DOCSLIB.ORG

Paradox of Choice, Happiness, and Depression in Context of Personality and Self-Rumination

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Paradox of Choice, Happiness, and Depression in Context of Personality and Self-Rumination PARADOX OF CHOICE, HAPPINESS, AND DEPRESSION IN CONTEXT OF PERSONALITY AND SELF-RUMINATION The way of making choices: maximizing and satisficing and its relationship to well- being, personality, and self-rumination Lenka Vargová1, Ľubica Zibrínová1,2, Gabriel Baník1* 1University of Presov, Slovakia 2Center of Clinical Psychology Care, Slovakia Autor note Lenka Vargová, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Presov, Slovakia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8758-0997; Ľubica Zibrínová, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Presov, Slovakia, and Center of Clinical Psychology Care, Presov, Slovakia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7336-7343; Gabriel Baník, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Presov, Slovakia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6601-3619 Please note this manuscript has not yet been peer reviewed and is therefore subject to further changes. This work was funded by Slovak Research and Development Agency [APVV-17-0418] Declaration of interest: none Supplementary materials: https://osf.io/3csjk/ *Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Gabriel Baník, Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Universtiy of Presov, 17. Novembra 1, 080 01, Presov, Slovakia e-mail: [email protected] Abstract The current age is characterized by having too many options. Decision-making is harder when there are numerous options to choose from. However, having a large number of options is not necessarily a problem for everyone and in this context, maximizing and satisficing tendencies are described. Yet, there is a debate about the effect of these tendencies on well-being and it has to be asked as to whether maximizing and satisficing have an adaptive or maladaptive effect on our well-being. Moreover, it raises questions regarding the conceptualization and measurement of maximizing and satisficing tendencies. In a sample of 480 subjects from the general population, a two-component model of maximizing was examined. The results show that the two-component model (maximizing as a strategy and maximizing as a goal) is an efficient way to measure maximizing tendency. The results show that maximizing as a strategy (measured as alternative search) was maladaptive (was positively related to depression and negatively related to happiness), whereas maximizing as a goal (measured as high standards) had no maladaptive effect (was not related to well-being at all). In addition, the two components were differently associated with personality factors which strengthen the need for measuring maximizing as a two-component model. In the current study, it was found that even though great effort was invested in studying maximizing tendency, satisficing tendency stayed behind and its conceptualization and measurement are unclear. Therefore, the (mal)adaptive effect of these tendencies depends on their conceptualization as well as on how these tendencies are measured, and also on their different relationship with personality factors. Keywords paradox of choice, well-being, personality traits, self-rumination, two-component model of maximizing, satisficing 2 1 Introduction Paradox of choice Nowadays, there are often too many options in situations related to decision-making. This can lead to difficulties with processing such huge amounts of information (Álvarez et al., 2014). Piasecki and Hanna (2011) have suggested that negative experiencing is caused by a deficiency of sufficient options although there is a debate surrounding this. While it seems likely that having several options leads to making better decisions, having a large number of options can have also a negative effect (Kinjo & Ebina, 2014). This has been called the paradox of choice (Schwartz, 2000). In other words, having too many options in the decision-making process can lead to the inability to make a decision (Schwartz, 2004). In particular, the following three problems are related to the paradox of choice: the first is the process of obtaining information about the options related to the choice. The second is the increase in possibilities, which is accompanied by increasing the standards of the desired result. The third problem is that making a mistake in decision-making with so many options available is considered a personal failure (Schwartz et al., 2002). In this context, Schwartz (2000) has suggested that less freedom (in the meaning of fewer options) could be better in the decision-making process. Indeed, it has been argued that in this context “less is sometimes more” (Schwartz, 2004). Maximizing and satisficing However, Schwartz et al. (2002) has explained that if all people reacted negatively to large numbers of options, there would be significant problems making even common decisions. Thus, they distinguish between “maximizing” and “satisficing” in the context of the paradox of choice. The maximizing tendency is the effort given to selecting the best option and the satisficing tendency to selecting a sufficient or “fairly good” option. In other words, maximizing tends to consider a large, if not absolute, number of potential choices in finding the best option and making the best decision. Satisficing tends to consider some criteria of options and when the criteria of options meet with the satisficer’s criteria, this is good enough to make a decision. Unlike satisficers, an increasing number of options in decision-making can be a huge problem for maximizers. Maximizers have far greater difficulty obtaining information about all options in order to make the best choice. Moreover, there is always a chance that there is a much better option than those currently available (Schwartz et al., 2002). While maximizers only consider the decisions with the best results to be correct, satisficers consider all those with sufficient results to be correct (Jenkins & Nolan, 2010). The biggest difference between 3 maximizers and satisficers is how they evaluate the choice after it has been made. It is important for satisficers to have a fairly good result while maximizers are unlikely to say that they have achieved the best result after making their choice (Schwartz et al., 2002). Despite maximizers being able to objectively make better decisions than satisficers, satisficers feel subjectively better with the decision they have made (Álvarez et al., 2014). Maximizers are not able to experience happiness, compared to satisficers who are satisfied with their decisions. The maximizing tendency to find and make the best decision can be maladaptive. In other words, it can contribute to a lower experience of happiness, subjective well-being and a higher incidence of depressive symptoms (Schwartz et al., 2002). However, Diab et al. (2008) have pointed out that maximizers can be portrayed as unhappy and exhausted from the constant search for the best option. Yet, it is important to consider a way of measuring the maximizing tendency which may not show maximizers as being less happy or depressed. Rather, maximizers could be more motivated and subjectively much more satisfied because of the high goals they are able to achieve through this tendency (Bubić & Erceg, 2018). Maximizers can experience more success due to the higher maximizing tendency and success can in turn make them happier (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). In this context, having a large number of options in the decision- making process may not be negative for maximizers. A greater number of choices be an opportunity to achieve greater goals which can have a positive effect on experiencing satisfaction (Dalal et al., 2015). Indeed, personal goals are very important in the context of happiness (Myers & Diener, 1995). The original theory claims that the maximizing tendency is maladaptive while the satisficing tendency is adaptive (Schwartz et al., 2002). In other words, it states that that maximizers are less happy (or more depressed) than satisficers and vice versa. Yet, this could arguably be the other way round. Dalal et al. (2015) have argued that Schwartz et al. (2002) did not provide an exact definition of these constructs and thus maximizers could be as happy as satisficers (Diab et al., 2008; Dalal et al., 2015). In particular, the operationalization of maximizing is not clear and there is disagreement about how to measure it. It is also not clear if maximizing should be viewed as maladaptive or not. In the theory of paradox of choice (satisficers vs maximizers), certain things need to be clarified: a) anchoring of the theory and conceptual model as well as measuring these tendencies; b) the relationship between these tendencies and well-being (e.g., happiness and depression); c) the relationships between satisficing, maximizing and other variables (variables which are important to both well-being and decision making) Conceptual model and measuring of maximizing and satisficing 4 In the paradox of choice theory, there is no consensus regarding how satisficing and maximizing should be conceptualized and measured. As a result, there are some other issues which need to be addressed: a) it has been suggested that the maximizing and satisficing tendencies constitute a continuum. By this, these tendencies are measured through one tool where a high score indicates maximizing and a low score indicates satisficing (Schwartz et al., 2002; Nenkov et al., 2008; Diab et al,, 2008; Lai, 2010; Weinhardt et al., 2012; Richardson et al., 2014; Dalal et al., 2015). However, others have suggested that maximizing and satisficing tendencies are two separate variables. Therefore, they should be measured by two different instruments
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Citations and Herding: Why One Article Makes It and Another Doesn't
    ASSOCIATION FOR CONSUMER RESEARCH Labovitz School of Business & Economics, University of Minnesota Duluth, 11 E. Superior Street, Suite 210, Duluth, MN 55802 Citations and Herding: Why One Article Makes It and Another Doesn’T Simon Quaschning, Ghent University, Belgium Mario Pandelaere, Ghent University, Belgium Iris Vermeir, Ghent University, Belgium The purpose of this paper is to draw a link between citations and the choice overload paradigm and show that herding plays a role in citing behavior. In addition, parallel with an increase in the number of published papers, we observe an increase in the strength of herding in citation. [to cite]: Simon Quaschning, Mario Pandelaere, and Iris Vermeir (2011) ,"Citations and Herding: Why One Article Makes It and Another Doesn’T", in NA - Advances in Consumer Research Volume 38, eds. Darren W. Dahl, Gita V. Johar, and Stijn M.J. van Osselaer, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer Research. [url]: http://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/16061/volumes/v38/NA-38 [copyright notice]: This work is copyrighted by The Association for Consumer Research. For permission to copy or use this work in whole or in part, please contact the Copyright Clearance Center at http://www.copyright.com/. Advances in Consumer Research (Volume 38) / 747 Chocarro, Raquel, Monica Cortiñas and Margarita Elorz (2009), “The Impact of Product Category Knowledge on Consumer Use of Extrinsic Cues: A Study Involving Agrifood Products,” Food Quality and Preference, 20(3), 176-86. Hakanen, Ernest. A. (1998), “Counting Down to Number One: The Evolution of the Meaning of Popular Music Charts,” Popular Music, 17(1), 95-111. Iyengar, Sheena.
    [Show full text]
  • CHOICE – a NEW STANDARD for COMPETITION LAW ANALYSIS? a Choice — a New Standard for Competition Law Analysis?
    GO TO TABLE OF CONTENTS GO TO TABLE OF CONTENTS CHOICE – A NEW STANDARD FOR COMPETITION LAW ANALYSIS? a Choice — A New Standard for Competition Law Analysis? Editors Paul Nihoul Nicolas Charbit Elisa Ramundo Associate Editor Duy D. Pham © Concurrences Review, 2016 GO TO TABLE OF CONTENTS All rights reserved. No photocopying: copyright licenses do not apply. The information provided in this publication is general and may not apply in a specifc situation. Legal advice should always be sought before taking any legal action based on the information provided. The publisher accepts no responsibility for any acts or omissions contained herein. Enquiries concerning reproduction should be sent to the Institute of Competition Law, at the address below. Copyright © 2016 by Institute of Competition Law 60 Broad Street, Suite 3502, NY 10004 www.concurrences.com [email protected] Printed in the United States of America First Printing, 2016 Publisher’s Cataloging-in-Publication (Provided by Quality Books, Inc.) Choice—a new standard for competition law analysis? Editors, Paul Nihoul, Nicolas Charbit, Elisa Ramundo. pages cm LCCN 2016939447 ISBN 978-1-939007-51-3 ISBN 978-1-939007-54-4 ISBN 978-1-939007-55-1 1. Antitrust law. 2. Antitrust law—Europe. 3. Antitrust law—United States. 4. European Union. 5. Consumer behavior. 6. Consumers—Attitudes. 7. Consumption (Economics) I. Nihoul, Paul, editor. II. Charbit, Nicolas, editor. III. Ramundo, Elisa, editor. K3850.C485 2016 343.07’21 QBI16-600070 Cover and book design: Yves Buliard, www.yvesbuliard.fr Layout implementation: Darlene Swanson, www.van-garde.com GO TO TABLE OF CONTENTS ii CHOICE – A NEW STANDARD FOR COMPETITION LAW ANALYSIS? Editors’ Note PAUL NIHOUL NICOLAS CHARBIT ELISA RAMUNDO In this book, ten prominent authors offer eleven contributions that provide their varying perspectives on the subject of consumer choice: Paul Nihoul discusses how freedom of choice has emerged as a crucial concept in the application of EU competition law; Neil W.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less Free
    FREE THE PARADOX OF CHOICE: WHY MORE IS LESS PDF Dorwin Cartwright Professor of Social Theology and Social Action Theology Department Barry Schwartz,Ken Kliban | none | 22 Apr 2014 | BRILLIANCE AUDIO | 9781491514238 | English | United States The Paradox of Choice - Wikipedia Uh-oh, it looks like your Internet Explorer is out of date. For a better shopping experience, please upgrade now. Javascript is not enabled in The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less browser. Enabling JavaScript in your browser will allow you to experience all the features of our site. Learn how to enable JavaScript on your browser. NOOK Book. Audio MP3 on CD. Whether we're buying a pair of jeans, ordering a cup of coffee, selecting a long-distance carrier, applying to college, choosing a doctor, or setting up a keveryday decisions—both big and small—have become increasingly complex due to the overwhelming abundance of choice with which we are presented. As Americans, we assume that more choice means better options and greater satisfaction. But beware of excessive choice: choice overload can make you question the decisions you make before you even make them, it can set you up for unrealistically high expectations, and it can make you blame yourself for any and all failures. In the long run, this can lead to decision-making paralysis, anxiety, and perpetual stress. And, in a culture that tells us that there is no excuse for falling short of perfection when your options are limitless, too much choice can lead to clinical depression. In The Paradox of ChoiceBarry Schwartz explains at what point choice—the hallmark of individual freedom and self-determination that we so cherish—becomes detrimental to our psychological and emotional well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paradox of Choice
    & The Paradox of Choice Humanistisk-Teknologisk Bachelor Roskilde Universit et Forår 20 17 Vejleder: Thomas Søbirk Petersen Gruppe 12: Jonas Frandsen (55060), Mathias Sterlet Schack Grundahl (5508 9), Oskar Bjørn Vossen (55100), Simone Hagn Rieder (55142), Sophie van Moorselaar (55644) ? Abstract In this project, we seek to examine the phenomenon The Paradox of Choice and how a wide variety of choice can have negative consequences on individuals using the dating application Tinder. We seek to understand how users experience the application and if the large pool of potential partners to choose from affect them in a negative way. We have a hypothesis that the features on Tinder, is giving its users almost endless choices and that endless choices can lead to a point where we can’t decide what to choose. We also try to examine, the fact that many choices can make it more difficult to choose but also the idea that more choices can give you a greater dissatisfaction with whatever choice you make. From our understanding, there is another aspect involved in why we get this feeling of dissatisfaction and that is the Fear of Missing Out. With so many potential partners on Tinder to choose from the next one could have been more satisfying. We will try to figure out if this paradox is applicable on Tinder and if so what the consequences are. Based on our findings we will create a podcast presenting the results with the hope of informing the users of Tinder of a potential issue they might have and how to solve it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tyranny of Choice: a Cross-Cultural Investigation of Maximizing-Satisficing Effects on Well-Being
    Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 7, No. 6, November 2012, pp. 689–704 The tyranny of choice: a cross-cultural investigation of maximizing-satisficing effects on well-being Arne Roets∗ Barry Schwartz† Yanjun Guan‡ Abstract The present research investigated the relationship between individual differences in maximizing versus satisficing (i.e., seeking to make the single best choice, rather than a choice that is merely good enough) and well-being, in interac- tion with the society in which an individual lives. Data from three distinct cultural groups (adults), drawn respectively from the U.S. (N=307), Western Europe (N=263), and China (N=218), were analyzed. The results showed that, in so- cieties where choice is abundant (i.e., U.S. and Western Europe), maximizers reported less well-being than satisficers, and this difference was mediated by experienced regret. However, in the non-western society (China), maximizing was unrelated to well-being. Although in China maximizing was associated with more experiences of regret, regret had no substantial relationship to well-being. These patterns also emerged for the individual facets of the maximizing scale, al- though with a notable difference between the U.S. and Europe for the High Standards facet. It is argued that, in societies where abundant individual choice is highly valued and considered the ultimate route to personal happiness, maximizers’ dissatisfaction and regret over imperfect choices is a detrimental factor in well-being, whereas it is a much less crucial determinant of well-being in societies that place less emphasis on choice as the way to happiness. Keywords: well-being, maximizing, choice, cross-cultural.
    [Show full text]
  • Unconscious Decision Making and Its Impact on Consumers' Intention To
    Bachelor Thesis Unconscious Decision Making and its Impact on Consumers’ Intention to Purchase Online A Quantitative Study Investigating Consumers’ Mental Shortcuts Authors: Anna Quant Ellen Rydberg Sofie Göransson Tutor: Dan Halvarsson Examiner: Setayesh Sattari Semester: Spring 2018 Level: Bachelor Course Code: 2FE21E Date: 2018-05-23 II Acknowledgement We would like to take the opportunity to show our gratitude to the people who have supported us while conducting this study with their expertise and engagement. Through their constructive comments and useful inputs, we were able to steer this study into the right direction throughout the writing process. Firstly, we would like to thank our tutor Dan Halvarsson lecturer in the Department of Marketing at Linnaeus University that has always taken the time to support our study as well shared his knowledge regarding this topic. Secondly, a big thank you to our examinator Setayesh Sattari senior lecturer in the Department of Marketing at Linnaeus University for helping us during the writing process by providing us with her knowledge on quantitative research as well supporting with inputs during the seminars. Finally, we would also like to say a big thank you to all the participants that took their time responding to our questionnaire. Without them this bachelor thesis would never been able to reach a result. Växjö, Sweden 23rd of May 2018 Anna Quant Ellen Rydberg Sofie Göransson III IV Abstract Consumers often make decisions without being aware of it, also known as habitual decision making. A part of habitual decision making is mental shortcuts, which can push the consumers to unconsciously make decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Doing Better but Feeling Worse: the Paradox of Choice Barry Schwartz
    Schwartz and Ward Choice 1 Doing Better but Feeling Worse: The Paradox of Choice Barry Schwartz and Andrew Ward Swarthmore College In the United States, we live in a time and a place in which freedom and autonomy are valued above all else and in which expanded opportunities for “self- determination” are regarded as a sign of the psychological well-being of individuals and the moral well-being of the culture. And we take choice as the critical sign that we have freedom and autonomy. It is axiomatic that choice is good, and that more choice is better. This chapter argues that choice, and with it freedom, autonomy, and self- determination, can become excessive, and that when that happens, freedom can be experienced as a kind of misery-inducing tyranny. Unconstrained freedom leads to paralysis. It is self-determination within significant constraints—within “rules” of some sort—that leads to well-being, to optimal functioning. And the task for a future psychology of optimal functioning is to identify which constraints on self-determination are the crucial ones. There is no denying that choice improves the quality of our lives. It enables us to control our destinies, and to come close to getting exactly what we want out of any situation. Choice is essential to autonomy, which is absolutely fundamental to well- being. Healthy people want and need to direct their own lives. Whereas many needs are universal (food, shelter, medical care, social support, education, and so on), much of what we need to flourish is highly individualized. Choice is what enables each person to pursue precisely those objects and activities that best satisfy his or her own preferences within the limits of his or her resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Optimizing the Psychological Benefits of Choice: Information Transparency & Heuristic Use in Game Environments
    Running head: OPTIMIZING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL BENEFITS OF CHOICE 1 Optimizing the Psychological Benefits of Choice: Information Transparency & Heuristic Use in Game Environments James J. Cummings Stanford University Travis Ross Indiana University Running head: OPTIMIZING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL BENEFITS OF CHOICE 2 Abstract This paper suggests that the paradox of choice can be resolved in game environments by promoting heuristics-based decision-making, thereby maintaining player freedom while also avoiding the potential negative consequences of excessive deliberation. To do this, the informational cues relevant to such decisions must be made transparent, allowing players to employ fast and frugal tools from the brain’s adaptive toolbox to make the same optimal choices that they might otherwise make after extended deliberation. Developers can design for such transparency not only by creating choice experiences in which options can be assessed and compared through clear metrics and attributes, but also by designing social systems in which the choices and successes of others can be easily identified and used for informing one’s own future decisions. Keywords: games, design, heuristics, ecological rationality, decision-making, paradox of choice. Running head: OPTIMIZING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL BENEFITS OF CHOICE 3 Optimizing the Psychological Benefits of Choice: Information Transparency & Heuristic Use in Game Environments Introduction: The Paradox of Choice People are generally thought to prefer having a number of options available when making a choice. When presented with options, we are permitted to choose for ourselves, in light of our own personal tastes and needs. This conventional wisdom that choice is preferable is corroborated by the sheer amount of options characteristic in modern consumerism – everyday actions ranging from selecting peanut butter to customizing one’s new laptop computer are often filled with a menagerie of choice options.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paradox of Choice in Emerging Adulthood: Anxiety and Ambivalence
    THE PARADOX OF CHOICE IN EMERGING ADULTHOOD: ANXIETY AND AMBIVALENCE Jennifer L. McMillin A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS August 2017 Committee: Monica A. Longmore, Advisor Wendy D. Manning Peggy C. Giordano ii ABSTRACT Monica Longmore, Advisor Research in the last twenty years has characterized the life course stage of emerging adulthood as a time of unparalleled freedom and an abundance of choice. Few researchers, however, have addressed the darker side to emerging adulthood, including the effects an abundance of choice might have on emerging adults’ mental health. I drew from existing theory to examine how ambivalence associated with too much choice within the markers of adulthood influenced anxiety. Using data from the fifth interview of The Toledo Adolescent Relationship Study (TARS), I used ordinary least squares regression to examine whether the markers of adulthood, and the choices associated with the markers of adulthood including full-time employment, education completion, sustaining an intimate relationship, and living independently from parents influenced anxiety. Additionally, I examined whether social psychological processes of ambivalence, perceived control, and subjective adulthood mediated the relationship between markers of adulthood and anxiety. The only marker of adulthood found to be significantly and positively associated with anxiety in all models was relationship churning, suggesting that wavering in markers of adulthood is more important in terms of anxiety than actually completing or not completing the markers. Ambivalence sustained a significant and positive relationship with anxiety. Likewise, perceived control, and subjective adulthood remained significantly and negatively associated with anxiety.
    [Show full text]
  • The Council of Psychological Advisers
    The Council of Psychological Advisers The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Cass R. Sunstein, The Council of Psychological Advisers, 67 Ann. Rev. Psychol. 713 (2016). Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:13031653 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP Preliminary draft 9/15/14 All rights reserved Subject to significant revision and further editorial review Forthcoming, Annual Review of Psychology The Council of Psychological Advisers Cass R. Sunstein* ABSTRACT Findings in behavioral science, including psychology, have been influencing policies and reforms in many nations. “Choice architecture” can affect outcomes even if material incentives are not involved. In some contexts, default rules, simplification, and uses of social norms have been found to have even larger effects than significant economic incentives. Psychological research is helping to inform initiatives in areas that include savings, finance, highway safety, consumer protection, energy, climate change, obesity, education, poverty, development, crime, corruption, health, and the environment. No nation has created a Council of Psychological Advisers, but the role of behavioral research is likely to grow in coming years, especially in light of the mounting interest in promoting ease and simplification (“navigability”); in increasing effectiveness, economic growth, and competitiveness; and in low-cost, choice-preserving approaches. (The Appendix is a one-page list of thirty- one such approaches.) I.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence Against Choice Overload in E-Commerce Carol Moser1, Chanda Phelan1, Paul Resnick1, Sarita Y
    No Such Thing as Too Much Chocolate: Evidence Against Choice Overload in E-Commerce Carol Moser1, Chanda Phelan1, Paul Resnick1, Sarita Y. Schoenebeck1, and Katharina Reinecke2 1University of Michigan 2University of Washington Ann Arbor, MI, US Seattle, WA, US {moserc, cdphelan, presnick, yardi}@umich.edu [email protected] ABSTRACT and enhance perceptions of freedom of choice and control E-commerce designers must decide how many products to (see [5] for a review). On the other hand, choice overload display at one time. Choice overload research has research has shown that selecting from large choice sets demonstrated the surprising finding that more choice is not can be more cognitively demanding and feel more necessarily better—selecting from larger choice sets can be overwhelming [40], can lead to less satisfaction with the more cognitively demanding and can result in lower levels final choice [11], and can deter actual purchases [21]. of choice satisfaction. This research tests the choice Further, how users respond to different choice set sizes overload effect in an e-commerce context and explores may depend on an individual’s tendency to maximize or how the choice overload effect is influenced by an satisfice decisions. Maximizers, who search for the best individual’s tendency to maximize or satisfice decisions. option (in contrast to satisficers, who opt for the first We conducted an online experiment with 611 participants satisfactory option), tend to be less satisfied with their randomly assigned to select a gourmet chocolate bar from choices [22], even when they expend time and effort to either 12, 24, 40, 50, 60, or 72 different options.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychology Alexis I
    Advanced Placement Psychology Alexis I. DuPont High School 2019 Summer Assignment Room 223 Mr. Blum [email protected] 302- 651-2626 ext. 223 Welcome to AP Psychology! I am looking forward to an exciting year of understanding who we are and why we do what we do. Although this is a simplified definition of Psychology, you will find everyday uses for what we explore in this course. Beyond an increased understanding of human nature, I expect most of you will be taking the AP exam in May. This is a college-level course so it makes sense to get college credit. You will receive a syllabus on the first day of class. Until then, here is an overview of the topics we will cover this year: 1. History of Psychology 2. Research Methods 3. Physiology of Behavior 4. Sensation and Perception 5. Human Development 6. Motivation and Emotion 7. States of Consciousness 8. Thought and Language 9. Learning 10. Memory 11. Intelligence and Assessment 12. Personality Theory 13. Psychological Disorders 14. Treatment of Disorders 15. Social Behavior Over the summer, you will be required to complete the following assignments: 1. Read ONE of the following books: Goleman, Daniel. Social Intelligence Sacks,Oliver. The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat Kindlon, Dan. Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys Simmons, Rachel. Odd Girl Out: The Hidden Culture of Aggression in Girls Gladwell, Malcolm. The Tipping Point You will write a book review which will answer the following questions: 1. Summary main ideas, themes, concepts, or plot 2.
    [Show full text]