Bookworm: The Paradox of Choice

If we think like a ‘satisficer’ (settling for ‘good enough’), we will be happier, advises psychologist Barry Schwartz.

What does the author mean by the paradox of choice?

While we assume that more choice means that we’ll get a better outcome, the paradox in question is that we actually make better choices when we have a smaller selection to choose from. Modern life presents us with wonderful opportunities that previous generations might have thought heaven-sent. But, such variety can bring bewilderment at best and depression at worst.

Psychologist and TED regular Barry Schwartz’s aim is to help us define our own way of navigating the options so that we make decisions that satisfy us long term.

What kind of choices are we talking about?

We’re talking exclusively about the decisions that stress us out. This might be which training programme to sign up for, which mortgage lender to go with, or whether to leave a difficult relationship.

Schwartz is interested in the important decisions where we have a new-found plethora of options, and where historically our options might have been distinctly limited.

What’s wrong with just weighing up the options and picking the best?

Unfortunately, this will almost always lead us to the wrong decision, because:

We can’t all suddenly become experts in each field. Someone who knows everything about fixed-rate mortgages is unlikely to also be a connoisseur of post-graduate sculpture courses in the north east of England.

Our memories, which form much of our basis for how to plan the future, are flawed. Instead of accurately recalling a period of time (a tenure in a job; a family Christmas), we tend to remember the most extreme emotion we felt and apply it to the whole event. So, an otherwise great job feels like it was awful just because you fell out with your boss in your last week.

We are useless at predicting what we’ll want in the future. A study cited by Schwartz showed that students were only capable of successfully making decisions for themselves one week ahead. If they made decisions for just three weeks later, they chose badly and they were disappointed when the time came around.

The existence of more options causes less satisfaction with our final choice. When we know ‘what we could have won’, if only we’d made another decision, our satisfaction with our original choice drops significantly. Even if the other options are less valuable, their very presence makes us doubt the value of what we chose. The price of any choice is that the other options become unavailable. This is known as ‘opportunity cost’.

But if all my choices are good, what’s the worst that can happen?

As French philosopher Albert Camus put it : “I could kill myself, or I could have a cup of tea”.

Unfortunately, Schwartz observes a relationship between the growing multitude of choices and the increasing prevalence of depression. While you might imagine that prosperity would mean greater happiness overall, and more support for those who need it, the reverse appears to be true.

How can having more choices make me depressed?

The flow charts of our lives now have more and more pathways we can follow. The implication is that, with so many wonderful opportunities at our feet, we should be able to succeed. If we don’t, it must be our fault. This self-blame is pretty toxic.

So, how can I make sure that I make the right decision?

An important point is that you will, based on simple probability, make some good and some bad decisions in your life. Schwartz is concerned, however, not with always getting the absolute best outcome every time, but rather with ensuring that we don’t get crushed under the pressure of constant decision-making, and that we feel good about the choice we ultimately make.

But I want the absolute best every time!

Then you must be a maximiser. In other words, someone who is only happy when they have done all their research and can rest easy in the thought that they have made the very best possible choice.

What’s wrong with that?

Well, in some ways, not much. Maximisers often do make objectively ‘better’ choices, such as finding jobs that pay more than their satisficing peers are getting. However, for each choice made, they are less happy.

As Schwartz says: “As a general rule, maximisers do better, but feel worse.” That’s because the pleasure we get from making that agonising decision will fade rapidly, and we’ll likely regret the purchase and the time spent stewing over it.

Second, we may well have become so wrapped up in all the options that we even start imagining other ones that don’t even exist. The opportunity cost is likely to sap any joy from the process and may even mean we don’t end up making a choice at all.

What is a ‘healthier’ way to approach decision-making?

Think like a ‘satisficer’. A satisficer settles for ‘good enough’. They set themselves a standard which their choice must meet to be acceptable and look for the first option that meets that standard.

This usually serves to cut the options by a huge factor, because those which aren’t up to standard don’t make the cut, and it cuts the time, energy and opportunity cost, too. Further, applying a satisficer mentality to all areas of our life will make us calmer, happier and more self-aware.

Why will be be happier?

The pressures of modern life, including all we discussed here, take us away from the things that matter in our lives. Studies show that spending time with our friends and families is what enriches our lives and improves our wellbeing.

While these relationships might feel like a bit of a drag to maintain, especially when a good-looking or entertaining stranger comes into view, remember that if we spread ourselves too thinly or open ourselves up to too many options, we won’t feel satisfied.

What am I most likely to say after reading this book?

 “Yep, that’ll do just fine.”

What am I least likely to say after reading this book?

“If it’s worth doing, it’s worth making it perfect.”