Decision-making in terrorism sting operations: is entrapment driven by the sunk-cost effect and intergroup biases?

Abstract

ABSTRACT Previous research has found that entrapment – inducing suspects to commit crimes they were not already predisposed to commit – is widespread in US terrorism sting operations, particularly those involving Muslims and racial minorities. To test whether the sunk cost effect and/or intergroup biases could explain decisions to authorise these operations, we conducted an experiment in which college student and MTurk participants (n = 1009) from the US and India decided whether to approve an operation featuring apparent entrapment. Sunk costs and suspect characteristics were manipulated across experimental conditions. Results for US participants (n = 792) show that high sunk costs increased approval of the operation only for relatively young participants, and only in scenarios with non-Muslim suspects. Scenarios with Muslim suspects yielded higher approval rates for participants who were confident in their decision. Indian participants (n = 217) were more likely than US participants to approve the operation and were unaffected by suspect religion and sunk costs. Results suggest that the sunk cost bias may play some role in entrapment, although other factors, such as outgroup bias, may also contribute to these decisions. The observed cross-cultural differences could result from international variations in susceptibility to the sunk cost effect, among other factors.