L9 Maximising vs. Satisficing Flashcards
What is maximising vs satisficing?
How is maximising measured?
Maximising: pursuing the “best” option
Satisficing: pursuing the “good enough” option
Maximisation scale:
◦ “When I watch TV, I channel surf, often scanning through the available options even while attempting to watch one program
Who is happier with their decisions?
Schwartz et al. (2002, Study 2) asked participants to recall a recent purchase
Maximisers (compared to satisficers) were more likely to report:
◦ taking longer to decide
◦ engaging in more:
- social comparison
- product comparison
- counterfactual thinking (thinking back and thinking about what it would have been like if you bought the other thing)
◦ Greater regret
◦ Less happiness
Who makes better decisions?
Iyengar et al. (2006) followed graduating students who were on the job market
Maximising tendencies were associated with:
◦ Greater option fixation (even if they got a job, still fixate after)
◦ Greater reliance on information gathering from external sources
◦ Improved job market performance (got more job offers than satisficers)
◦ Higher starting salary (20% higher than satisficers on average)
◦ Greater negative affect with the job-search process
How to Prime a maximizing mindset
From Goldsmith, Roux, and Ma (2018)
They give people 10 multiple choice questions.
1. Please choose the job you think offers the highest salary: (maximisers, vs a moderately high salary)
2. Please choose the type of pet you think is the smartest: (vs moderately intelligent)
Consequences of the maximizing mindset (Goldsmith et al., 2018)
Maximising mindset activates cognitions related to scarcity
◦ Best outcomes are scarce
Scarcity promotes immoral behaviour when that behaviour allows for personal gain
◦ Scarcity promotes self-interested behaviour (e.g., Roux et al., 2015)
◦ Financial deprivation increased tendency to cheat for monetary gain (e.g., Sharma et al., 2014)
Goldsmith et al. (2018, Study 3)
Cover story: better understand current housing problems in major cities in China
Maximising mindset vs. neutral mindset, e.g.,
◦ Which of the five cities below is the best city to live? vs. ◦ Do you live in Beijing now?
Scarcity index:
◦ “I am lacking housing”, “I am lacking money”
Willingness to engage in immoral behaviour:
◦ “How permissible would it be for you to apply for government-subsidised housing even if you have your own housing?”
◦ Compared to neutral mindset, participants in maximising mindset condition reported: higher scores on scarcity index greater willingness to engage in immoral behavior (thought the behaviour was more permissible)
◦ Cognitions related to scarcity mediated the relationship between maximising mindset and willingness to engage immoral behaviour
◦ Describe some common biases with regard to consumer decision making
◦ narrow framing
◦ confirmation bias
◦ short-term emotion
◦ overconfidence
◦ Describe a tool to overcome decision making biases and apply this tool to everyday consumer decisions
WRAP process (Heath & Heath, 2013)
◦ WIDEN your options
considering multiple options, by asking the right kinds of questions (1. Opportunity cost 2. The “vanishing options” test(3. How others have solved the same problem More than one option at the same time (multitrack)
◦ REALITY-test your assumptions
• Take the inside view AND the outside view
• Consider the opposite
• Run small experiments (try a car share trial for a month)
◦ ATTAIN distance before deciding
• Overcome short-term emotion ◦ 10/10/10 analysis (10 minutes, 10 months, 10 years from now)
• Beware of the status quo bias (we are worried about what you have got to lose)
• Be true to your core values
◦ PREPARE to be wrong
Mitigate overconfidence (the overconfidence bias)
• Anticipate a range of outcomes
• Set a tripwire to alert you to re-consider your decision
Reading Goldsmith, Roux and Ma (2018) exp 1.
Exp1
- Participants in the maximizing mindset condition reported significantly higher ratings on the scarcity index (M = 4.34, SD = 1.41) than participants in the neutral mindset condition.
- the maximizing mindset manipulation had no effect on participants’ moral disengagement
- maximizing mindset manipulation had no effect on participants’ zero‐sum beliefs (focus on one’s relative standing vs. others’)
Reading Goldsmith, Roux and Ma (2018) Experiment 2
anagram task cheating test
Experiment 2 provides evidence for the proposed effect of a maximizing mindset on immoral behavior.
the effect only emerges when the cheating behavior is instrumental for advancing one’s own welfare that was not linked to self‐threat.
Maximising mindset not sufficient to trump moral compass
Exp4 reading Goldsmith, Roux and Ma (2018)
opportunity to engage in an immoral behavior for one’s own financial gain: if one owned their own home, one could accept the subsidized housing, and then earn rental income from renting their own home to others.
- when an immoral behavior had the potential to confer benefits to the self, a maximizing mindset increased participants’ likelihood of approving of the immoral behavior, as compared to the neutral mindset condition
- when the same immoral action had the potential to be costly to the self (i.e., because the beneficiary was a work colleague),maximizing (vs. neutral) mindset were significantly less likely to approve of the immoral behavior
Exp 3 reading Goldsmith, Roux and Ma (2018)
opportunity to engage in an immoral behavior for one’s own financial gain: if one owned their own home, one could accept the subsidized housing, and then earn rental income from renting their own home to others.
maximizing mindset reported that the behavior was more permissible (M = 3.46, SD = 1.39) than participants in the neutral mindset condition.
those in the maximizing mindset condition showed higher scores on the scarcity index (M = 3.68, SD = .88) than participants in the neutral mindset condition
mediation was significant
Exp 5 reading Goldsmith, Roux and Ma (2018)
motivation to choose conditions - describe an incident when they had to make a choice either focus on best option or good enough.
motivation to achieve - to describe an incident when they had a goal to “be” a certain way (i.e., not a choice‐related goal). focus on a goal to be the best or a goal to be good enough
presented with 5 maths problems (every right anser, entry into draw to win $50, if solved all 5, would get 20 entries)
They were next shown all of the correct answers, and then asked to self‐report the number of math problems they had solved correctly (measured cheating).
among participants with the motivation to choose, a focus on the best increased participants’ cheating behavior as compared to the focus on “good enough” condition
For those focused on achieving, this effect was no longer observed. In addition, the motivation to choose (vs. achieve) only increased cheating behavior among those who were focused on the best
both of the inherent components of a maximizing mindset (i.e., the motivation to choose and a focus on the best) are necessary to promote immoral behavior.
Therefore, participants could have acquired more rewards by engaging in the moral behavior of investing more effort, yet they did not do so
