Where does satisficing collide?

The original meaning, coined by Herbert Simon: because a chooser has limited information, time, and computing power, they do not scan every option for the best one. Instead they search through options one at a time and take the first that clears an aspiration level, a threshold for what counts as good enough. Simon's 1956 Rational choice and the structure of the environment in Psychological Review presented this as a rational adaptation to real limits, arguing that a satisficing procedure can perform well without the impossible demands of full optimization. Here the referent is a search-and-stopping procedure that a limited agent uses on purpose, not a personality trait and not a formula for the mathematically best time to stop.[1]

Unit

One search that ends at the first option meeting the aspiration level

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Traced through the search path, the aspiration threshold, and where search stops

A stable individual difference in how people approach choices. Schwartz and colleagues' 2002 Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology built a Maximization Scale that sorts people along a line from maximizers, who feel compelled to consider every option and find the very best, to satisficers, who settle for what is good enough. Their studies reported that higher maximizers tend to be less happy and more prone to regret and depression, a pattern later popularized as the paradox of choice. In this tradition satisficing is a trait a person carries across many decisions and a comparatively healthy one, rather than Simon's neutral search procedure or a formal stopping rule.[2]

Unit

A person's score on a maximizing-versus-satisficing scale

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Self-report questionnaire items summed into a maximization score

A meaning specific to how people answer questionnaires. Krosnick's 1991 Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys in Applied Cognitive Psychology argued that answering a survey question well takes real mental effort, and that unmotivated or tired respondents often shortcut it. Rather than carefully retrieving and weighing what they think, they give the first answer that seems acceptable, agree with whatever is asked, pick the middle option, or say they do not know. Krosnick called this survey satisficing, in contrast to the effortful optimizing a good answer requires. The referent is a low-effort response strategy inside a single questionnaire, not a lifelong trait and not a deliberate search for a good enough choice.[3]

Unit

One survey answer produced by shortcutting rather than full effort

Recovery means

Not applicable

Measured by

Inferred from response patterns such as agreeing, non-differentiation, and middle or don't-know answers