{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01874414245548266, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005623242736644799, 'mean_word_length': 5.472727272727273, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Looking forward and looking back: integrating completion and sunk-cost effects within an escalation-of-commitment progress decision.

Currently, there are 2 conflicting frameworks with which to understand why decision makers might escalate their commitment to a previously chosen course of action: sunk costs and project completion. The author proposes that sunk costs and need to complete exert simultaneous pressures, both independent and interactive, on a decision maker's level of commitment. The responses of 340 participants were analyzed and supported a complementary relationship between the 2 predictors. In addition, sunk costs demonstrated a curvilinear influence on commitment and an interaction with level of completion that supported a Level of Completion x Sunk Cost moderation model. (A marginal utility model was not supported.) Results are discussed in terms of their relevance toward offering a complementary view of 2 potential antecedents to a decision maker's propensity to escalate his or her commitment to a previously chosen course of action.