Quiz: The Sunk Cost of Consensus

Q: The five components of consensus switching cost are: Evidence, logic, methodology, funding, and prestige Career investment, reputational capital, textbook infrastructure, funding commitments, and identity investment Peer review, publication, citation, tenure, and retirement Training, hiring, promoting, publishing, and firing

B) The five structural components. Reference: Section 9.3

Q: The "cost asymmetry" principle states: Switching costs are always higher than staying costs The cost of maintaining a wrong consensus is distributed and invisible; the cost of acknowledging it is concentrated and personal Rich fields have higher switching costs than poor fields Switching costs are symmetric for all stakeholders

B) This asymmetry is the engine of persistence. Reference: Section 9.6

Q: The lobotomy case demonstrates that: Psychiatrists in the 1940s were uniquely unethical The same structural sunk cost forces that maintained lobotomy are present in every field today Nobel Prizes are always given for correct work Surgical procedures are inherently more prone to error than other medical treatments

B) The structural forces are permanent; only the specific procedures change. Reference: Section 9.2

Q: Institutional sunk cost differs from individual sunk cost because: Institutions don't make mistakes It is distributed across careers, infrastructure, funding, and identity, making it impossible for any single individual to overcome Institutions are more rational than individuals Individual sunk cost is always larger

B) The distributed, emergent nature of institutional sunk cost requires collective action to overcome. Reference: Section 9.1

Q: Fields tend to change *en masse* rather than one person at a time because: Scientists always agree with each other The coordination game structure means early individual movers face devastating costs while collective movers face minimal costs Journals require unanimous agreement before publishing corrections Government regulations prevent individual dissent

B) The coordination problem incentivizes waiting for collective switching. Reference: Section 9.6

Q: "Moral sunk cost" refers to: The financial cost of ethical violations The psychological impossibility of acknowledging that your work caused irreversible harm to patients or others The cost of following ethical guidelines The moral obligation to maintain consensus

B) When the "investment" includes having harmed people, the sunk cost acquires a moral dimension that is even more resistant to rational override. Reference: Section 9.1

Q: "All resistance to changing scientific consensus is pathological entrenchment."

False. Healthy conservatism — evidence-based, symmetrically applied, with specific correction thresholds — is a legitimate and valuable function of scientific communities. The diagnostic table distinguishes healthy resistance from pathological entrenchment. Reference: Section 9.8

Q: "The longer a wrong consensus persists, the easier it becomes to correct."

False. The opposite is true. Sunk cost compounds over time — each year adds more career investment, more textbook infrastructure, and more institutional identity. Time is the enemy of correction. Reference: Section 9.5

Quiz: The Sunk Cost of Consensus

Target: 70% or higher to proceed confidently.

Section 1: Multiple Choice (1 point each)

1. The five components of consensus switching cost are: - A) Evidence, logic, methodology, funding, and prestige - B) Career investment, reputational capital, textbook infrastructure, funding commitments, and identity investment - C) Peer review, publication, citation, tenure, and retirement - D) Training, hiring, promoting, publishing, and firing

Answer

**B)** The five structural components. *Reference:* Section 9.3

2. The "cost asymmetry" principle states: - A) Switching costs are always higher than staying costs - B) The cost of maintaining a wrong consensus is distributed and invisible; the cost of acknowledging it is concentrated and personal - C) Rich fields have higher switching costs than poor fields - D) Switching costs are symmetric for all stakeholders

Answer

**B)** This asymmetry is the engine of persistence. *Reference:* Section 9.6

3. The lobotomy case demonstrates that: - A) Psychiatrists in the 1940s were uniquely unethical - B) The same structural sunk cost forces that maintained lobotomy are present in every field today - C) Nobel Prizes are always given for correct work - D) Surgical procedures are inherently more prone to error than other medical treatments

Answer

**B)** The structural forces are permanent; only the specific procedures change. *Reference:* Section 9.2

4. Institutional sunk cost differs from individual sunk cost because: - A) Institutions don't make mistakes - B) It is distributed across careers, infrastructure, funding, and identity, making it impossible for any single individual to overcome - C) Institutions are more rational than individuals - D) Individual sunk cost is always larger

Answer

**B)** The distributed, emergent nature of institutional sunk cost requires collective action to overcome. *Reference:* Section 9.1

5. Fields tend to change en masse rather than one person at a time because: - A) Scientists always agree with each other - B) The coordination game structure means early individual movers face devastating costs while collective movers face minimal costs - C) Journals require unanimous agreement before publishing corrections - D) Government regulations prevent individual dissent

Answer

**B)** The coordination problem incentivizes waiting for collective switching. *Reference:* Section 9.6

6. "Moral sunk cost" refers to: - A) The financial cost of ethical violations - B) The psychological impossibility of acknowledging that your work caused irreversible harm to patients or others - C) The cost of following ethical guidelines - D) The moral obligation to maintain consensus

Answer

**B)** When the "investment" includes having harmed people, the sunk cost acquires a moral dimension that is even more resistant to rational override. *Reference:* Section 9.1

Section 2: True/False with Justification (1 point each)

7. "All resistance to changing scientific consensus is pathological entrenchment."

Answer

**False.** Healthy conservatism — evidence-based, symmetrically applied, with specific correction thresholds — is a legitimate and valuable function of scientific communities. The diagnostic table distinguishes healthy resistance from pathological entrenchment. *Reference:* Section 9.8

8. "The longer a wrong consensus persists, the easier it becomes to correct."

Answer

**False.** The opposite is true. Sunk cost compounds over time — each year adds more career investment, more textbook infrastructure, and more institutional identity. Time is the enemy of correction. *Reference:* Section 9.5

Section 3: Short Answer (2 points each)

9. Explain the "compound interest" analogy for sunk cost. Why does this analogy imply that early correction is dramatically more valuable than late correction?

Sample Answer

Sunk cost compounds like interest: each year of additional investment builds on previous years' investment. A wrong consensus that has persisted for 10 years has a certain switching cost; after 20 years, the cost has more than doubled because the additional investment (new careers, new textbooks, deeper identity integration) builds on the existing base. This means early correction is dramatically more valuable: correcting a 10-year-old error costs far less than correcting a 50-year-old error, even if the evidence is equally strong in both cases. The implication is that any mechanism that speeds up correction — earlier detection, lower switching costs, better evidence evaluation — has outsized value.

Section 4: Applied Scenario (3 points)

10. A medical specialty has used a particular diagnostic test for 25 years. A new meta-analysis shows that the test has a false positive rate much higher than previously believed, leading to thousands of unnecessary procedures annually. The test is embedded in clinical guidelines, training curricula, insurance reimbursement codes, and specialty board exams. Apply the sunk cost framework to predict the field's response and recommend a correction strategy.

Sample Answer

**Predicted response:** The field will initially resist, citing the meta-analysis's limitations while defending the test's long track record. The five sunk cost components predict: (1) specialists who built careers on the test will defend it, (2) the specialty's reputation depends on the test's validity, (3) guidelines and board exams would need revision, (4) funded research programs assume the test's validity, (5) practitioners' identities include expertise in performing and interpreting the test. **Correction strategy:** (1) Frame the correction as a discovery ("We've found a way to reduce unnecessary procedures by X%") rather than an admission of error. (2) Provide transition support: updated training, revised guidelines with a realistic timeline, and transitional reimbursement. (3) Involve specialty leaders in the correction process so they can be heroes of the change rather than defenders of the status quo. (4) Set a sunset clause: "The current test will be reassessed in 2 years using pre-specified criteria." (5) Fund the transition — new protocols, retraining, patient communication — so the economic switching cost is absorbed collectively rather than individually.

Scoring & Next Steps

Score	Assessment	Recommended Action
< 50%	Needs review	Re-read 9.1–9.3
50–70%	Partial	Review the five components and the cost asymmetry principle
70–85%	Solid	Ready to proceed
> 85%	Strong	Proceed to Chapter 10