Are maximizers blind to the future? When today’s best does not make for a better tomorrow

Besharat, Ali; Ladik, Daniel M.; Carrillat, François A.

doi:10.1007/s11002-013-9243-4

Cited by 42 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This seems to be what many studies that examine this question suggest (Besharat et al 2014;Carrillat et al 2011;Chowdhury et al 2009;Iyengar et al 2006;Leach and Patall 2013;Polman 2010; Schwartz et al…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

When the purpose lies within: Maximizers and satisfaction with autotelic choices

Kokkoris

2017

Mark Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are maximizers less satisfied with their choices than satisficers? This research provides a novel perspective on this question by distinguishing between two types of consumer goals: autotelic, when choice is a goal in itself, and instrumental, when a choice is a means to achieving other goals. Study 1 showed that maximizers value autotelic experiences more than satisficers. Study 2 experimentally manipulated the choice goal and found that maximizers compared to satisficers experience higher choice satisfaction when the choice goal is autotelic rather than instrumental. Additionally, evidence is provided for the underlying mechanism (perceived ease of choice) as well as downstream consequences (consumers' willingness to pay for their chosen option). These findings advance a conceptualization of maximizers as consumers seeking self-contained meaning in choice and provide new insights into the relation between maximizing and choice satisfaction. Theoretical and practical implications for consumer decision-making are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

When the purpose lies within: Maximizers and satisfaction with autotelic choices

Kokkoris

2017

Mark Lett

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, cognitive limitations increase the difficulty of decision tasks such as the evaluation and comparison of all alternatives [53,54]. They also tend to underestimate the time resources they need to allocate to a task [8]. Maximizers therefore engage in longer (time-wise) decision processes with more cycles than satisficers.…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of prior knowledge and decision-making style on the online purchase decision-making process: A typology of consumer shopping behaviour

Karimi

Papamichail

Holland

2015

Decision Support Systems

186

125

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Maximizers have a greater cognitive burden in the decision-making process (Yang & Chiou, 2010). As options increase, their ability to exclude irrelevant information is reduced, they tend to over-generalize and produce more cognitive biases, making it difficult to correctly assess decision-making costs and benefits (Besharat, Ladik, & Carrillat, 2014). Researchers have found that maximizers tend to underestimate decision-making costs and overestimate decision-making gains (Botti & Hsee, 2010;Jain et al, 2011;Misuraca & Teuscher, 2013).…”

Section: Maximizers Have More Cognitive Biasesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study on Maximization Paradox and Its Psychological Origin

Ding¹,

Li²

2018

PSYCH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Compared with satisficers, maximizers intend to pursue optimal results, leading to more negative emotions and worse experience. Even when they do get a better result, they are still less satisfied. We call it "maximization paradox". Theoretically, the purpose of this study is to enrich and deepen research in fields of the maximization paradox and its psychological origin. What's more, we intend to provide feasible advice for corporations and the government on the basis of our findings. By reviewing existing literatures, we find that the psychological origin of this paradox includes three aspects: the uncertainty of their optimal standards, their behavioral strategies to search and compare excessively, and more cognitive biases such as expectation biases and focusing biases. These conclusions help us to better understand the maximizing tendency and make relevant suggestions for decision-makers.

show abstract

Are maximizers blind to the future? When today’s best does not make for a better tomorrow

Cited by 42 publications

References 45 publications

When the purpose lies within: Maximizers and satisfaction with autotelic choices

When the purpose lies within: Maximizers and satisfaction with autotelic choices

The effect of prior knowledge and decision-making style on the online purchase decision-making process: A typology of consumer shopping behaviour

A Study on Maximization Paradox and Its Psychological Origin

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About