236:. In business, an example of sunk costs may be an investment into a factory or research that now has a lower value or none. For example, $ 20 million has been spent on building a power plant; the value now is zero because it is incomplete (and no sale or recovery is feasible). The plant can be completed for an additional $ 10 million or abandoned and a different but equally valuable facility built for $ 5 million. Abandonment and construction of the alternative facility is the more rational decision, even though it represents a total loss of the original expenditure—the original sum invested is a sunk cost. If decision-makers are irrational or have the "wrong" (different) incentives, the completion of the project may be chosen. For example, politicians or managers may have more incentive to avoid the appearance of a total loss. In practice, there is considerable ambiguity and uncertainty in such cases, and decisions may in retrospect appear irrational that were, at the time, reasonable to the economic actors involved and in the context of their incentives. A decision-maker might make rational decisions according to their incentives, outside of efficiency or profitability. This is considered to be an
436:: 72 of the people had just finished placing a $ 2.00 bet within the past 30 seconds, and 69 people were about to place a $ 2.00 bet in the next 30 seconds. Their hypothesis was that people who had just committed themselves to a course of action (betting $ 2.00) would reduce post-decision dissonance by believing more strongly than ever that they had picked a winner. Knox and Inkster asked the bettors to rate their horse's chances of winning on a 7-point scale. What they found was that people who were about to place a bet rated the chance that their horse would win at an average of 3.48 which corresponded to a "fair chance of winning" whereas people who had just finished betting gave an average rating of 4.81 which corresponded to a "good chance of winning". Their hypothesis was confirmed: after making a $ 2.00 commitment, people became more confident their bet would pay off. Knox and Inkster performed an ancillary test on the patrons of the horses themselves and managed (after normalization) to repeat their finding almost identically. Other researchers have also found evidence of inflated probability estimations.
181:, and such behavior may be described as "throwing good money after bad", while refusing to succumb to what may be described as "cutting one's losses". People can remain in failing relationships because they "have already invested too much to leave". Other people are swayed by arguments that a war must continue because lives will have been sacrificed in vain unless victory is achieved. Individuals caught up in psychologically manipulative scams will continue investing time, money and emotional energy into the project, despite doubts or suspicions that something is not right. These types of behaviour do not seem to accord with rational choice theory and are often classified as behavioural errors.
449:
that they, as manager, had made an earlier, disappointing R&D investment. In the low responsibility condition, subjects were told that a former manager had made a previous R&D investment in the underperforming division and were given the same profit data as the other group. In both cases, subjects were then asked to make a new $ 20 million investment. There was a significant interaction between assumed responsibility and average investment, with the high responsibility condition averaging $ 12.97 million and the low condition averaging $ 9.43 million. Similar results have been obtained in other studies.
320:
193:
100:
people should not let sunk costs influence their decisions; sunk costs are irrelevant to rational decisions. Thus, if a new factory was originally projected to cost $ 100 million, and yield $ 120 million in value, and after $ 30 million is spent on it the value projection falls to $ 65 million, the company should abandon the project rather than spending an additional $ 70 million to complete it. Conversely, if the value projection falls to $ 75 million, the company, as a rational actor, should continue the project. This is known as the
154:(dependent on volume). However, many economists consider it a mistake to classify sunk costs as "fixed" or "variable". For example, if a firm sinks $ 400 million on an enterprise software installation, that cost is "sunk" because it was a one-time expense and cannot be recovered once spent. A "fixed" cost would be monthly payments made as part of a service contract or licensing deal with the company that set up the software. The upfront irretrievable payment for the installation should
2951:
225:(R&D) costs. Once spent, such costs are sunk and should have no effect on future pricing decisions. A pharmaceutical company's attempt to justify high prices because of the need to recoup R&D expenses would be fallacious. The company would charge a high price whether R&D cost one dollar or one million. R&D costs and the ability to recoup those costs are a factor in deciding whether to spend the money on R&D in the first place.
185:
second experiment, while people are in a relationship which they had invested enough time in, they tended to devote more time to the relationship. It also means people fall into the sunk cost fallacy. Although people should ignore sunk costs and make rational decisions when planning for the future, time, money, and effort often make people continue to maintain this relationship, which is equivalent to continuing to invest in failed projects.
71:, which are future costs that may be avoided if action is taken. In other words, a sunk cost is a sum paid in the past that is no longer relevant to decisions about the future. Even though economists argue that sunk costs are no longer relevant to future rational decision-making, people in everyday life often take previous expenditures in situations, such as repairing a car or house, into their future decisions regarding those properties.
463:
2940:
189:
lost public support in the 1970s and 1980s, when public service commissions around the nation ordered prudency reviews. From these reviews, De Bondt and
Makhija find evidence that the commissions denied many utility companies even partial recovery of nuclear construction costs on the grounds that they had been mismanaging the nuclear construction projects in ways consistent with throwing good money after bad.
136:
history. In the language of decision trees, it requires the agent's choice at a particular choice node to be independent of unreachable parts of the tree. This formulation makes clear how central the principle is to standard economic theory by, for example, founding the folding-back algorithm for individual sequential decisions and game-theoretical concepts such as sub-game perfection.
229:
by the sunk cost fallacy. When stressed, they are more motivated to invest in failed projects rather than take additional approaches. Their report shows that the sunk cost fallacy will have a greater impact on people under high load conditions and people's psychological state and external environment will be the key influencing factors.
424:
hypothesis. Secondly, the social image hypothesis suggests that the frame in which the options are presented will affect the way the decision maker is viewed and will in turn affect their behaviour. Lastly, the frame may affect the expectations that people have about each other's behaviour and will in turn affect their own behaviour.
209:
supersonic airplane even after it became apparent that there was no longer an economic case for the aircraft. The
British government privately regarded the project as a commercial disaster that should never have been started. Political and legal issues made it impossible for either government to pull
161:
There are cases in which taking sunk costs into account in decision-making, violating the bygones principle, is rational. For example, for a manager who wishes to be perceived as persevering in the face of adversity, or to avoid blame for earlier mistakes, it may be rational to persist with a project
228:
Dijkstra and Hong proposed that part of a person's behavior is influenced by a person's current emotions. Their experiments showed that emotional responses benefit from the sunk cost fallacy. Negative influences lead to the sunk cost fallacy. For example, anxious people face the stress brought about
99:
consequences. Past mistakes are irrelevant. Any costs incurred prior to making the decision have already been incurred no matter what decision is made. They may be described as "water under the bridge", and making decisions on their basis may be described as "crying over spilt milk". In other words,
135:
The bygones principle can also be formalised as the notion of "separability". Separability requires agents to take decisions by comparing the available options in eventualities that can still occur, uninfluenced by how the current situation was reached or by eventualities that are precluded by that
419:
The most common type of framing effect was theorised in
Kahneman & Tversky, 1979 in the form of valence framing effects. This form of framing signifies types of framing. The first type can be considered positive where the 'sure thing' option highlights the positivity whereas if it is negative,
256:
that tends to force the continuation of a plan or course of action even in the face of changing conditions. In the field of aerospace it has been recognised as a significant causal factor in accidents, with a 2004 NASA study finding that in 9 out of the 19 accidents studied, aircrew exhibited this
523:
A ticket buyer who purchases a ticket in advance to an event they eventually turn out not to enjoy makes a semi-public commitment to watching it. To leave early is to make this lapse of judgment manifest to strangers, an appearance they might otherwise choose to avoid. As well, the person may not
448:
investment either in an underperforming company department, or in other sections of the hypothetical company. Staw and Fox divided the participants into two groups: a low responsibility condition and a high responsibility condition. In the high responsibility condition, the participants were told
188:
According to evidence reported by De Bondt and
Makhija (1988), managers of many utility companies in the United States have been overly reluctant to terminate economically unviable nuclear plant projects. In the 1960s, the nuclear power industry promised "energy too cheap to meter". Nuclear power
176:
The bygones principle does not always accord with real-world behavior. Sunk costs often influence people's decisions, with people believing that investments (i.e., sunk costs) justify further expenditures. People demonstrate "a greater tendency to continue an endeavor once an investment in money,
415:
While these functions are framed differently, regardless of the input 'x', the outcome is analytically equivalent. Therefore, if a rational decision maker were to choose between these two functions, the likelihood of each function being chosen should be the same. However, a framing effect places
184:
Rego, Arantes, and MagalhĂŁes point out that the sunk cost effect exists in committed relationships. They devised two experiments, one of which showed that people in a relationship which they had invested money and effort in were more likely to keep that relationship going than end it; and in the
423:
Ellingsen, Johannesson, Möllerström and
Munkammar have categorised framing effects in a social and economic orientation into three broad classes of theories. Firstly, the framing of options presented can affect internalised social norms or social preferences - this is called variable sociality
276:
ran aground when its captain persisted with a risky course rather than accepting a delay. It has been a factor in numerous air crashes and an analysis of 279 approach and landing accidents (ALAs) found that it was the fourth most common cause, occurring in 11% of cases. Another analysis of 76
162:
for personal reasons even if it is not the benefit of their company. Or, if they hold private information about the undesirability of abandoning a project, it is fully rational to persist with a project that outsiders think displays the fallacy of sunk cost.
420:
the 'sure thing' option highlights the negativity, while both being analytically identical. For example, saving 200 people from a sinking ship of 600 is equivalent to letting 400 people drown. The former framing type is positive and the latter is negative.
374:
where the outcome is the same regardless of how the information is framed. This is in contradiction to the concept of intentionality, which is concerned with whether the presentation of information changes the situation in question.
204:
There is also evidence of government representatives failing to ignore sunk costs. The term "Concorde fallacy" derives from the fact that the
British and French governments continued to fund the joint development of the costly
1585:
Winter, Scott R.; Rice, Stephen; Capps, John; Trombley, Justin; Milner, Mattie N.; Anania, Emily C.; Walters, Nathan W.; Baugh, Bradley S. (2020-03-01). "An analysis of a pilot's adherence to their personal weather minimums".
132:, which says that it is rational in decision-making to disregard (cancel) any state of the world that yields the same outcome regardless of one's choice. Past decisions—including sunk costs—meet that criterion.
143:
and is properly included in any decision-making process. For instance, if someone is considering pre-ordering movie tickets, but has not actually purchased them yet, the cost remains avoidable.
158:
be deemed a "fixed" cost, with its cost spread out over time. Sunk costs should be kept separate. The "variable costs" for this project might include data centre power usage, for example.
1723:
2028:
354:
The desire not to appear wasteful—"One reason why people may wish to throw good money after bad is that to stop investing would constitute an admission that the prior money was wasted."
351:
The requisite of personal responsibility. Sunk cost appears to operate chiefly in those who feel a personal responsibility for the investments that are to be viewed as a sunk cost.
200:
fallacy": the
British and French governments took their past expenses on the costly supersonic jet as a rationale for continuing the project, as opposed to "cutting their losses".
1828:
Levin, Irwin P.; Schneider, Sandra L.; Gaeth, Gary J. (2 November 1998). "All Frames Are Not
Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects".
288:
having made a decision. The second is that of personal responsibility: when you are personally accountable, it is difficult for you to admit that you were wrong.
524:
want to leave the event because they have already paid, so they may feel that leaving would waste their expenditure. Alternatively, they may take a sense of
221:
incurs costs that cannot normally be recovered. It is not typically possible to later "demote" one's brand names in exchange for cash. A second example is
1200:
1863:
Ellingsen, Tore; Johannesson, Magnus; Mollerstrom, Johanna; Munkhammar, Sara (17 May 2012). "Social framing effects: Preferences or beliefs?".
345:; e.g. as a loss or as a gain. People tend to avoid risk when a positive frame is presented but seek risks when a negative frame is presented.
1664:
244:
is reversed; that is, where individuals appear irrationally eager to write off earlier investments in order to take up a new endeavor.
2821:
2320:
1724:"A review of optimism bias, planning fallacy, sunk cost bias and groupthink in project delivery and organisational decision making"
1054:
268:
who may stick to a planned course even when it is leading to fatal disaster and they should abort instead. A famous example is the
1968:
348:
An overoptimistic probability bias, whereby after an investment the evaluation of one's investment-reaping dividends is increased.
213:
The idea of sunk costs is often employed when analyzing business decisions. A common example of a sunk cost for a business is the
1492:
Heath, Chip. "Escalation and de-escalation of commitment in response to sunk costs: The role of budgeting in mental accounting."
2253:
2183:
1761:
1410:
962:
857:
832:
800:
775:
747:
719:
689:
664:
639:
614:
2122:
Amankwah-Amoah, J. (2014). "A unified framework of explanations for strategic persistence in the wake of others' failures".
1090:
Arkes, Hal R.; Ayton, Peter (1999). "The sunk cost and
Concorde effects: Are humans less rational than lower animals?".
2234:
341:, a cognitive bias where people decide on options based on whether the options are presented with positive or negative
2292:
2275:
572:
510:
17:
492:
2143:
Arkes, H.R.; Ayton, P. (1999). "The Sunk Cost and
Concorde effects: are humans less rational than lower animals?".
1511:
488:
300:
2248:
Klein, G. and Bauman, Y. The Cartoon Introduction to Economics Volume One: Microeconomics Hill and Wang 2010
35:
326:, an Israeli psychologist known for his work in behavioral economics and studies of rationality in economics
2512:
2313:
1171:
1955:
Arkes, Hal; Hutzel, Laura (2000). "The Role of Probability of Success Estimates in the Sunk Cost Effect".
2990:
2806:
2758:
2446:
338:
125:
2468:
2456:
2451:
2441:
1428:"The feeling of throwing good money after bad: The role of affective reaction in the sunk-cost fallacy"
562:
484:
334:
suggests that there are at least four specific psychological factors underlying the sunk cost effect:
2985:
2980:
2886:
2411:
2362:
2226:
1629:
358:
Taken together, these results suggest that the sunk cost effect may reflect non-standard measures of
1701:
2552:
2421:
2242:
552:
473:
445:
222:
1655:
2954:
2851:
2846:
2796:
2669:
2547:
2306:
2221:
1777:
Tversky, Amos; Kahneman, Daniel (1981). "The Framing of decisions and the psychology of choice".
583:
477:
433:
342:
269:
2871:
2831:
2826:
2608:
2579:
2436:
2358:
240:
and is distinct from a sunk cost problem. Some research has also noted circumstances where the
120:
444:
In a study of 96 business students, Staw and Fox gave the subjects a choice between making an
2816:
2801:
2517:
214:
985:
Parayre, Roch (1995). "The strategic implications of sunk costs: A behavioral perspective".
2995:
2866:
2786:
2718:
2633:
2527:
2463:
2029:"Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action"
1786:
1536:
1439:
331:
285:
171:
280:
There are also two predominant factors that characterise the bias. The first is an overly
8:
2881:
2708:
2557:
2500:
2343:
1680:"Analysis of Critical Factors During Approach and Landing in Accidents and Normal Flight"
1561:
1405:. Vol. One: Microeconomics (1st ed.). New York: Hill and Wang. pp. 24–25.
557:
319:
150:(continuous for as long as the business is operating and unaffected by output volume) or
80:
1790:
1731:
An Exploration of Behavioural Biases in Project Delivery at the Department for Transport
1443:
1021:
873:
Tversky, Amos; Kahneman, Daniel (1986). "Rational choice and the framing of decisions".
2791:
2737:
2664:
2574:
2532:
2522:
2490:
2485:
2431:
2426:
2178:
Bernheim, D. and Whinston, M. "Microeconomics". McGraw-Hill Irwin, New York, NY, 2008.
2160:
2100:
2075:
Whyte, Glen (1986). "Escalating Commitment to a Course of Action: A Reinterpretation".
2003:
1810:
1611:
1470:
1427:
1383:
1348:
1297:
1250:
1115:
933:
898:
542:
65:
that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered. Sunk costs are contrasted with
2924:
2912:
2891:
2861:
2723:
2647:
2603:
2288:
2271:
2249:
2230:
2191:
2179:
2092:
2051:
2047:
2007:
1983:
1941:
1907:
1845:
1802:
1757:
1615:
1603:
1475:
1457:
1406:
1352:
1301:
1289:
1254:
1246:
1153:
1149:
1107:
1066:
1029:
1002:
998:
958:
890:
853:
828:
796:
771:
743:
715:
685:
660:
635:
610:
2164:
1119:
192:
2876:
2856:
2763:
2713:
2684:
2542:
2507:
2404:
2382:
2211:
2206:
2152:
2131:
2084:
2043:
1995:
1964:
1937:
1899:
1872:
1837:
1814:
1794:
1595:
1465:
1447:
1387:
1375:
1338:
1328:
1281:
1242:
1196:
1145:
1099:
994:
937:
925:
882:
547:
529:
370:
The framing effect which underlies the sunk cost effect builds upon the concept of
296:
273:
67:
916:
Cubitt, Robin; Ruiz-Martos, Maria; Starmer, Chris (2012). "Are bygones bygones?".
657:
The Monetary Value of Time: Why Traditional Accounting Systems Make Customers Wait
139:
Until a decision-maker irreversibly commits resources, the prospective cost is an
2944:
2416:
2353:
1679:
1452:
952:
822:
709:
577:
567:
323:
115:
50:
2156:
1103:
252:
A related phenomenon is plan continuation bias, which is recognised as a subtle
2975:
2919:
2659:
2618:
2537:
2329:
1999:
1599:
1366:
Weatherhead, P.J. (1979). "Do Savannah Sparrows Commit the Concorde Fallacy?".
1269:
371:
265:
253:
2135:
1876:
1333:
1316:
1285:
929:
2969:
2841:
2741:
2732:
2703:
2689:
2679:
2623:
2387:
2377:
2367:
2238:
2096:
2055:
1607:
1461:
1317:"On the sunk-cost effect in economic decision-making: a meta-analytic review"
1293:
1157:
1111:
1070:
1033:
1006:
894:
308:
151:
140:
84:
1798:
1233:
McAfee, Preston; Mialon, Hugo; Mialon, Sue (2010). "Do Sunk Costs Matter?".
2811:
2643:
2638:
2372:
1841:
1479:
292:
233:
1911:
1849:
1806:
2836:
2748:
2628:
2480:
2394:
1984:"Escalation: The Determinants of Commitment to a Chosen Course of Action"
1862:
1753:
1650:
261:
88:
1343:
2596:
2348:
2281:
1969:
10.1002/1099-0771(200007/09)13:3<295::AID-BDM353>3.0.CO;2-6
1379:
1136:
Arkes, Hal R; Blumer, Catherine (1985). "The psychology of sunk cost".
902:
304:
147:
2104:
1890:
Knox, RE; Inkster, JA (1968). "Postdecision dissonance at post time".
91:
decision. At any moment in time, the best thing to do depends only on
2907:
2674:
2591:
2586:
1928:
Arkes, Hal; Blumer, Catherine (1985). "The Psychology of Sunk Cost".
1903:
218:
112:
46:
462:
2699:
2694:
2569:
2088:
886:
824:
Cost Management: Measuring, Monitoring & Motivating Performance
281:
277:
accidents found that it was a contributory factor in 42% of cases.
206:
197:
1678:
Khatwa, Ratan; Helmreich, Robert (November 1998 – February 1999),
2753:
2652:
2564:
2298:
359:
634:(8th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. pp. 274–276.
2939:
2728:
1734:
609:(5th ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. pp. 296–297.
362:, which is ultimately subjective and unique to the individual.
2613:
2495:
2475:
525:
416:
unequal biases towards preferences that are otherwise equal.
2770:
1268:
Rego, Sara; Arantes, Joana; MagalhĂŁes, Paula (2016-11-29).
62:
27:
Cost that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered
1562:"17 Cognitive Biases which Contribute to Diving Accidents"
87:
theory, only prospective (future) costs are relevant to a
2285:
Intermediate Microeconomics: A Modern Approach. Fifth Ed.
1721:
1270:"Is there a Sunk Cost Effect in Committed Relationships?"
146:
Both retrospective and prospective costs could be either
915:
128:. Expected utility theory relies on a property known as
1700:
Bermin, Benjamin A.; Dismukes, R. Key (December 2006),
1584:
1315:
Roth, Stefan; Robbert, Thomas; Straus, Lennart (2014).
766:
Bernheim, B. Douglas; Whinston, Michael Dennis (2008).
284:
estimate of probability of success, possibly to reduce
299:
and related factors including excessive optimism, an
1930:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
1830:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
1677:
1656:"Brexit lessons from the wreck of the Torrey Canyon"
1494:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
1267:
1138:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
1923:
1921:
1827:
439:
111:The bygones principle is grounded in the branch of
1654:
1232:
1189:
427:
95:alternatives. The only things that matter are the
1314:
1195:
2967:
2270:. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1991
1918:
765:
452:
196:The sunk cost fallacy has also been called the "
1776:
1426:Dijkstra, Koen A.; Hong, Ying-yi (2019-01-08).
987:Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization
872:
2121:
1750:The psychology of judgment and decision making
1699:
980:
978:
976:
974:
761:
759:
2314:
2036:Organizational Behavior and Human Performance
1506:
1504:
1502:
1228:
1226:
707:
1892:Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
1425:
1131:
1129:
703:
701:
679:
177:effort, or time has been made". This is the
2175:Addison Wesley Paperback 1st Edition: 2001.
1954:
1927:
1889:
1365:
1135:
971:
944:
816:
814:
812:
756:
742:. Cengage Learning EMEA. pp. 229–230.
708:Lipsey, Richard G.; Harbury, Colin (1992).
648:
491:. Unsourced material may be challenged and
2321:
2307:
2199:Ergo, an Open Access Journal of Philosophy
2192:"The Sunk Cost 'Fallacy' Is Not a Fallacy"
2142:
1982:Staw, Barry M.; Fox, Frederick V. (1977).
1499:
1400:
1223:
1089:
733:
731:
680:Sharma, Sanjay; Sharma, Pramodita (2019).
2263:McGraw-Hill International Editions: 1989.
2210:
2068:
1469:
1451:
1342:
1332:
1126:
847:
698:
623:
598:
511:Learn how and when to remove this message
432:In 1968, Knox and Inkster approached 141
247:
2259:Samuelson, Paul; and Nordhaus, William.
2020:
1630:"FAA Safety Briefing – July August 2018"
1019:
809:
714:. Oxford University Press. p. 143.
654:
318:
314:
191:
1981:
1722:Behavioural Insights Team (July 2017).
1649:
1394:
984:
950:
728:
14:
2968:
629:
604:
2302:
2189:
2074:
1957:Journal of Behavioral Decision Making
1770:
1747:
1403:The Cartoon Introduction to Economics
1052:
820:
30:"Sunk Costs" redirects here. For the
2245:, 22 December 2011, pp. 40–44.)
2026:
1401:Yoram, Bauman; Klein, Grady (2010).
1020:Staw, Barry M.; Ross, Jerry (1987).
790:
737:
489:adding citations to reliable sources
456:
74:
1715:
1693:
1671:
1201:"Psychic Arrested in Exorcism Scam"
740:Finance and Accounting for Business
24:
2877:Microfoundations of macroeconomics
2328:
2124:Journal of Strategy and Management
2115:
1643:
1537:"Safety and The Sunk Cost Fallacy"
1178:. Cambridge University Press. 2019
25:
3007:
2171:Bade, Robin; and Michael Parkin.
573:Psychology of previous investment
378:Take two mathematical functions:
365:
165:
2950:
2949:
2938:
2077:The Academy of Management Review
1512:"Flying in the rear view mirror"
1247:10.1111/j.1465-7295.2008.00184.x
532:of the alternative use of time.
461:
440:Sense of personal responsibility
2268:Sunk Costs and Market Structure
1975:
1948:
1883:
1856:
1821:
1741:
1667:from the original on 2022-12-10
1622:
1578:
1554:
1529:
1486:
1419:
1374:(4). Springer Berlin: 373–381.
1359:
1308:
1261:
1164:
1083:
1046:
1022:"Knowing When to Pull the Plug"
1013:
909:
866:
841:
428:Overoptimistic probability bias
232:The sunk cost effect may cause
2212:10.3998/ergo.12405314.0006.040
2173:Foundations of Microeconomics.
852:. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
795:. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
784:
684:. Cambridge University Press.
673:
301:unwillingness to admit failure
217:of a brand name. This type of
13:
1:
1321:Business Research (Göttingen)
827:. Global India Publications.
711:First Principles of Economics
591:
453:Desire not to appear wasteful
2048:10.1016/0030-5073(76)90005-2
1942:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4
1453:10.1371/journal.pone.0209900
1176:Cambridge English Dictionary
1150:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4
999:10.1016/0167-2681(95)00045-3
957:. Pearson / Addison Wesley.
607:Principles of Microeconomics
7:
2822:Civil engineering economics
2807:Statistical decision theory
2447:Income elasticity of demand
2157:10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.591
1865:Games and Economic Behavior
1104:10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.591
848:Samuelson, Paul A. (2010).
655:Warnacut, Joyce I. (2017).
630:Mankiw, N. Gregory (2018).
605:Mankiw, N. Gregory (2009).
535:
126:expected utility hypothesis
10:
3012:
2457:Price elasticity of supply
2452:Price elasticity of demand
2442:Cross elasticity of demand
2000:10.1177/001872677703000503
1600:10.1016/j.ssci.2019.104576
563:Foot-in-the-door technique
169:
29:
2933:
2900:
2779:
2336:
2227:Farrar, Straus and Giroux
2136:10.1108/JSMA-01-2014-0009
1877:10.1016/j.geb.2012.05.007
1334:10.1007/s40685-014-0014-8
1286:10.1007/s12144-016-9529-9
930:10.1007/s11238-010-9233-4
528:in having recognised the
2513:Income–consumption curve
2243:New York Review of Books
659:. Taylor & Francis.
553:Escalation of commitment
223:research and development
2847:Industrial organization
2222:Thinking, Fast and Slow
2027:Staw, Barry M. (1976).
1799:10.1126/science.7455683
1702:"Pressing the Approach"
1028:. No. March 1987.
1026:Harvard Business Review
951:Sherman, Roger (2008).
875:The Journal of Business
632:Principles of Economics
584:Thinking, Fast and Slow
270:Torrey Canyon oil spill
2145:Psychological Bulletin
1842:10.1006/obhd.1998.2804
1516:Critical Uncertainties
1368:Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol
1092:Psychological Bulletin
327:
295:and delays due to the
291:Projects often suffer
248:Plan continuation bias
201:
121:rational choice theory
2817:Engineering economics
2412:Cost–benefit analysis
1748:Plous, Scott (1993).
1709:Aviation Safety World
1566:www.thehumandiver.com
821:Gupta, K. P. (2009).
770:. McGraw-Hill Irwin.
322:
315:Psychological factors
260:This is a hazard for
195:
141:avoidable future cost
2634:Price discrimination
2528:Intertemporal choice
2219:Kahneman, D. (2011)
2190:Doody, Ryan (2020).
1687:Flight Safety Digest
791:Jain, P. K. (2000).
485:improve this section
332:behavioral economics
286:cognitive dissonance
172:Fail fast (business)
2945:Business portal
2882:Operations research
2709:Substitution effect
1791:1981Sci...211..453T
1653:(18 January 2019),
1444:2019PLoSO..1409900D
1172:"sunk cost fallacy"
1053:Arkes, Hal (2000).
918:Theory and Decision
558:Region-beta paradox
81:classical economics
2991:Behavioral finance
2523:Indifference curve
2491:Goods and services
2432:Economies of scope
2427:Economies of scale
1380:10.1007/BF00292525
1274:Current Psychology
1205:Skeptical Inquirer
1055:"Think Like a Dog"
738:Ryan, Bob (2004).
543:Disposition effect
328:
257:behavioural bias.
202:
124:, particularly in
106:marginal principle
59:retrospective cost
2963:
2962:
2925:Political economy
2724:Supply and demand
2604:Pareto efficiency
2254:978-0-8090-9481-3
2205:(40): 1153–1190.
2184:978-0-07-290027-9
1763:978-0-07-050477-6
1496:62 (1995): 38-38.
1412:978-0-8090-9481-3
1197:Radford, Benjamin
964:978-0-321-32232-6
954:Market Regulation
859:978-0-07-070071-0
834:978-93-80228-02-0
802:978-0-07-040224-9
777:978-0-07-721199-8
749:978-1-86152-993-0
721:978-0-297-82120-5
691:978-1-107-12366-3
666:978-1-4987-4967-1
641:978-1-305-58512-6
616:978-1-111-80697-2
521:
520:
513:
238:incentive problem
179:sunk cost fallacy
102:bygones principle
75:Bygones principle
68:prospective costs
18:Sunk cost fallacy
16:(Redirected from
3003:
2986:Cognitive biases
2981:Cost engineering
2953:
2952:
2943:
2942:
2685:Returns to scale
2543:Market structure
2323:
2316:
2309:
2300:
2299:
2216:
2214:
2196:
2168:
2139:
2109:
2108:
2072:
2066:
2065:
2063:
2062:
2033:
2024:
2018:
2017:
2015:
2014:
1979:
1973:
1972:
1952:
1946:
1945:
1925:
1916:
1915:
1904:10.1037/h0025528
1887:
1881:
1880:
1860:
1854:
1853:
1825:
1819:
1818:
1785:(4481): 453–58.
1774:
1768:
1767:
1745:
1739:
1738:
1728:
1719:
1713:
1712:
1711:, pp. 28–33
1706:
1697:
1691:
1690:
1684:
1675:
1669:
1668:
1658:
1647:
1641:
1640:
1634:
1626:
1620:
1619:
1582:
1576:
1575:
1573:
1572:
1558:
1552:
1551:
1549:
1548:
1533:
1527:
1526:
1524:
1523:
1508:
1497:
1490:
1484:
1483:
1473:
1455:
1423:
1417:
1416:
1398:
1392:
1391:
1363:
1357:
1356:
1346:
1336:
1312:
1306:
1305:
1265:
1259:
1258:
1235:Economic Inquiry
1230:
1221:
1220:
1218:
1216:
1199:(January 2017).
1193:
1187:
1186:
1184:
1183:
1168:
1162:
1161:
1133:
1124:
1123:
1087:
1081:
1080:
1078:
1077:
1059:Psychology Today
1050:
1044:
1043:
1041:
1040:
1017:
1011:
1010:
982:
969:
968:
948:
942:
941:
924:(2): S185–S202.
913:
907:
906:
881:(4): S251–S278.
870:
864:
863:
845:
839:
838:
818:
807:
806:
788:
782:
781:
763:
754:
753:
735:
726:
725:
705:
696:
695:
677:
671:
670:
652:
646:
645:
627:
621:
620:
602:
548:Endowment effect
530:opportunity cost
516:
509:
505:
502:
496:
465:
457:
411:
395:
309:aversion to loss
297:planning fallacy
242:sunk cost effect
38:Better Call Saul
32:Better Call Saul
21:
3011:
3010:
3006:
3005:
3004:
3002:
3001:
3000:
2966:
2965:
2964:
2959:
2937:
2929:
2896:
2775:
2417:Deadweight loss
2354:Consumer choice
2332:
2327:
2287:New York, 1999
2237:. (Reviewed by
2194:
2118:
2116:Further reading
2113:
2112:
2073:
2069:
2060:
2058:
2031:
2025:
2021:
2012:
2010:
1988:Human Relations
1980:
1976:
1953:
1949:
1926:
1919:
1888:
1884:
1861:
1857:
1826:
1822:
1775:
1771:
1764:
1746:
1742:
1726:
1720:
1716:
1704:
1698:
1694:
1689:, pp. 1–77
1682:
1676:
1672:
1661:Financial Times
1648:
1644:
1632:
1628:
1627:
1623:
1583:
1579:
1570:
1568:
1560:
1559:
1555:
1546:
1544:
1535:
1534:
1530:
1521:
1519:
1510:
1509:
1500:
1491:
1487:
1438:(1): e0209900.
1424:
1420:
1413:
1399:
1395:
1364:
1360:
1313:
1309:
1266:
1262:
1231:
1224:
1214:
1212:
1194:
1190:
1181:
1179:
1170:
1169:
1165:
1134:
1127:
1088:
1084:
1075:
1073:
1051:
1047:
1038:
1036:
1018:
1014:
983:
972:
965:
949:
945:
914:
910:
871:
867:
860:
846:
842:
835:
819:
810:
803:
793:Cost Accounting
789:
785:
778:
764:
757:
750:
736:
729:
722:
706:
699:
692:
682:Patient Capital
678:
674:
667:
653:
649:
642:
628:
624:
617:
603:
599:
594:
589:
578:Stop-loss order
568:Prospect theory
538:
517:
506:
500:
497:
482:
466:
455:
442:
430:
398:
382:
368:
339:Framing effects
324:Daniel Kahneman
317:
311:of sunk costs.
266:aircraft pilots
262:ships' captains
250:
174:
168:
116:decision theory
77:
57:(also known as
51:decision-making
43:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
3009:
2999:
2998:
2993:
2988:
2983:
2978:
2961:
2960:
2958:
2957:
2947:
2934:
2931:
2930:
2928:
2927:
2922:
2920:Macroeconomics
2917:
2916:
2915:
2904:
2902:
2898:
2897:
2895:
2894:
2889:
2884:
2879:
2874:
2869:
2864:
2859:
2854:
2849:
2844:
2839:
2834:
2829:
2824:
2819:
2814:
2809:
2804:
2799:
2794:
2789:
2783:
2781:
2777:
2776:
2774:
2773:
2768:
2767:
2766:
2761:
2751:
2746:
2745:
2744:
2735:
2721:
2716:
2711:
2706:
2697:
2692:
2687:
2682:
2677:
2672:
2667:
2662:
2657:
2656:
2655:
2650:
2641:
2636:
2631:
2626:
2621:
2619:Price controls
2611:
2606:
2601:
2600:
2599:
2594:
2589:
2584:
2583:
2582:
2577:
2567:
2562:
2561:
2560:
2555:
2540:
2538:Market failure
2535:
2530:
2525:
2520:
2515:
2510:
2505:
2504:
2503:
2498:
2488:
2483:
2478:
2473:
2472:
2471:
2461:
2460:
2459:
2454:
2449:
2444:
2434:
2429:
2424:
2419:
2414:
2409:
2408:
2407:
2402:
2397:
2392:
2391:
2390:
2380:
2375:
2365:
2356:
2351:
2346:
2340:
2338:
2334:
2333:
2330:Microeconomics
2326:
2325:
2318:
2311:
2303:
2297:
2296:
2282:Varian, Hal R.
2279:
2264:
2257:
2246:
2235:978-0374275631
2217:
2187:
2176:
2169:
2151:(5): 591–600.
2140:
2130:(4): 422–444.
2117:
2114:
2111:
2110:
2089:10.2307/258462
2083:(2): 311–321.
2067:
2019:
1994:(5): 431–450.
1974:
1963:(3): 295–306.
1947:
1917:
1898:(4): 319–323.
1882:
1855:
1836:(2): 149–188.
1820:
1769:
1762:
1740:
1714:
1692:
1670:
1642:
1621:
1588:Safety Science
1577:
1553:
1541:SafetyRisk.net
1528:
1498:
1485:
1418:
1411:
1393:
1358:
1307:
1280:(3): 508–519.
1260:
1241:(2): 323–336.
1222:
1188:
1163:
1144:(1): 124–140.
1125:
1098:(5): 591–600.
1082:
1045:
1012:
993:(3): 417–442.
970:
963:
943:
908:
887:10.1086/296365
865:
858:
840:
833:
808:
801:
783:
776:
768:Microeconomics
755:
748:
727:
720:
697:
690:
672:
665:
647:
640:
622:
615:
596:
595:
593:
590:
588:
587:
580:
575:
570:
565:
560:
555:
550:
545:
539:
537:
534:
519:
518:
469:
467:
460:
454:
451:
441:
438:
429:
426:
413:
412:
396:
372:extensionality
367:
366:Framing effect
364:
356:
355:
352:
349:
346:
330:Evidence from
316:
313:
254:cognitive bias
249:
246:
167:
166:Fallacy effect
164:
152:variable costs
76:
73:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3008:
2997:
2994:
2992:
2989:
2987:
2984:
2982:
2979:
2977:
2974:
2973:
2971:
2956:
2948:
2946:
2941:
2936:
2935:
2932:
2926:
2923:
2921:
2918:
2914:
2911:
2910:
2909:
2906:
2905:
2903:
2899:
2893:
2890:
2888:
2885:
2883:
2880:
2878:
2875:
2873:
2870:
2868:
2865:
2863:
2860:
2858:
2855:
2853:
2852:Institutional
2850:
2848:
2845:
2843:
2840:
2838:
2835:
2833:
2830:
2828:
2825:
2823:
2820:
2818:
2815:
2813:
2810:
2808:
2805:
2803:
2800:
2798:
2797:Computational
2795:
2793:
2790:
2788:
2785:
2784:
2782:
2778:
2772:
2769:
2765:
2762:
2760:
2757:
2756:
2755:
2752:
2750:
2747:
2743:
2742:Law of supply
2739:
2736:
2734:
2733:Law of demand
2730:
2727:
2726:
2725:
2722:
2720:
2719:Social choice
2717:
2715:
2712:
2710:
2707:
2705:
2704:Excess supply
2701:
2698:
2696:
2693:
2691:
2690:Risk aversion
2688:
2686:
2683:
2681:
2678:
2676:
2673:
2671:
2668:
2666:
2663:
2661:
2658:
2654:
2651:
2649:
2645:
2642:
2640:
2637:
2635:
2632:
2630:
2627:
2625:
2624:Price ceiling
2622:
2620:
2617:
2616:
2615:
2612:
2610:
2607:
2605:
2602:
2598:
2595:
2593:
2590:
2588:
2585:
2581:
2580:Complementary
2578:
2576:
2573:
2572:
2571:
2568:
2566:
2563:
2559:
2556:
2554:
2551:
2550:
2549:
2546:
2545:
2544:
2541:
2539:
2536:
2534:
2531:
2529:
2526:
2524:
2521:
2519:
2516:
2514:
2511:
2509:
2506:
2502:
2499:
2497:
2494:
2493:
2492:
2489:
2487:
2484:
2482:
2479:
2477:
2474:
2470:
2467:
2466:
2465:
2462:
2458:
2455:
2453:
2450:
2448:
2445:
2443:
2440:
2439:
2438:
2435:
2433:
2430:
2428:
2425:
2423:
2420:
2418:
2415:
2413:
2410:
2406:
2403:
2401:
2398:
2396:
2393:
2389:
2386:
2385:
2384:
2381:
2379:
2376:
2374:
2371:
2370:
2369:
2366:
2364:
2363:non-convexity
2360:
2357:
2355:
2352:
2350:
2347:
2345:
2342:
2341:
2339:
2335:
2331:
2324:
2319:
2317:
2312:
2310:
2305:
2304:
2301:
2294:
2293:0-393-97830-3
2290:
2286:
2283:
2280:
2277:
2276:0-262-19305-1
2273:
2269:
2265:
2262:
2258:
2255:
2251:
2247:
2244:
2240:
2239:Freeman Dyson
2236:
2232:
2228:
2224:
2223:
2218:
2213:
2208:
2204:
2200:
2193:
2188:
2185:
2181:
2177:
2174:
2170:
2166:
2162:
2158:
2154:
2150:
2146:
2141:
2137:
2133:
2129:
2125:
2120:
2119:
2106:
2102:
2098:
2094:
2090:
2086:
2082:
2078:
2071:
2057:
2053:
2049:
2045:
2041:
2037:
2030:
2023:
2009:
2005:
2001:
1997:
1993:
1989:
1985:
1978:
1970:
1966:
1962:
1958:
1951:
1943:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1924:
1922:
1913:
1909:
1905:
1901:
1897:
1893:
1886:
1878:
1874:
1870:
1866:
1859:
1851:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1824:
1816:
1812:
1808:
1804:
1800:
1796:
1792:
1788:
1784:
1780:
1773:
1765:
1759:
1755:
1751:
1744:
1736:
1732:
1725:
1718:
1710:
1703:
1696:
1688:
1681:
1674:
1666:
1662:
1657:
1652:
1646:
1638:
1631:
1625:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1581:
1567:
1563:
1557:
1542:
1538:
1532:
1517:
1513:
1507:
1505:
1503:
1495:
1489:
1481:
1477:
1472:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1454:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1422:
1414:
1408:
1404:
1397:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1369:
1362:
1354:
1350:
1345:
1340:
1335:
1330:
1327:(1): 99–138.
1326:
1322:
1318:
1311:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1264:
1256:
1252:
1248:
1244:
1240:
1236:
1229:
1227:
1210:
1206:
1202:
1198:
1192:
1177:
1173:
1167:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1132:
1130:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1086:
1072:
1068:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1049:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1016:
1008:
1004:
1000:
996:
992:
988:
981:
979:
977:
975:
966:
960:
956:
955:
947:
939:
935:
931:
927:
923:
919:
912:
904:
900:
896:
892:
888:
884:
880:
876:
869:
861:
855:
851:
844:
836:
830:
826:
825:
817:
815:
813:
804:
798:
794:
787:
779:
773:
769:
762:
760:
751:
745:
741:
734:
732:
723:
717:
713:
712:
704:
702:
693:
687:
683:
676:
668:
662:
658:
651:
643:
637:
633:
626:
618:
612:
608:
601:
597:
586:
585:
581:
579:
576:
574:
571:
569:
566:
564:
561:
559:
556:
554:
551:
549:
546:
544:
541:
540:
533:
531:
527:
515:
512:
504:
494:
490:
486:
480:
479:
475:
470:This section
468:
464:
459:
458:
450:
447:
437:
435:
434:horse bettors
425:
421:
417:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
380:
379:
376:
373:
363:
361:
353:
350:
347:
344:
340:
337:
336:
335:
333:
325:
321:
312:
310:
306:
302:
298:
294:
293:cost overruns
289:
287:
283:
278:
275:
271:
267:
263:
258:
255:
245:
243:
239:
235:
230:
226:
224:
220:
216:
211:
208:
199:
194:
190:
186:
182:
180:
173:
163:
159:
157:
153:
149:
144:
142:
137:
133:
131:
127:
123:
122:
117:
114:
109:
107:
103:
98:
94:
90:
86:
85:microeconomic
83:and standard
82:
79:According to
72:
70:
69:
64:
60:
56:
52:
49:and business
48:
41:
39:
34:episode, see
33:
19:
2887:Optimization
2872:Mathematical
2832:Experimental
2827:Evolutionary
2812:Econometrics
2670:Public goods
2644:Price system
2639:Price signal
2553:Monopolistic
2422:Distribution
2399:
2337:Major topics
2284:
2267:
2260:
2220:
2202:
2198:
2172:
2148:
2144:
2127:
2123:
2080:
2076:
2070:
2059:. Retrieved
2042:(1): 27–44.
2039:
2035:
2022:
2011:. Retrieved
1991:
1987:
1977:
1960:
1956:
1950:
1933:
1929:
1895:
1891:
1885:
1868:
1864:
1858:
1833:
1829:
1823:
1782:
1778:
1772:
1749:
1743:
1730:
1717:
1708:
1695:
1686:
1673:
1660:
1651:Harford, Tim
1645:
1636:
1624:
1591:
1587:
1580:
1569:. Retrieved
1565:
1556:
1545:. Retrieved
1543:. 2015-06-20
1540:
1531:
1520:. Retrieved
1518:. 2011-06-26
1515:
1493:
1488:
1435:
1431:
1421:
1402:
1396:
1371:
1367:
1361:
1344:10419/156273
1324:
1320:
1310:
1277:
1273:
1263:
1238:
1234:
1213:. Retrieved
1208:
1204:
1191:
1180:. Retrieved
1175:
1166:
1141:
1137:
1095:
1091:
1085:
1074:. Retrieved
1062:
1058:
1048:
1037:. Retrieved
1025:
1015:
990:
986:
953:
946:
921:
917:
911:
878:
874:
868:
849:
843:
823:
792:
786:
767:
739:
710:
681:
675:
656:
650:
631:
625:
606:
600:
582:
522:
507:
498:
483:Please help
471:
443:
431:
422:
418:
414:
407:
403:
399:
391:
387:
383:
377:
369:
357:
343:connotations
329:
290:
279:
259:
251:
241:
237:
234:cost overrun
231:
227:
212:
203:
187:
183:
178:
175:
160:
155:
145:
138:
134:
130:cancellation
129:
119:
110:
105:
101:
96:
92:
78:
66:
58:
54:
44:
37:
36:Sunk Costs (
31:
2996:Game theory
2837:Game theory
2802:Development
2749:Uncertainty
2629:Price floor
2609:Preferences
2548:Competition
2518:Information
2481:Externality
2464:Equilibrium
2405:Transaction
2383:Opportunity
2344:Aggregation
2266:Sutton, J.
1936:: 124–140.
1871:: 117–130.
1754:McGraw-Hill
272:in which a
148:fixed costs
2970:Categories
2867:Managerial
2787:Behavioral
2660:Production
2597:Oligopsony
2437:Elasticity
2349:Budget set
2261:Economics.
2061:2019-08-05
2013:2019-08-06
1594:: 104576.
1571:2019-12-28
1547:2019-12-28
1522:2019-12-28
1211:(1): 12–13
1182:2019-08-07
1076:2019-08-05
1039:2019-08-09
592:References
501:April 2024
305:groupthink
282:optimistic
170:See also:
2908:Economics
2780:Subfields
2675:Rationing
2592:Oligopoly
2587:Monopsony
2575:Bilateral
2508:Household
2359:Convexity
2097:0363-7425
2056:0030-5073
2008:146542771
1616:212959377
1608:0925-7535
1462:1932-6203
1353:154851729
1302:152208754
1294:1046-1310
1255:154805248
1158:0749-5978
1112:1939-1455
1071:0033-3107
1065:(1): 10.
1034:0017-8012
1007:0167-2681
895:0021-9398
850:Economics
472:does not
406:) = 2 · (
219:marketing
215:promotion
118:known as
113:normative
55:sunk cost
47:economics
2955:Category
2901:See also
2792:Business
2764:Marginal
2759:Expected
2700:Shortage
2695:Scarcity
2570:Monopoly
2476:Exchange
2388:Implicit
2378:Marginal
2165:10296273
1665:archived
1480:30620741
1432:PLOS ONE
1215:18 April
1120:10296273
536:See also
207:Concorde
198:Concorde
89:rational
2913:Applied
2892:Welfare
2754:Utility
2714:Surplus
2653:Pricing
2565:Duopoly
2558:Perfect
2501:Service
2469:General
2373:Average
1912:5645589
1850:9831520
1815:5643902
1807:7455683
1787:Bibcode
1779:Science
1471:6324799
1440:Bibcode
1388:6144898
938:5051889
903:2352759
493:removed
478:sources
446:R&D
360:utility
104:or the
93:current
61:) is a
2738:Supply
2729:Demand
2665:Profit
2533:Market
2395:Social
2291:
2274:
2252:
2233:
2182:
2163:
2105:258462
2103:
2095:
2054:
2006:
1910:
1848:
1813:
1805:
1760:
1735:GOV.UK
1614:
1606:
1478:
1468:
1460:
1409:
1386:
1351:
1300:
1292:
1253:
1156:
1118:
1110:
1069:
1032:
1005:
961:
936:
901:
893:
856:
831:
799:
774:
746:
718:
688:
663:
638:
613:
274:tanker
97:future
2976:Costs
2857:Labor
2842:Green
2614:Price
2496:Goods
2486:Firms
2195:(PDF)
2161:S2CID
2101:JSTOR
2032:(PDF)
2004:S2CID
1811:S2CID
1727:(PDF)
1705:(PDF)
1683:(PDF)
1633:(PDF)
1612:S2CID
1384:S2CID
1349:S2CID
1298:S2CID
1251:S2CID
1116:S2CID
934:S2CID
899:JSTOR
526:pride
390:) = 2
210:out.
2771:Wage
2680:Rent
2648:Free
2400:Sunk
2368:Cost
2361:and
2289:ISBN
2272:ISBN
2250:ISBN
2231:ISBN
2180:ISBN
2093:ISSN
2052:ISSN
1908:PMID
1846:PMID
1803:PMID
1758:ISBN
1604:ISSN
1476:PMID
1458:ISSN
1407:ISBN
1290:ISSN
1217:2021
1154:ISSN
1108:ISSN
1067:ISSN
1030:ISSN
1003:ISSN
959:ISBN
891:ISSN
854:ISBN
829:ISBN
797:ISBN
772:ISBN
744:ISBN
716:ISBN
686:ISBN
661:ISBN
636:ISBN
611:ISBN
476:any
474:cite
410:+ 5)
394:+ 10
307:and
63:cost
53:, a
2862:Law
2241:in
2207:doi
2153:doi
2149:125
2132:doi
2085:doi
2044:doi
1996:doi
1965:doi
1938:doi
1900:doi
1873:doi
1838:doi
1795:doi
1783:211
1637:FAA
1596:doi
1592:123
1466:PMC
1448:doi
1376:doi
1339:hdl
1329:doi
1282:doi
1243:doi
1146:doi
1100:doi
1096:125
995:doi
926:doi
883:doi
487:by
264:or
156:not
45:In
2972::
2229:,
2225:,
2201:.
2197:.
2159:.
2147:.
2126:.
2099:.
2091:.
2081:11
2079:.
2050:.
2040:16
2038:.
2034:.
2002:.
1992:30
1990:.
1986:.
1961:13
1959:.
1934:35
1932:.
1920:^
1906:.
1894:.
1869:76
1867:.
1844:.
1834:76
1832:.
1809:.
1801:.
1793:.
1781:.
1756:.
1752:.
1733:.
1729:.
1707:,
1685:,
1663:,
1659:,
1635:.
1610:.
1602:.
1590:.
1564:.
1539:.
1514:.
1501:^
1474:.
1464:.
1456:.
1446:.
1436:14
1434:.
1430:.
1382:.
1370:.
1347:.
1337:.
1323:.
1319:.
1296:.
1288:.
1278:37
1276:.
1272:.
1249:.
1239:48
1237:.
1225:^
1209:41
1207:.
1203:.
1174:.
1152:.
1142:35
1140:.
1128:^
1114:.
1106:.
1094:.
1063:33
1061:.
1057:.
1024:.
1001:.
991:28
989:.
973:^
932:.
922:73
920:.
897:.
889:.
879:59
877:.
811:^
758:^
730:^
700:^
303:,
108:.
2740:/
2731:/
2702:/
2646:/
2322:e
2315:t
2308:v
2295:.
2278:.
2256:.
2215:.
2209::
2203:6
2186:.
2167:.
2155::
2138:.
2134::
2128:7
2107:.
2087::
2064:.
2046::
2016:.
1998::
1971:.
1967::
1944:.
1940::
1914:.
1902::
1896:8
1879:.
1875::
1852:.
1840::
1817:.
1797::
1789::
1766:.
1737:.
1639:.
1618:.
1598::
1574:.
1550:.
1525:.
1482:.
1450::
1442::
1415:.
1390:.
1378::
1372:5
1355:.
1341::
1331::
1325:8
1304:.
1284::
1257:.
1245::
1219:.
1185:.
1160:.
1148::
1122:.
1102::
1079:.
1042:.
1009:.
997::
967:.
940:.
928::
905:.
885::
862:.
837:.
805:.
780:.
752:.
724:.
694:.
669:.
644:.
619:.
514:)
508:(
503:)
499:(
495:.
481:.
408:x
404:x
402:(
400:f
392:x
388:x
386:(
384:f
42:.
40:)
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
_last_flight.jpg)