Escalation of commitment describes the continuation of a course of action in spite of drawbacks and continuing insecurity of goal achievement. To prevent escalation and its associated costs, de-escalation techniques are valuable. The present study investigates predecisional accountability to an unknown audience as a de-escalation technique. In addition, the evolution of cognitive processes (reasons for persisting) during escalation is examined. As predicted, predecisional accountability has a de-escalating effect. In addition, escalation is accompanied by an increase of nonrational reasons for continuing the respective course of action, and decision makers without accountability provide more nonrational reasons for not quitting than those who are held accountable.