> The Reversal Test: When a proposed change to a certain parameter (in a certain direction) is thought to have bad overall consequences, consider a change to th

> The Reversal Test: When a proposed change to a certain parameter (in a certain direction) is thought to have bad overall consequences, consider a change to the same parameter in the opposite direction. If this is also thought to have bad overall consequences, then the onus is on those who believe this to explain why any changes to the parameter are deemed to be bad. If they are unable to do so, we have reason to suspect they are suffering from the status quo bias. So, for example, if a rise in global temperature is thought to have bad consequences, consider a fall. If this is also thought to have bad consequences, "we have reason to suspect they are suffering from the status quo bias." But any change in global temperature in any direction would have unpredictable consequences, and we only know that we can live with the current temperature — the status quo. The author's example is a change in the speed limit. If someone opposed raising and lowering it, they must be suffering from status quo bias. But we know how many traffic fatalities we have under the current limit, we know whether we're able to get to work. We know that society keeps functioning under the current limit, we know that people are able to get to work, that emergency rooms aren't overwhelmed with traffic accidents. We don't know that about any other speed limit. So here too, status quo bias is justified.