Should we explain accepted answers?

Question

I posted this question on the economics.stack and I am wondering if I should explain the answer I am gonna accept. I see this as a good practice but I would like to know about your views.

Furthermore, I don't where to explain my choice. Should I do it as a comment? Or should I update my question with a specific mention?

Let me justify why I want to explain my accepted answer.

• All answers are interesting and upvoted.
• The most upvoted answer (the one by @Andras at this point in time) is a good one by reminding us the importance of sunk costs and the fact that the decision should be a forward-looking one. This answer also attracted very good comments. However, sunk costs are a favorite subject of economists and I was aware of the sunk cost fallacy. By the way, not all investment costs are sunk.
• @luchonacho's answer on the discrete choice literature is promising and well documented.
• @Ubiquitous' answer is my favorite one. I didn't know about optimal stopping problems. This answer is original, very promising, with great academic references.

Answer 1

I don't see any harm in posting a justification for your acceptance in the comments or by adding an edit to the end of your question. Adding a justification is useful information to other users about the kinds of answers people are looking for on this site. Comments can sometimes get messy of course. If it is a comment heavy section, it could get lost. I might go with editing your question first, but personally do not have a problem with either editing/commenting.

Answer 2

I would not edit the question. It might be confusing, and (fallacy) I have not seen this done elsewhere (other SE).

I would not add a comment either. In the end, the idea is to leave Q&A sites neat, without comments. But that is my understanding of neat Q&A site (I'm constantly flagging comments like "thank you blabla" to be deleted). Others might have a different opinion on the matter.