The way of making choices: Maximizing and satisficing and its relationship to well-being, personality, and self-rumination

Abstract

There is a lively debate about the effect of maximizing and satisficing tendencies on well-being. The question is, whether maximizing and satisficing have an adaptive or maladaptive effect on well-being. There are also issues regarding the conceptualization and measurement of maximizing and satisficing tendencies. In a sample of 514 subjects from the general population in Slovakia, a two-component model of maximizing was examined. Satisficing tendency was measured as a separate construct. The results show the usefulness of a two-component model (maximizing as a strategy and maximizing as a goal) in measuring maximizing tendency. Maximizing as a strategy (measured as alternative search) turned out to be maladaptive (positively related to depression and negatively related to happiness), whereas maximizing as a goal (measured as high standards) had no maladaptive effect (no relation with well-being). In addition, the two components were differently associated with personality factors, which strengthens the need to distinguish between them. However, the satisficing tendency measured separately from maximizing tendency was not related to anything which raises a question about the conceptualization and validity of this tendency. The results of the current study, therefore, indicate that 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. However, results also point to the importance of considering the cultural context that may have an effect on the relationship between maximizing and well-being. Therefore, the results may vary due to different cultures.

Curiosity and zetetic style in ADHD

“…Contrast, for example, a satisficing approach (i.e., settling for the first means of inquiry that seems good enough) with a maximizing approach (i.e., settling only for the most effective). There is a rich literature discussing the advantages and drawbacks of each, and one upshot is that while maximizers tend to make better choices, satisficing is often more cost-effective and positively related to subjective well-being (Vargová, 2020). Once again, it seems that the rationality of different settings on this parameter are influenced by broader practical considerations, and it thus seems possible for more than one setting to be rational, depending on the context.…”

Maximizers’ Reactance to Algorithm-Recommended Options: The Moderating Role of Autotelic vs. Instrumental Choices

“…Second, maximizing comprises two facets: the pursuit of the best possible choice (goal) and an extensive search for alternatives (search) [34]. Depending on which of the two factors dominates, maximizing individuals could experience positive or negative affective states [35][36][37][38]. For example, Kim [38] found that the search aspect of maximizing is related to seeking both negative and positive customer reviews after product choice, which decreases the level of satisfaction.…”