For two decades, researchers have investigated the correlates and consequences of individual differences in maximizing, the tendency to pursue the goal of making the best possible choice by extensively seeking out and comparing alternatives. In this time, many different conceptualizations of maximizing have been proposed, including several that incorporate a construct called “decision difficulty.” We propose that including decision difficulty in measures of maximizing is problematic because the tendency to experience difficulty when making decisions is a separate individual difference construct already studied independently of maximizing — namely, indecisiveness. Across two studies (total N = 639), we find that scales measuring decision difficulty and indecisiveness are strongly correlated (r’s ≥.85), load on the same component in a principal component analysis, and show a very similar pattern of correlations with related variables. Moreover, decision difficulty and indecisiveness scales both show a divergent pattern of correlations when compared to measures of maximizing. We argue that decision difficulty scales are best interpreted as tapping the same underlying tendency as indecisiveness scales, and conclude that the tendency to experience difficulty in decision making is best conceptualized not as a component of maximizing, but rather a cause or consequence of it.
CITATION STYLE
Cheek, N. N., & Goebel, J. (2020). What does it mean to maximize? “decision difficulty,” indecisiveness, and the jingle-jangle fallacies in the measurement of maximizing. Judgment and Decision Making, 15(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500006884
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.