They are sunk costs to the jobseeker in that he cannot do anything about them and they have a negative value. If he were to take them into account, he would no doubt throw up his hands and shout “but who would hire ME?” So he must ignore them as he would any sunk cost when deciding what to do; namely, where to apply for a job.
The sunk cost fallacy is when you assign a higher value than you would otherwise to something because of the price you paid for it. In this case, the job seeker is not concerned with the value of anything she gained from the felonies, so the fallacy does not apply. The job seeker’s situation is not like having already paid for a ticket to a movie that she does not really want to see.
The job seeker should take into account how prospective employers will perceive her reputation, and focus on those who are more likely to give her a chance to build a more positive reputation, and be prepared to answer from the employers perspective why they should do so. The past events have consequences for expected future expected utility that should not be ignored.
They are sunk costs to the jobseeker in that he cannot do anything about them and they have a negative value. If he were to take them into account, he would no doubt throw up his hands and shout “but who would hire ME?” So he must ignore them as he would any sunk cost when deciding what to do; namely, where to apply for a job.
At least that is how I understand it.
The sunk cost fallacy is when you assign a higher value than you would otherwise to something because of the price you paid for it. In this case, the job seeker is not concerned with the value of anything she gained from the felonies, so the fallacy does not apply. The job seeker’s situation is not like having already paid for a ticket to a movie that she does not really want to see.
The job seeker should take into account how prospective employers will perceive her reputation, and focus on those who are more likely to give her a chance to build a more positive reputation, and be prepared to answer from the employers perspective why they should do so. The past events have consequences for expected future expected utility that should not be ignored.