Freezing Under Fire: Status-Quo Bias, Effortful Coping, and Well-Being During a Prolonged War

Abstract Status-quo bias (SQB) is usually studied as decision inertia in choice tasks, but its role in emotional adjustment to real-life crises is poorly understood. We used the Israel–Hamas war to examine whether maintaining the status quo predicts subjective well-being (SWB) during a prolonged national threat. In December 2022, ten months before the war, 1,423 Israeli adults reported SQB and pre-war SWB. At the beginning of the war, 1,053 of them completed a second-wave survey, and 723 completed a third-wave survey in the thirteenth month of the conflict, reporting global life evaluation, meaning in life, positive and negative emotions, anxiety, fear, efforts to improve key life domains (e.g., health, work, social relationships, leisure), and perceived war impact. At the beginning of the war, positive (negative) emotions decreased (increased), whereas life evaluation and meaning remained relatively stable; by month 13, both also declined. Multivariate regressions controlling for socio-demographics, war-related exposure, and pre-war SWB showed that higher pre-war SQB predicted poorer longer-term wartime SWB: lower life evaluation, meaning, and positive emotions, and higher negative emotions, anxiety, and fear. Drawing on coping theory, we tested a moderated mediation model in which SQB reduces improvement efforts. Pre-war SQB predicted lower efforts, which were associated with lower life evaluation, meaning, and positive emotions and higher anxiety. SQB also showed direct positive associations with anxiety and fear after accounting for effort. Consistent with coping theory, our results suggest that active, approach-oriented coping, reflected in efforts to improve key life domains, functions as a pathway to resilience during prolonged crises.