Abstract
Venture capitalists (VCs) follow elaborate procedures to identify the top candidates, out of countless aspiring start-ups, for financing and other types of investor support. Purportedly, VCs also carefully evaluate, based on venture performance, whether or not it deserves to receive follow-on funding. But could decision making biases interfere with the evaluation process? In this article, we introduce the notion of a continuation bias defined as the proclivity to provide follow-on funding contingent on investor's earlier investment. We argue that a continuation bias differs from sunk costs, status quo bias and escalation of commitment as it stems from the dual fallacy-information and narcissistic-exaggerating the benefits of greater data availability at later stages of investment and investor's own contribution to the venture. We also argue that a continuation bias is influenced by contingency factors such that it is more likely to be observed when VCs apply competition-related rather than venture-related investment criteria. A survey of 51 VCs from the US provided support for the hypotheses.