 32(2), pages 167-205, May.
    15. Roee Teper, 2010. "Probabilistic Dominance and Status Quo Bias," Working Paper 5864, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh.
    16. Seth, Himanshu & Talwar, Shalini & Bhatia, Anuj & Saxena, Akanksha & Dhir, Amandeep, 2020. "Consumer resistance and inertia of retail investors: Development of the resistance adoption inertia continuance (RAIC) framework," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    17. Yingying Yang & Peng Lu & Yuanyuan Niu & Guohong Yuan, 2024. "Research on Unmanned Smart Hotels Resistance from the Perspective of Innovation Resistance Theory," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(3), pages 21582440241, September.
    18. Riella, Gil & Teper, Roee, 2014. "Probabilistic dominance and status quo bias," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 288-304.
    19. Frederiks, Elisha R. & Stenner, Karen & Hobman, Elizabeth V., 2015. "Household energy use: Applying behavioural economics to understand consumer decision-making and behaviour," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1385-1394.
    20. Miriam Krieger & Stefan Felder, 2013. "Can Decision Biases Improve Insurance Outcomes? An Experiment on Status Quo Bias in Health Insurance Choice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Status quo bias; Literature review; Cognitive bias; Bias measurement; Countermeasures;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:manrev:v:73:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s11301-022-00283-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.