skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: Is satisficing really satisfying? Satisficers exhibit greater threat than maximizers during choice overload
Abstract When selecting from too many options (i.e., choice overload),maximizers(people who search exhaustively to make decisions that areoptimal) report more negative post‐decisional evaluations of their choices than dosatisficers(people who search minimally to make decisions that aresufficient). Although ample evidence exists for differences in responses after‐the‐fact, little is known about possible divergences in maximizers’ and satisficers’ experiencesduringchoice overload. Thus, using the biopsychosocial model of challenge/threat, we examined 128 participants’ cardiovascular responses as they actively made a selection from many options. Specifically, we focused on cardiovascular responses assessing the degree to which individuals (a) viewed their decisions as valuable/important and (b) viewed themselves as capable (vs. incapable) of making a good choice. Although we found no differences in terms of the value individuals placed on their decisions (i.e., cardiovascular responses of task engagement), satisficers—compared to maximizers—exhibited cardiovascular responses consistent with feeling less capable of making their choice (i.e., greater relative threat). The current work provides a novel investigation of the nature of differences in maximizers’/satisficers’ momentary choice overload experiences, suggesting insight into why they engage in such distinct search behaviors.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1823497
PAR ID:
10452035
Author(s) / Creator(s):
 ;  ;  ;  ;  
Publisher / Repository:
Wiley-Blackwell
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Psychophysiology
Volume:
58
Issue:
1
ISSN:
0048-5772
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; (, Routledge handbook of bounded rationality)
    Viale, R. (Ed.)
    Alternative-based approaches to decision making generate overall values for each option in a choice set by processing information within options before comparing options to arrive at a decision. By contrast, attribute-based approaches compare attributes (such as monetary cost and time delay to receipt of a reward) across options and use these attribute comparisons to make a decision. Because they compare attributes, they may not use all available information to make a choice, which categorizes many of them as heuristics. Attribute-based models can better predict choice compared to alternative-based models in some situations (e.g., when there are many options in the choice set, when calculating an overall value for an option is too cognitively taxing). Process data comparing alternative-based and attribute-based processing obtained from eye-tracking and mouse-tracking technology support these findings. Data on attribute-based models thus align with the notion of bounded rationality that people make use of heuristics to make good decisions when under time pressure, informational constraints, and computational constraints. Further study of attribute-based models and processing would enhance our understanding of how individuals process information and make decisions. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin)
    Mindfulness has been associated with enhanced coping with stress. However, it remains unclear how dispositional mindfulness impacts the nature and valence of experiences during active stressors. Across 1,001 total participants, we used cardiovascular responses from the biopsychosocial model of challenge/threat to assess the degree to which individuals cared about a stressor in the moment and had a positive versus negative psychological experience. Although we found a small association between mindfulness—particularly the acting with awareness facet—and responses consistent with caring more about the stressor (i.e., greater task engagement), we found no evidence that mindfulness was associated with exhibiting a more positive psychological response (i.e., greater challenge) during the stressor. Despite no differences in the valence of momentary experiences as a function of mindfulness, individuals higher in mindfulness self-reported more positive experiences afterward. These findings suggest that dispositional mindfulness may benefit responses to active stressors only after they have passed. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; (, Physics Education Research Conference 2022)
    Frank, Brian W.; Jones, Dyan L.; Ryan, Qing X. (Ed.)
    The ways in which physics majors make career decisions is a critical, yet understudied, aspect of the undergraduate experience. Such decisions are important to students, physics departments, and administrators. In this project, we specifically examine how students develop interests and intent to pursue specific subfields of physics by interviewing 13 physics majors from all years of study. The interviews examined factors that led students to choose their most preferred and least preferred subfields. Interviews leveraged the framework of Social Cognitive Career Theory, a model that describes how several constructs such as self-efficacy, learning experiences, and outcome expectations relate to decision-making. Findings highlight the differences in decision-making between upper-division students and beginning students. For instance, we see how popular culture and popular science provide an initial learning experience about certain subfields, such as astronomy and astrophysics, which strongly affect beginning students' perceptions of that subfield. Initial exposure to biology and chemistry in high school or early undergraduate classes often negatively affected students' interests in fields like biophysics or chemical physics. Data also suggests a splitting between students with respect to their outcome expectations of a desirable career in science. While some students prioritize using science to help people, others prioritize discovery of new knowledge though science, and some are in between. Students in both groups form perceptions about subfields that do not align with their identities and hence make decisions based on these perceptions. For instance, a student who prioritizes helping others through science may be quick to reject astrophysics as a subfield choice as they do not think that astrophysics can help people enough. 
    more » « less
  4. ; (, 27th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI ’22))
    When people receive advice while making difficult decisions, they often make better decisions in the moment and also increase their knowledge in the process. However, such incidental learning can only occur when people cognitively engage with the information they receive and process this information thoughtfully. How do people process the information and advice they receive from AI, and do they engage with it deeply enough to enable learning? To answer these questions, we conducted three experiments in which individuals were asked to make nutritional decisions and received simulated AI recommendations and explanations. In the first experiment, we found that when people were presented with both a recommendation and an explanation before making their choice, they made better decisions than they did when they received no such help, but they did not learn. In the second experiment, participants first made their own choice, and only then saw a recommendation and an explanation from AI; this condition also resulted in improved decisions, but no learning. However, in our third experiment, participants were presented with just an AI explanation but no recommendation and had to arrive at their own decision. This condition led to both more accurate decisions and learning gains. We hypothesize that learning gains in this condition were due to deeper engagement with explanations needed to arrive at the decisions. This work provides some of the most direct evidence to date that it may not be sufficient to provide people with AI-generated recommendations and explanations to ensure that people engage carefully with the AI-provided information. This work also presents one technique that enables incidental learning and, by implication, can help people process AI recommendations and explanations more carefully. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; (, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences)
    For many animals, options abound when choosing a mate in socially complex environments like a breeding chorus or lek. In such environments, receivers often choose their mate based on individual differences in signal repetition rate. However, signallers also differ in the regularity with which they produce repeated signals. Irregularity in signalling introduces uncertainty in decision-making by masking the among-individual variation in signalling rate that is a target of mate choice. At present, we know little about how the complexity of the choice environment affects selection on rate and regularity, two signalling behaviours that receivers can only compare after sampling series of signals produced by multiple signallers. In this study of female grey treefrogs (Hyla chrysoscelis), we measured multivariate sexual selection on the rate and regularity of male calling behaviour using two-, four- and eight-choice tests. Receivers overwhelmingly chose faster, more regular calling rates in two-choice tests, but did so markedly less often when they chose among four or eight stimuli. Sexual selection imposed by female choice became markedly weaker and differently shaped as the complexity of the social environment increased, suggesting noise and choice overload effects may allow relatively unattractive males to mate. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email