Abstract
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.
Highlights
The material life of modern society is greatly enriched
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
Li ing high standards, seeking out and comparing among alternatives, and experiencing decision difficulty), and they use the total score of three factors as a measure of people’s maximizing tendency
Summary
The material life of modern society is greatly enriched. More and more choices have brought people much more convenience and brought more challenges to people, and there are more and more people get lost in a world with infinite choices. Corresponding to these two viewpoints, Schwartz et al (2002) proposed maximization and satisfaction and used maximizer and satisficer to describe individuals with the above decision styles In his opinion, maximizers are those who aim at maximizing utility, striving for excellence in decision-making, seeking to find the best choice, and obtaining optimal results. Li ing high standards, seeking out and comparing among alternatives, and experiencing decision difficulty), and they use the total score of three factors as a measure of people’s maximizing tendency Contrary to this view, Diab, Gillespie, and Highhouse (2008) believe that the maximizing tendency is “the general tendency to pursue the identification of the optimal alternative” and put forward Maximizing Tendency Scale (MTS) containing only one factor. Decision difficulty “was mainly derived from the entries in” decision difficulty “and seeking out and comparing among alternatives” in MS
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
