@article{ref1,
title="First evidence for "The Backup Plan Paradox"",
journal="Journal of experimental psychology: general",
year="2017",
author="Napolitano, Christopher M. and Freund, Alexandra M.",
volume="146",
number="8",
pages="1189-1203",
abstract="This research is a first test of the backup plan paradox. We hypothesized that investing in a backup plan may facilitate the conditions that it was developed to address: Plan A's insufficiency. Five studies provide initial, primarily correlative support for the undermining effect of investing in a backup plan. Study 1 (n= 160) demonstrated that the more participants perceived they had invested in developing a backup plan (preparing a &quot;crib sheet&quot;), the more likely they were to use it, although greater investments were unrelated to backup plan utility. Studies 2-4 used a simulated negotiation task. Study 2 (n = 247) demonstrated that when goal-relevant resources are limited, investing in developing backup plans and perceiving them as highly instrumental can decrease goal performance through the indirect effect of increased means replacing. Study 3 (n = 248) replicated this effect when goal-relevant resources were plentiful. Study 4 (n = 204) used an experimental variant of the simulated negotiation task and demonstrated that simply having a backup plan is not detrimental, but perceiving backup plans to be highly instrumental decreased goal performance, again through the indirect effect of increased means replacing. Study 5 (n = 160) replicated findings from Studies 1-4 using a lab-based motor task (throwing a ball). Together, these results provide first evidence that backup plans can introduce costs that may jeopardize goal performance. (PsycINFO Database Record<br><br>(c) 2017 APA, all rights reserved).<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0096-3445",
doi="10.1037/xge0000331",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000331"
}