On the meaning and measurement of maximization

Abstract

Building on Herbert Simon’s critique of rational choice theory, Schwartz et al. (2002) proposed that when making choices, some individuals — maximizers — search extensively through many alternatives with the goal of making the best choice, whereas others — satisficers — search only until they identify an option that meets their standards, which they then choose. They developed the Maximization Scale (MS) to measure individual differences in maximization, and a substantial amount of research has now examined maximization using the MS, painting a picture of maximizers that is generally negative. Recently, however, several researchers have criticized the MS, and almost a dozen new measures of maximization have now been published, resulting in a befuddling and contradictory literature. We seek to clarify the confusing literature on the measurement of maximization to help make sense of the existing findings and to facilitate future research. We begin by briefly summarizing the understanding of maximizers that has emerged through research using Schwartz et al.’s MS. We then review the literature on the measurement of maximization, attempting to identify the similarities and differences among the 11 published measures of maximization. Next, we propose a two-component model of maximization, outlining our view of how maximization should be conceptualized and measured. Our model posits that maximization is best understood as the pursuit of the maximization goal of choosing the best option through the maximization strategy of alternative search; other constructs such as decision difficulty and regret are best considered outcomes or causes — rather than components — of maximization. We discuss the implications of our review and model for research on maximization, highlighting what we see as pressing unanswered questions and important directions for future investigations.

Maximize when valuable: The domain specificity of maximizing decision-making style

“…Will satisficers be consistently satisfied with sufficiently good options? Maximizing tendencies are widely expected to vary across occasions and domains (Schwartz, 2004;Cheek & Schwartz, 2016). Schwartz (2004), one of the proposers of maximization concept, said that maximizing-satisficing orientations tend to be "domain specific".…”

“…Abundant studies have investigated characteristics and consequences of maximization (Cheek & Schwartz, 2016;Khare et al, 2021;Zhu et al, 2019) of maximizers. This study explores the factors that influence people's strategic choices of maximization in different domains.…”

“…The theoretical contributions of our research are mainly reflected in the following aspects. First, we responded to the question of whether there is domain specificity in maximization (Cheek & Schwartz, 2016) and showed that the maximizing decision-making style had within-person variation across domains. Our study showed the existence of the domain specificity of maximization.…”

“…2020), and desirability rather than feasibility (Hsieh & Yalch, 2020;Luan & Li, 2017). Thus, compared to satisficers, maximizers are willing to invest more effort in searching for alternatives while trying to obtain the best outcomes (Dar-Nimrod et al, 2009;Weaver et al, 2015;Rim, 2017), which corresponds to two key components for maximization: the maximization goal of choosing the best and the strategy of alternative search (Cheek & Schwartz, 2016). They regarded the former as more central and the latter as the way to achieve the best goal.…”

The Short Maximization Inventory

“…Since the publication of MS (Schwartz et al, 2002), the scale has been shortened (Nenkov et al, 2008) and modified (Lai, 2010;Weinhardt, Morse, Chimeli & Fisher, 2012), and new scales to measure maximization have been developed (Diab et al, 2008;Misuraca, Faraci, Gangemi, Carmeci & Miceli, 2015;Turner et al, 2012). See Cheek and Schwartz (2016) for a list and discussion of the existing maximization scales. Some authors, notably Diab, Gillespie, and Highhouse (2008) and Giacopelli, Simpson, Dalal, Randolph, and Holland (2013) note that various measures of maximizing yield different correlations with indices of well-being, indicating that the scale selection is likely to influence the results observed in a study.…”