IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v10y1993i1p83-111.html

An Experimental Investigation of Explanations for Outcome Effects on Appraisals of Capital†Budgeting Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • CLIFTON E. BROWN
  • IRA SOLOMON

Abstract

. Studies investigating effects of outcomes on judgments and decisions have been increasing within the business/accounting research literatures. No study, however, has addressed the presence or absence of such effects in terms of potential explanations and the conditions affecting their viability. Three such explanations are the foci of the present study: cognitive reconstruction, self†enhancing motive, and an escalation†of†commitment analogue. The viability of these explanations was investigated experimentally in an accounting context in which subjects evaluated a capital†budgeting committee's funding priority decisions with or without project outcome information (five†year operating results). Experimental results fully support the cognitive reconstruction explanation for outcome effects on decision appraisals but provide only limited support for the self†enhancing motive and escalation†of†commitment explanations. Results of additional experimentation are presented, further supporting logic inherent in the hypothesis derived from the cognitive reconstruction explanation. The relationship of the present study to prior research and implications for future research and practice are discussed. Résumé. Les études portant sur l'analyse de l'incidence de l'issue d'une situation sur les jugements posés et les décisions prises par la suite se sont multipliées dans la recherche en gestion et en comptabilité. Aucun chercheur ne s'est pourtant penché sur la présence ou l'absence d'une telle incidence en s'interrogeant sur son explication potentielle et sur les facteurs qui influent sur sa viabilité. La présente étude s'articule autour de trois de ces explications: la reconstruction cognitive, la promotion personnelle et un équivalent de l'escalade de l'engagement. La viabilité de ces explications a été soumise à une étude expérimentale dans un contexte comptable dans lequel les sujets évaluaient les décisions d'un comité chargé du choix des investissements dans le cadre de l'établissement des priorités en matière d'affectation des fonds, avec ou sans information sur l'issue des projets (résultats d'exploitation de cinq ans). Les résultats de l'expérience confirment sans équivoque l'explication de la reconstruction cognitive relativement à l'incidence de l'issue des projets sur les évaluations décisionnelles, mais ils n'appuient que de façon mitigée les explications de la promotion personnelle et de l'escalade des engagements. Les auteurs exposent les résultats d'autres expériences, qui viennent étayer la logique sous†jacente à l'hypothèse fondée sur l'explication de la reconstruction cognitive. Ils analysent enfin la relation entre la présente étude et les travaux de recherche antérieurs de même que ses conséquences éventuelles sur la recherche et la profession.

Suggested Citation

  • Clifton E. Brown & Ira Solomon, 1993. "An Experimental Investigation of Explanations for Outcome Effects on Appraisals of Capital†Budgeting Decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 83-111, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:10:y:1993:i:1:p:83-111
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1911-3846.1993.tb00383.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1993.tb00383.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1993.tb00383.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hogarth, Robin M & Reder, Melvin W, 1986. "Perspectives from Economics and Psychology: Editor's Comments," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 185-207, October.
    2. Buchman, Thomas A., 1985. "An effect of hindsight on predicting bankruptcy with accounting information," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 267-285, July.
    3. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    4. March, James G., 1987. "Ambiguity and accounting: The elusive link between information and decision making," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 153-168, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mertins, Lasse & Salbador, Debra & Long, James H., 2013. "The outcome effect – A review and implications for future research," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 2-30.
    2. Luft, Joan & Shields, Michael D., 2003. "Mapping management accounting: graphics and guidelines for theory-consistent empirical research," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 169-249.
    3. Eva Crespo-Cebada & Carlos Díaz-Caro & Aurora E. Rabazo-Martín & Edilberto J. Rodríguez-Rivero, 2021. "Do Narcissistic Managers Prefer Incentive Systems Based on Financial Instruments? An Analysis Based on Choice Experiments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-13, January.
    4. Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2003. "Perspectives on experimental research in managerial accounting," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 287-318.
    5. Paul Andon & Jane Baxter & Wai Fong Chua, 2024. "Affect and reason in uncertain accounting settings: The case of capital investment appraisal," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 64(2), pages 1439-1470, June.
    6. Ghosh, Dipankar & Lusch, Robert F., 2000. "Outcome effect, controllability and performance evaluation of managers: some field evidence from multi-outlet businesses," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 25(4-5), pages 411-425, May.

    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. Pingle, Mark, 1997. "Submitting to authority: Its effect on decision-making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 45-68, February.
    2. Blom, Tannelie and Valentina Carraro, 2014. "An information processing approach to public organizations: The case of the European Union Fundamental Rights Agency," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 18, February.
    3. Freeman, Steven F., 1997. "Good decisions : reconciling human rationality, evolution, and ethics," Working papers WP 3962-97., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    4. Pascale Amans & Sylvie Rascol-Boutard, 2006. "Controlling Complex Organizations on the Basis of an Operational Performance Measure," Post-Print hal-01659071, HAL.
    5. Ellen Garbarino & Robert Slonim, 2007. "Preferences and decision errors in the winner’s curse," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 241-257, June.
    6. Joshua M. Epstein, 2007. "Agent-Based Computational Models and Generative Social Science," Introductory Chapters, in: Generative Social Science Studies in Agent-Based Computational Modeling, Princeton University Press.
    7. Liebig, Stefan & Schupp, Jürgen, 2008. "Leistungs- oder Bedarfsgerechtigkeit? Über einen normativen Zielkonflikt des Wohlfahrtsstaats und seiner Bedeutung für die Bewertung des eigenen Erwerbseinkommens," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 59(1), pages 7-30.
    8. Buckenmaier, Johannes & Dimant, Eugen & Posten, Ann-Christin & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2017. "On punishment institutions and effective deterrence of illicit behavior," Kiel Working Papers 2090, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    9. Jérôme Massiani, 2023. "Economic Expertise and Large Infrastructures Projects: The 2019 Cost Benefit Analysis of the Lyon Turin Project [Expertise économique et grandes infrastructures : l’analyse coûts- avantages du Lyon-Turin de 2019]," Post-Print hal-04159527, HAL.
    10. Ashton, John K. & Hudson, Robert S., 2008. "Interest rate clustering in UK financial services markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1393-1403, July.
    11. Satish Nambisan & Yadong Luo, 2021. "Toward a loose coupling view of digital globalization," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(8), pages 1646-1663, October.
    12. Bindewald, Eckart, 2017. "A survey suggests individual priorities are virtually unique: Implications for group dynamics, goal achievement and ecology," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 362(C), pages 69-79.
    13. Cheng Li, 2019. "Morality and value neutrality in economics: a dualist view," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 97-118, May.
    14. Åsa Lofgren & Katarina Nordblom, 2009. "Puzzling tax attitudes and labels," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(18), pages 1809-1812.
    15. Yu‐Lin Hsu & Gavin C. Reid, 2021. "Two‐stage decision‐making within the firm: Analysis and case studies," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(6), pages 1355-1373, September.
    16. Yuval Arbel & Danny Ben-Shahar & Eyal Sulganik, 2009. "Mean Reversion and Momentum: Another Look at the Price-Volume Correlation in the Real Estate Market," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 316-335, October.
    17. Rania HENTATI & Jean-Luc PRIGENT, 2010. "Structured Portfolio Analysis under SharpeOmega Ratio," EcoMod2010 259600073, EcoMod.
    18. Keiran Sharpe, 2006. "Effective demand in a stylised Keynesian model of growth," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 173-191.
    19. Ross Niswanger & Eric Walden, 2022. "Quantity bias in comparison-shopping of multi-item baskets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, February.
    20. Wardley, Marcus & Alberhasky, Max, 2021. "Framing zero: Why losing nothing is better than gaining nothing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).

    More about this item

    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:wly:coacre:v:10:y:1993:i:1:p:83-111. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.