IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-02152494.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

De la compréhension du biais de statu quo pour accompagner le changement : vers une mobilité des préférences

Author

Listed:
  • Anne Krupicka

    (CEREGE [Poitiers, La Rochelle] - Centre de recherche en gestion [EA 1722] - UP - Université de Poitiers = University of Poitiers - ULR - La Rochelle Université)

Abstract

Un des éléments de résistance au changement réside dans le biais de statu quo qui intervient dans la prise de décision. La théorie des perspectives développée par Kahneman et Tversky (1979) semble apporter un éclairage tant sur le poids de ce statu quo que sur les moyens d'y remédier. Après avoir décrit les facteurs explicatifs du statu quo, la présente communication explore les facteurs explicatifs du statu quo dans le basculement des préférences d'un produit A vers un produit B dans le secteur banque-assurance. Pour ce faire une observation participante, complétée par 14 entretiens individuels et deux tables rondes permettent d'identifier différents facteurs en interaction dans l'explication du statu quo observé. Mots-clés : Théorie des perspectives, biais de statu quo, approche ethnographique, facteurs explicatifs du statu quo Abstract : This paper introduces the prospect theory and presents the explanatory factors of the status quo bias. The methodology used on this research consists of a participating observation completed by 14 interviews and 2 focuses group. Through an example in the Bank Assurance sector, this paper identifies the determinants biais in interaction into the statu quo choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne Krupicka, 2018. "De la compréhension du biais de statu quo pour accompagner le changement : vers une mobilité des préférences," Post-Print hal-02152494, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-02152494
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02152494v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-02152494v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2004. "Save More Tomorrow (TM): Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(S1), pages 164-187, February.
    2. Spiggle, Susan, 1994. "Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(3), pages 491-503, December.
    3. Dominique Bourgeon-Renault & Caroline Urbain & Christine Petr & Marine Le Gall-Ely & Anne Gombault, 2006. "An Experiential Approach to the Consumption Value of Arts and Culture: The Case of Museums and Monuments," Post-Print halshs-00112576, HAL.
    4. Balbo Laurie & Jeannot Florence & Justine Estarague, 2017. "Promouvoir les comportements de santé pro-sociaux : l’association du cadrage du message et de la distance sociale," Post-Print hal-02308477, HAL.
    5. Laurie Balbo & Florence Jeannot & Justine Estarague, 2017. "Promouvoir les comportements de santé pro-sociaux : l'association du cadrage du message et de la distance sociale," Post-Print hal-02000434, HAL.
    6. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    7. 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.
    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. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Meloria Meschi & Carla Pace, 2012. "Accounting for Behavioral Biases for Non-biased Demand Estimations," Chapters, in: Michael A. Crew & Paul R. Kleindorfer (ed.), Multi-Modal Competition and the Future of Mail, chapter 24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Sullivan, Nikki & Breslav, Alexander & Doré, Samyukta & Bachman, Matthew & Huettel, Scott A., 2025. "The golden halo of defaults in simple choices," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126086, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Knetsch, Jack L., 2007. "Biased valuations, damage assessments, and policy choices: The choice of measure matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 684-689, September.
    5. Kunte Sebastian, 2020. "The Regional Nudger: Wie Erkenntnisse der Verhaltensökonomie die Regionalpolitik und die politische Praxis auf Länderebene verbessern können," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 69(1), pages 69-87, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Yang, Jiaqi, 2025. "Status quo bias with choice overload," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 170-186.
    8. Delgado, Laura & Shealy, Tripp, 2018. "Opportunities for greater energy efficiency in government facilities by aligning decision structures with advances in behavioral science," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 3952-3961.
    9. van Rooij, Maarten C.J. & Kool, Clemens J.M. & Prast, Henriette M., 2007. "Risk-return preferences in the pension domain: Are people able to choose?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 701-722, April.
    10. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    11. Ritika & Nawal Kishor, 2020. "Development and validation of behavioral biases scale: a SEM approach," Review of Behavioral Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 14(2), pages 237-259, November.
    12. Nobel Prize Committee, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    13. 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.
    14. Vincze, János & Koltay, Gábor, 2009. "Fogyasztói döntések a viselkedési közgazdaságtan szemszögéből [Consumer decisions from the angle of behavioural economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(6), pages 495-525.
    15. Daniel Vuuren, 2014. "Flexible Retirement," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 573-593, July.
    16. Rogers, Todd & Bazerman, Max H., 2008. "Future lock-in: Future implementation increases selection of 'should' choices," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 1-20, May.
    17. Camara, N'Famory & Xu, Deyi & Binyet, Emmanuel, 2017. "Understanding household energy use, decision making and behaviour in Guinea-Conakry by applying behavioural economics," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1380-1391.
    18. van Rooij, Maarten C.J. & Kool, Clemens J.M. & Prast, Henriette M., 2007. "Risk-return preferences in the pension domain: Are people able to choose?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 701-722, April.
    19. Olapeju Comfort Ogunmokun & Oluwasoye P. Mafimisebi & Demola Obembe, 2023. "Prospect theory and bank credit risk decision-making behaviour: a systematic literature review and future research agenda," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 1-25, April.
    20. Sherman, Gary D., 2020. "The moral psychology of continuation decisions: A recipe for moral disengagement," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 36-48.

    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:hal:journl:hal-02152494. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.