a****5
发帖数: 747 | 1 最近在读，已经快超过一半了。感觉很不错。
下面是Wiki的介绍：
The Paradox of Choice - Why More Is Less is a 2004 book by American
psychologist Barry Schwartz. In the book, Schwartz argues that eliminating
consumer choices can greatly reduce anxiety for shoppers.
Autonomy and Freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is
critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have
more choice than any group of people ever has before, and thus, presumably,
more freedom and autonomy, we don't seem to be benefiting from it
psychologically.
Barry Schwartz's thesis
Schwartz assembles his argument from a variety of fields of modern
psychology that study how happiness is affected by success or failure of
goal achievement.
When we choose
Schwartz compares the various choices that Americans face in their daily
lives by comparing the selection of choices at a supermarket to the variety
of classes at an Ivy League college.
“
There are now several books and magazines devoted to what is called the "
voluntary simplicity" movement. Its core idea is that we have too many
choices, too many decisions, too little time to do what is really important.
[...] Taking care of our own "wants" and focusing on what we "want" to do
does not strike me as a solution to the problem of too much choice.[1]
”
Schwartz maintains that it is precisely so that we can focus on our own
wants that all of these choices emerged in the first place.
How we choose
Schwartz describes that a consumer's strategy for most good decisions will
involve these steps:
Figure out your goal or goals. The process of goal-setting and decision
making begins with the question: "What do I want?" When faced with the
choice to pick a restaurant, a CD, or a movie, one makes their choice based
upon how one would expect the experience to make them feel, expected utility
. Once they have experienced that particular restaurant, CD or movie, their
choice will be based upon a remembered utility. To say that you know what
you want, therefore, means that these utilities align. Nobel Prize winning
psychologist Daniel Kahneman and his colleagues have shown that what we
remember about the pleasurable quality of our past experiences is almost
entirely determined by two things: how the experiences felt when they were
at their peak (best or worst), and how they felt when they ended.
Evaluate the importance of each goal. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky have
researched how people make decisions and found a variety of rules of thumb
that often lead us astray. Most people give substantial weight to anecdotal
evidence, perhaps so much so that it cancels out expert evidence. The
researchers called it the availability heuristic describing how we assume
that the more available some piece of information is to memory, the more
frequently we must have encountered it in the past. Salience will influence
the weight we give any particular piece of information.
Array the options. Kahneman and Tversky found that personal "psychological
accounts" will produce the effect of framing the choice and determining what
options are considered as subjects to factor. For example, an evening at a
concert could be just one entry in a much larger account, of say a "meeting
a potential mate" account. Or it could be part of a more general account
such as "ways to spend a Friday night". Just how much an evening at a
concert is worth will depend on which account it is a part of.
Evaluate how likely each of the options is to meet your goals. People often
talk about how "creative accountants can make a corporate balance sheet look
as good or bad as they want it to look." In many ways Schwartz views most
people as creative accountants when it comes to keeping their own
psychological balance sheet.
Pick the winning option. Schwartz argues that options are already attached
to choices being considered. When the options are not already attached, they
are not part of the endowment and choosing them is perceived as a gain.
Economist Richard Thaler provides a helpful term sunk costs.
Modify goals. Schwartz points out that later, one uses the consequences of
their choice to modify their goals, the importance assigned to them, and the
way future possibilities are evaluated.
Schwartz relates the ideas of psychologist Herbert A. Simon from the 1950s
to the psychological stress that most consumers face today. He notes some
important distinctions between, what Simon termed, maximizers and
satisficers. A maximizer is like a perfectionist, someone who needs to be
assured that their every purchase or decision was the best that could be
made. The way a maximizer knows for certain is to consider all the
alternatives they can imagine. This creates a psychologically daunting task,
which can become even more daunting as the number of options increases. The
alternative to maximizing is to be a satisficer. A satisficer has criteria
and standards, but a satisficer is not worried about the possibility that
there might be something better. Ultimately, Schwartz agrees with Simon's
conclusion, that satisficing is, in fact, the maximizing strategy.
Why we suffer
Schwartz integrates various psychological models for happiness showing how
the problem of choice can be addressed by different strategies. What is
important to note is that each of these strategies comes with its own bundle
of psychological complication.
Choice and Happiness. Schwartz discusses the significance of common research
methods that utilize a Happiness Scale. He sides with the opinion of
psychologists David Myers and Robert Lane, who independently conclude that
the current abundance of choice often leads to depression and feelings of
loneliness. Schwartz draws particular attention to Lane's assertion that
Americans are paying for increased affluence and freedom with a substantial
decrease in the quality and quantity of community.
What was once given by family, neighborhood and workplace now must be
achieved and actively cultivated on an individual basis. The social fabric
is no longer a birthright but has become a series of deliberated and
demanding choices. Schwartz also discusses happiness with specific products.
For example, he cites a study by Sheena Iyengar of Columbia University and
Mark Lepper of Stanford University who found that when participants were
faced with a smaller rather than larger array of chocolates, they were
actually more satisfied with their tasting.
Freedom or Commitment. Schwartz connects this issue to economist Albert
Hirschman's research into how populations respond to unhappiness: they can
exit the situation, or they can protest and voice their concerns. While free
-market governments give citizens the right to express their displeasure by
exit, as in switching brands, Schwartz maintains that social relations are
different. Instead, we usually give voice to displeasure, hoping to project
influence on the situation.
Second-Order Decisions. Law professor Cass Sunstein uses the term "second-
order decisions" for decisions that follow a rule. Having the discipline to
live "by the rules" eliminates countless troublesome choices in one's daily
life. Schwartz shows that these second-order decisions can be divided into
general categories of effectiveness for different situations: presumptions,
standards, and cultural codes. Each of these methods are useful ways people
use to parse the vast array of choices they confront.
Missed Opportunities. Schwartz finds that when people are faced with having
to choose one option out of many desirable choices, they will begin to
consider hypothetical trade-offs. Their options are evaluated in terms of
missed opportunities instead of the opportunity's potential.
Schwartz maintains that one of the downsides of making trade-offs is it
alters how we feel about the decisions we face; afterwards, it affects the
level of satisfaction we experience from our decision. While psychologists
have known for years about the harmful effects of negative emotion on
decision making, Schwartz points to recent evidence showing how positive
emotion has the opposite effect: in general, subjects are inclined to
consider more possibilities when they are feeling happy. | a**e
发帖数: 5094 | 2 我的原则是，用不着的东西一律不买。东西没用完，也不囤货。看到感兴趣的东西，想
想自己家里面又没有可以替代的，是不是真的需要。东西越少越省心。最重要的是住的
地方一定要小，想想家里没地方放了，自然就不买了。
beauty lies in the simplicity
is
have
presumably,
【在 a****5 的大作中提到】
: 最近在读，已经快超过一半了。感觉很不错。
: 下面是Wiki的介绍：
: The Paradox of Choice - Why More Is Less is a 2004 book by American
: psychologist Barry Schwartz. In the book, Schwartz argues that eliminating
: consumer choices can greatly reduce anxiety for shoppers.
: Autonomy and Freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is
: critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have
: more choice than any group of people ever has before, and thus, presumably,
: more freedom and autonomy, we don't seem to be benefiting from it
: psychologically.
| b**l
发帖数: 33123 | 3 minimalism is the way to go
eliminating
choice
【在 a**e 的大作中提到】
: 我的原则是，用不着的东西一律不买。东西没用完，也不囤货。看到感兴趣的东西，想
: 想自己家里面又没有可以替代的，是不是真的需要。东西越少越省心。最重要的是住的
: 地方一定要小，想想家里没地方放了，自然就不买了。
: beauty lies in the simplicity
:
: is
: have
: presumably,
| a**e
发帖数: 5094 | 4 哈哈，就是看到漂亮衣服和鞋子有时候还是忍不住 :P
【在 b**l 的大作中提到】
: minimalism is the way to go
:
: eliminating
: choice
| b**l
发帖数: 33123 | 5 只逛高档店
【在 a**e 的大作中提到】
: 哈哈，就是看到漂亮衣服和鞋子有时候还是忍不住 :P
| a**e
发帖数: 5094 | 6 这个不影响我买啊：）
【在 b**l 的大作中提到】
: 只逛高档店
| b**l
发帖数: 33123 | 7 说明不够高档
【在 a**e 的大作中提到】
: 这个不影响我买啊：）
| a**e
发帖数: 5094 | 8 再逛就只能去纽约了 :P
不过话说回来，波士顿很多店的款式比纽约真心难看，实在是没有什么可以买的。
【在 b**l 的大作中提到】
: 说明不够高档
| w**1
发帖数: 1014 | 9 原文好像是说当选择丰富的时候，反而不容易快乐，譬如说会患得患失。没得选就可以
傻乐。 | a****5
发帖数: 747 | 10 到不是这么简单。有时间可以看看这本书。
【在 w**1 的大作中提到】
: 原文好像是说当选择丰富的时候，反而不容易快乐，譬如说会患得患失。没得选就可以
: 傻乐。
| | | w**1
发帖数: 1014 | 11 没时间啊，选择太多...
【在 a****5 的大作中提到】
: 到不是这么简单。有时间可以看看这本书。
| r*******t
发帖数: 8550 | 12 选择过多，会使一些人有anxiety
但是，如果只有单一选择，就很不好了
【在 w**1 的大作中提到】
: 原文好像是说当选择丰富的时候，反而不容易快乐，譬如说会患得患失。没得选就可以
: 傻乐。
| w**1
发帖数: 1014 | 13 对的，他们在斯坦福附近一超市做了一个果酱实验，有5，6种口味时买的人多些满意些
，排出24种，大家就晕了。
所以有两个版主可选，版民们应该觉得非常愉悦啊！
【在 r*******t 的大作中提到】
: 选择过多，会使一些人有anxiety
: 但是，如果只有单一选择，就很不好了
| a****5
发帖数: 747 | 14 看样子，你已经开始看了。我还差一点就看完了。
【在 w**1 的大作中提到】
: 对的，他们在斯坦福附近一超市做了一个果酱实验，有5，6种口味时买的人多些满意些
: ，排出24种，大家就晕了。
: 所以有两个版主可选，版民们应该觉得非常愉悦啊！
| w**1
发帖数: 1014 | 15 没有，我上过一门behavior decision theory的课，其中一个章节讲过那个实验，而且
那个超市以前常去。
这些watered-down-academic的书大都写得太长，总让人觉得在凑字数，如果可以精简
成10个bullet points，顶多各举一例，50页完事就好了。
‘Predictably Irrational’听说还行，你要无聊可以试试。
【在 a****5 的大作中提到】
: 看样子，你已经开始看了。我还差一点就看完了。
| a****5
发帖数: 747 | 16 书终于看完了，相当不错。强烈建议找时间读一下。
【在 a**e 的大作中提到】
: 我的原则是，用不着的东西一律不买。东西没用完，也不囤货。看到感兴趣的东西，想
: 想自己家里面又没有可以替代的，是不是真的需要。东西越少越省心。最重要的是住的
: 地方一定要小，想想家里没地方放了，自然就不买了。
: beauty lies in the simplicity
:
: is
: have
: presumably,
|
|
