The Paradox of Choice

The Paradox of Choice is an observation by Barry Schwartz. He mentioned and wrote about the
negative consequences of having too many options in his 2004 book, The Paradox of Choice:
Why More is Less. The paradox of choice is that having numerous options to choose from,
rather than making people happy and ensuring they get what they want, cause them stress and
problematize decision-making. The basic idea behind it is, imagine you go to a restaurant and
want to for brunch. You then look at the menu and find hundreds of dishes. They also provide
you with various combo, but different types of portions of dishes are available. Almost
flabbergasted, you stand in front of the counter and have no idea what Dish to pick. There are
so many choices that you are overwhelmed. This peculiarity is known as the paradox of
decision. It is turning into worry in the modern world, where an ever-increasing number of
choices are opening up to us. The conundrum of decision specifies that while we could accept
that being given various choices makes it more straightforward to pick one. We are content in
this manner in increments shopper fulfillment. Having a wealth of choices requires more work
to settle on and can leave us unsatisfied with our decision. Assuming we just needed to pick
somewhere in the range of one or two dishes. Knowing which choice we like is more
straightforward since we can gauge the advantages and disadvantages without much of a
stretch. Whenever the quantity of decisions increments, so does the trouble of realizing what is
ideal. Rather than expanding our opportunity to have what we need, the paradox of choices
recommends that having many such decisions restricts our opportunity.
There are some terms related to The Paradox of Choice. According to Barry Schwartz, two styles
of decision-makers were distinguished by psychologist Herbert A. Simon during the 1950s:
maximizers and satisficers. A maximizer is somebody headed to settle on the ideal decision.
Maximizers need to assess choices comprehensively but might be less happy with their
definitive decision than somebody who did less research. The last option term is a portmanteau
made from the words satisfy and do they suffice.
Satisficers are pragmatic people who are content to pick choices that meet their prerequisites.
They don't sit around overthinking their choices or lamenting their proactively making
decisions. Then there are other terms like Choice overload, the propensity for individuals to get
overpowered when given an enormous number of choices, regularly utilized reciprocally with
the term paradox of choice. Then we have terms like Choice architecture, which means
strategies that are executed to sort out the setting under which individuals settle on choices to
influence them to settle on specific decisions. We also have a term called Second-order
decisions that observe a guideline that goes about as a technique to assist with peopling
settling on normal decision-production more straightforward or less complicated.
At last, we have a pretty famous term in economics called Opportunity cost. This means that
advantages of choices are not picked when one settles on a specific choice. This incorporates
conjecturing about missed opportunities and can be intellectually exorbitant to ascertain.

Like any other phenomenon, the paradox of choice has controversy surrounding it. While many
studies have shown that individuals are less happy with their choices, more choices are
accessible, and different studies have clashing proof. For instance, the decoy effect proposes
that we feel unequivocal about a choice when there are three choices than if there are just two.
The paradox of choice has been scrutinized for not having sufficient concrete. The logical proof
behind it, and pundits regularly offer up countering proof, for example, how Starbucks, which
brags a menu with hundreds of prospects and customizations, is an unbelievably famous and
beneficial company. Another peculiarity that counters the conundrum of decisions is a single-
decision abhorrence, recognized by Daniel Motion, teacher of promoting. Single-decision
revulsion recommends that individuals are reluctant to pick an attractive choice assuming there
are no elective choices since they don't have anything to analyze it against.
The father of the paradox of choice, Barry Schwartz, recognizes that these questionable
discoveries are probable prominent. He recommends that assuming every one of the
examinations in light of how choices sway decision was incorporated. We would almost
certainly find that they normal out; in some cases, more choices prompt expanded fulfillment.
Now and then, it prompts lessened fulfillment. Nonetheless, rather than this contradicting
proof recommending that we don't have to concern ourselves over the effect of the decision,
Schwartz proposes that it is tied in with tracking down the proper harmony between having an
excessive number of choices and poor choices. He doesn't think the studies that proposition
results different to what exactly is expected by the paradox of choice sabotage the impact's
believability; all things being equal, research requirements to turn out to be more nuanced to
observe the magic number that can enhance individuals' satisfaction.

In modern days best example, we see how the paradox of choice is used, example when just
like I stated above, when a person goes to a restaurant and find hundreds of different
combination food he tends to get paralyzed and not able to make a particular decision, that
when restaurant use this opportunity and something like "Deal of the day" or "today's special"
and then customers get away with those option as they stand out from others various option, it
may be those "Deal of the day" or "today's special" do not change for years. There are
hundreds of options for what kind of garments we should purchase, the provisions we should
buy, the Auto-mobile we should be driving, the cosmetic products we should be using.
One of the finest examples where we find the paradox of choice in a modern world is dating
websites. Our grandparents had a limited pool of options for whom they could date back in the
day. Without the internet, they had to rely on meeting people in person. The number of single
people they met within a suitable age range was not very large. These days, dating websites
have changed the game. We no longer have to rely on meeting someone who runs in the same
circles. These dating websites allow us to swipe through potential matches with which we may
never have crossed paths, who are strangers. At first thought, this seems great – we now have
access to all these people we would never have been able to meet conventionally!
However, with so many possibilities for a partner right at your fingertips, the paradox of choice
also enters. How do you pick one person to date when there are so many other options that
might be better? This might mean that you make rash decisions since you don't have enough
time to look through all the options, or you might be careless with your decisions and swipe
right on every one. As a result of the paradox of choice, people also seem less likely to commit
or spend the necessary quality time getting to know someone since they can get right back on
the app. In an article for Stanford Daily, one user writes, "the seemingly infinite supply of
options allowed me to be careless, distance myself, treat people like items in an online
shopping cart… as a result, and I found myself deeply unhappy with all of it".
One of the best model where we observe the paradox of choice in the present day world are
dating websites. Back in the day, our grandparents had a restricted pool of choices for whom
they could date, or they relied on their parents to arrange marriage. Without the web, they
needed to depend on gathering individuals face to face, and the number of single individuals
they met inside an appropriate age range was not highly massive. Nowadays, dating websites
have changed the game. We never again need to depend on gathering somebody that runs in
similar circles as we do. These dating websites permit us to swipe through potential coordinates
we may never have encountered, who are finished outsiders. At the first idea, this appears to
be incredible - we currently approach this large number of individuals we could never have had
the option to meet routinely!
Nonetheless, with countless opportunities for an accomplice right readily available, so too
enters the paradox of choice. How would you pick one individual to date when there are such
countless different choices out there that may be better? This could imply that you settle on ill-
advised choices since you need more chance to glance through every one of the choices, or you
could be reckless with your choices and swipe right on everybody. Because of the paradox of
choice, individuals appear to be more averse to submitting or investing the total quality energy
getting to know somebody since they can get right back on the application. In an article for
Stanford Daily, one client states, " The seemingly infinite supply of options allowed me to be
careless, distance myself, treat people like items in an online shopping cart… as a result, and I
found myself deeply unhappy with all of it".
In conclusion, I must say that even though there is some controversy around the choice
paradox theory, I feel that somewhere we all felt the effect of this phenomenon.
References-

 https://www.ted.com/talks/barry_schwartz_the_paradox_of_choice?language=en
 Goodreads. (n.d.). Barry Schwartz (Author of the paradox of choice) Quotes. Retrieved
January 6, 2021, from
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/6957.Barry_Schwartz
 Bernstein, E. (2014, October 6). How You Make Decisions Says a Lot About How Happy
You Are. Wall Street Journal. https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-you-make-decisions-
says-a-lot-about-how-happy-you-are-1412614997
 The Decision Lab. (2020, December 15). Nudges.
https://thedecisionlab.com/reference-guides/test/nudges/
 Sunstein, C. R., & Ullmann-Margalit, E. (1998). Second-order decisions. SSRN Electronic
Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.101268
 Schwartz, B., & Ward, A. (2012). Doing better but feeling worse: The paradox of
choice. Positive Psychology in Practice, 86-104.
https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470939338.ch6
 Barry Schwartz: Are we happier when we have more options? (2013, November 15).
National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2013/11/15/245034685/are-we-happier-
when-we-have-more-options
 Barry Schwartz: Are we happier when we have more options? (2013, November 15).
National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2013/11/15/245034685/are-we-happier-
when-we-have-more-options
 Thompson, D. (2013, August 19). More Is More: Why the Paradox of Choice Might Be a
Myth. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/more-is-
more-why-the-paradox-of-choice-might-be-a-myth/278658/
 Schwartz, B. (2014, January 29). Is the famous 'paradox of choice' a myth? PBS
NewsHour. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/is-the-famous-paradox-of-
choice
 Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2001). When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire
Too Much of a Good Thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995-
1006. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511618031.017
 Nixon, C. (2020, October 7). Do Dating Apps Affect Relationship Decision Making? The
Decision Lab. https://thedecisionlab.com/insights/society/do-dating-apps-affect-
relationship-decision-making/
 Bersh, L. (2020, February 26). On the paradox of choice, Tinder. The Stanford Daily.
https://www.stanforddaily.com/2020/02/26/on-the-paradox-of-choice-tinder/