Discussion Forum > How Good Enough is Actually Optimal
Thanks for posting this, Seraphim. Very interesting research. I particular like this quote from the researchers:
"The implication is that so much of happiness comes not from getting what you want, but from wanting what you get."
"The implication is that so much of happiness comes not from getting what you want, but from wanting what you get."
October 5, 2014 at 0:22 |
Maureen
Maureen
Seraphim:
147 college graduates is hardly a representatative selection, and I'd like to know a bit more about the sort of questions asked. The whole thing smacks of deciding what conclusion you want and then fitting the study to support it. This sort of "research" is usually worth the paper it's printed on.
I also don't agree that what we know of the research (not much) lead to the "implication". My interpretation would be that people who don't obsess about maximal decisions make decisions in a different way. They are not happy because they want what they get but because they get what they really want. It's the obsessors who don't get what they want because they are using the wrong methodology to make decisions.
See my new book to find out more.
147 college graduates is hardly a representatative selection, and I'd like to know a bit more about the sort of questions asked. The whole thing smacks of deciding what conclusion you want and then fitting the study to support it. This sort of "research" is usually worth the paper it's printed on.
I also don't agree that what we know of the research (not much) lead to the "implication". My interpretation would be that people who don't obsess about maximal decisions make decisions in a different way. They are not happy because they want what they get but because they get what they really want. It's the obsessors who don't get what they want because they are using the wrong methodology to make decisions.
See my new book to find out more.
October 5, 2014 at 23:16 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<<The whole thing smacks of deciding what conclusion you want and then fitting the study to support it.>>
20+ years of working in mental health, I've never seen or heard anything like this /sarcasm
20+ years of working in mental health, I've never seen or heard anything like this /sarcasm
October 6, 2014 at 2:05 |
avrum
avrum
Mark:
I'm having trouble understanding this sentence "...people who don't obsess about maximal decisions make decisions in a different way."
What are "maximal decisions"?
"They are not happy because they want what they get but because they get what they really want."
Do you mean happy people define what they really want and why they want it up front and are then happier with the outcome they get?
"It's the obsessors who don't get what they want because they are using the wrong methodology to make decisions."
Obsessors over what? Decisions? Activities, actions, tasks, and lists?
So what's ultimately needed is a new mental model. A system, method, or framework through which decisions can pass to create higher levels of creativity and accomplishment in the areas that really matter to you.
I'm having trouble understanding this sentence "...people who don't obsess about maximal decisions make decisions in a different way."
What are "maximal decisions"?
"They are not happy because they want what they get but because they get what they really want."
Do you mean happy people define what they really want and why they want it up front and are then happier with the outcome they get?
"It's the obsessors who don't get what they want because they are using the wrong methodology to make decisions."
Obsessors over what? Decisions? Activities, actions, tasks, and lists?
So what's ultimately needed is a new mental model. A system, method, or framework through which decisions can pass to create higher levels of creativity and accomplishment in the areas that really matter to you.
October 6, 2014 at 7:56 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
avrum:
<< 20+ years of working in mental health, I've never seen or heard anything like this /sarcasm >>
Well, you still haven't because I wasn't being sarcastic.
However I had another read of the article and found that I had misread it. I thought on my first reading that all the findings and details related to one study. The author of the article had conflated at least three studies, plus several quotes, to produce her own conclusions.
I then followed the link given for Iyengar http://news.columbia.edu/record/2044 to find that what she and her colleagues actually said was good stuff, and that her conclusions (though not the journalist's) did actually flow from her research.
<< 20+ years of working in mental health, I've never seen or heard anything like this /sarcasm >>
Well, you still haven't because I wasn't being sarcastic.
However I had another read of the article and found that I had misread it. I thought on my first reading that all the findings and details related to one study. The author of the article had conflated at least three studies, plus several quotes, to produce her own conclusions.
I then followed the link given for Iyengar http://news.columbia.edu/record/2044 to find that what she and her colleagues actually said was good stuff, and that her conclusions (though not the journalist's) did actually flow from her research.
October 6, 2014 at 19:59 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Michael B
Have you read the article? What I said is in reply to what it says there.
As for the best way to make decisions, I go for what Iyengar actually said, rather than what the journalist gave the impression she said.
Have you read the article? What I said is in reply to what it says there.
As for the best way to make decisions, I go for what Iyengar actually said, rather than what the journalist gave the impression she said.
October 6, 2014 at 20:04 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<<Well, you still haven't because I wasn't being sarcastic. >>
Mark: I know you weren't, but I was. One of the many reasons I opted for private practice work was to escape the eco-politics of evidenced-based psychotherapy.
Mark: I know you weren't, but I was. One of the many reasons I opted for private practice work was to escape the eco-politics of evidenced-based psychotherapy.
October 6, 2014 at 20:24 |
avrum
avrum
avrum:
The words "evidence" and "politics" not being inextricably linked? I've got a paragraph or two on that subject in my new book.
Quote (which may have completely changed by the time it gets into print):
"Governments are particularly prone to making changes on the basis of unproven theories and then massaging the figures to disguise the disastrous results. What one can tell immediately is that they are more interested in proving themselves right than in finding methods that actually work. Don’t be like them. You are a productive person, who is aiming to make things work – not to protect your own back."
The words "evidence" and "politics" not being inextricably linked? I've got a paragraph or two on that subject in my new book.
Quote (which may have completely changed by the time it gets into print):
"Governments are particularly prone to making changes on the basis of unproven theories and then massaging the figures to disguise the disastrous results. What one can tell immediately is that they are more interested in proving themselves right than in finding methods that actually work. Don’t be like them. You are a productive person, who is aiming to make things work – not to protect your own back."
October 6, 2014 at 22:43 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I just read Eli Goldratt's "The goal". The book shows how finding every local optimum in a factory leads to global congestion and waste. ("A factory where everybody is working all the time is an *in*efficient factory")
In this book, once the factory workers identified the most constrained resources, (a furnace and another highly efficient machine) and they lined everything else up to these resources (making the other machines NOT produce anything just for the sake of producing), work-in-progress plumetted like a sheep learning how to fly by jumping off the highest branch of a tree, and they raked profit in, and produced results more quickly than before, gaining more clients, and so on.
I came to think that when managing your life, the most constrained resource is yourself, and you should line up what you commit to to the time you have. And it means cherry-picking what you set yourself up to get, so it had better be what you'll want to get.
In this book, once the factory workers identified the most constrained resources, (a furnace and another highly efficient machine) and they lined everything else up to these resources (making the other machines NOT produce anything just for the sake of producing), work-in-progress plumetted like a sheep learning how to fly by jumping off the highest branch of a tree, and they raked profit in, and produced results more quickly than before, gaining more clients, and so on.
I came to think that when managing your life, the most constrained resource is yourself, and you should line up what you commit to to the time you have. And it means cherry-picking what you set yourself up to get, so it had better be what you'll want to get.
October 7, 2014 at 7:45 |
Laurent
Laurent
Laurent:
Yes, I agree entirely. What's more my new book in progress aims to make it impossible for you to commit to more than you have time to do.
Yes, I agree entirely. What's more my new book in progress aims to make it impossible for you to commit to more than you have time to do.
October 7, 2014 at 8:12 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Stever Robbins had a good article about satisfycing and maximizing. Satisfycers pick something good enough and are happy about it. (I try to be one.) Maximizers look at all the options, and spend tons of time analyzing, then are never quite sure they made the right choice.
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/relationships/professional/what-is-satisficing
I have both tendencies. You should see the charts I made comparing cell phones! But when I force myself to satisfice, I'm equally happy. Knowing I skipped all the agony of extra research and giving every single choice a fair evaluation more than makes up for the possibility that I paid an extra 5% for something that wasn't the absolute best choice available.
Avrum, I've read some pretty scary articles about practices that aren't evidence-based. Equally scary articles about practices that everyone thinks are evidence-based, but weren't. And about studies that looked to be evidence-based but fell apart under scrutiny. The articles which looked to be evidence-based about the relationship between therapist and client being more important than the exact protocol used were reassuring. (Yep, intentional cognitive bias there.)
Whenever I worry too much about it, I think of how far all sciences have come. The history of medicine is filled with good intentions that failed. I pray that we catch those mistakes early. I also pray that the fear of doing something wrong doesn't prevent us from taking reasonable risks that allow us to learn, and that people can actually collect data and learn from it, without fear.
Mark, I love the concept of looking at the real data. I'm keeping notes this season of whether I meet my goals or not. I'm seeing, again (slow learner), that a day with no appointments is much more rare than I think it should be. Given that, it's no surprise that I'm not meeting my goals.
Laurent, that sounds like the Toyota Method and Lean Manufacturing. Making a ton of part 1 is a waste of resources if the next machine can't take them all. Fixing the bottleneck at the second station is much better. Also, huge inventories between stations is a waste of money, and hides problems. To that, I add that if machine 1 only needs to run half the day to keep machine busy, then the operators for machine 1 should have additional work for the time that machine 1 doesn't have to run.
Mark, I'm looking forward to your new book. I'm constantly over-committing, and unwilling to drop things that are in my routine that are supposed to be relaxing, but I know are sucking up way too much time. Unwilling? Unable? Resistant to? All I know is I sound like my preteen daughter when I mention that maybe watching all her favourite shows every night isn't as important as doing her homework. "But this is MY TIME, Mom. Aren't I allowed to relax after a hard day at school?"
http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/relationships/professional/what-is-satisficing
I have both tendencies. You should see the charts I made comparing cell phones! But when I force myself to satisfice, I'm equally happy. Knowing I skipped all the agony of extra research and giving every single choice a fair evaluation more than makes up for the possibility that I paid an extra 5% for something that wasn't the absolute best choice available.
Avrum, I've read some pretty scary articles about practices that aren't evidence-based. Equally scary articles about practices that everyone thinks are evidence-based, but weren't. And about studies that looked to be evidence-based but fell apart under scrutiny. The articles which looked to be evidence-based about the relationship between therapist and client being more important than the exact protocol used were reassuring. (Yep, intentional cognitive bias there.)
Whenever I worry too much about it, I think of how far all sciences have come. The history of medicine is filled with good intentions that failed. I pray that we catch those mistakes early. I also pray that the fear of doing something wrong doesn't prevent us from taking reasonable risks that allow us to learn, and that people can actually collect data and learn from it, without fear.
Mark, I love the concept of looking at the real data. I'm keeping notes this season of whether I meet my goals or not. I'm seeing, again (slow learner), that a day with no appointments is much more rare than I think it should be. Given that, it's no surprise that I'm not meeting my goals.
Laurent, that sounds like the Toyota Method and Lean Manufacturing. Making a ton of part 1 is a waste of resources if the next machine can't take them all. Fixing the bottleneck at the second station is much better. Also, huge inventories between stations is a waste of money, and hides problems. To that, I add that if machine 1 only needs to run half the day to keep machine busy, then the operators for machine 1 should have additional work for the time that machine 1 doesn't have to run.
Mark, I'm looking forward to your new book. I'm constantly over-committing, and unwilling to drop things that are in my routine that are supposed to be relaxing, but I know are sucking up way too much time. Unwilling? Unable? Resistant to? All I know is I sound like my preteen daughter when I mention that maybe watching all her favourite shows every night isn't as important as doing her homework. "But this is MY TIME, Mom. Aren't I allowed to relax after a hard day at school?"
October 8, 2014 at 17:19 |
Cricket
Cricket
<<about the relationship between therapist and client being more important than the exact protocol used were reassuring.>>
Yes, that line gets thrown around quite a bit - mostly by therapists. I find it used to even the playing field... so that choosing between a therapist has little to do with training, experience, etc. It should be quite obvious that a strong relationship correlates with successful therapy. Beyond that, I think orientation plays a huge role** - much larger than most therapists acknowledge.
** My wife is friends/colleagues with a psychiatrist/psychoanalyst/researcher at a major teaching hospital in Toronto. Last year, she sent a "hot off of the press" journal article measuring the efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy vs cbt - over the long term (psych studies rarely go beyond a few months). The result? Psychodynamic psychotherapy outperformed behavioural therapies (and not just in the relational categories, but the behavioural one's as well).
Of course, you'll never hear about this. Instead, you'll be peppered about mindfulness meditation and how it's "curing" everything from stress to herpes. And it only takes 10 minutes a day. A bit of hyperbole, but not by much.
Yes, that line gets thrown around quite a bit - mostly by therapists. I find it used to even the playing field... so that choosing between a therapist has little to do with training, experience, etc. It should be quite obvious that a strong relationship correlates with successful therapy. Beyond that, I think orientation plays a huge role** - much larger than most therapists acknowledge.
** My wife is friends/colleagues with a psychiatrist/psychoanalyst/researcher at a major teaching hospital in Toronto. Last year, she sent a "hot off of the press" journal article measuring the efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy vs cbt - over the long term (psych studies rarely go beyond a few months). The result? Psychodynamic psychotherapy outperformed behavioural therapies (and not just in the relational categories, but the behavioural one's as well).
Of course, you'll never hear about this. Instead, you'll be peppered about mindfulness meditation and how it's "curing" everything from stress to herpes. And it only takes 10 minutes a day. A bit of hyperbole, but not by much.
October 8, 2014 at 17:56 |
avrum
avrum
In my experience (n=1), you need a bit of both psychodynamic and behavioural. Sometimes an insight can loosen a block and help break patterns and move on. Sometimes you need to stop naval gazing and focus on today and the future. Psychodynamic is also harder to standardize for experiments. I prefer a therapist with a huge toolbox who adapts to the client, including as the client changes.
Mindfulness meditation is, I think, useful in that it balances the over-busyness of today's world. Too much input, too fast, not enough time to slow down. I wish metta bhavana were more popular. Compassion, for self and others. It's like any other tool: useful in many cases, but not all. And it's not perfectly safe, either. If it's strong enough to help, then it's strong enough to hurt.
Mindfulness meditation is, I think, useful in that it balances the over-busyness of today's world. Too much input, too fast, not enough time to slow down. I wish metta bhavana were more popular. Compassion, for self and others. It's like any other tool: useful in many cases, but not all. And it's not perfectly safe, either. If it's strong enough to help, then it's strong enough to hurt.
October 8, 2014 at 20:17 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket:
<<you need a bit of both psychodynamic and behavioural>>
To a degree, this is why I fell so hard for Family Systems theory/therapy. The theory is rich and deep, but the application (often) involves behavioural strategies.
<<I prefer a therapist with a huge toolbox who adapts to the client>>
Very, very hard to find. What you will find is therapists claiming they do everything and the kitchen sink. When pressed - particularly in the non-behavioural modalities, many will admit to one university course, perhaps a book or two. I wish this field (at least in Canada) had more regulation.
<<you need a bit of both psychodynamic and behavioural>>
To a degree, this is why I fell so hard for Family Systems theory/therapy. The theory is rich and deep, but the application (often) involves behavioural strategies.
<<I prefer a therapist with a huge toolbox who adapts to the client>>
Very, very hard to find. What you will find is therapists claiming they do everything and the kitchen sink. When pressed - particularly in the non-behavioural modalities, many will admit to one university course, perhaps a book or two. I wish this field (at least in Canada) had more regulation.
October 8, 2014 at 21:20 |
avrum
avrum
"...high achievers fall into the peculiar trap of getting mentally caught up in what you haven’t done — there’s always something else to be working on because it feels like, the more you do, the more you gain an edge. But focusing too hard on maximizing your productivity and choices can come at an ultimate cost to your time, health, and happiness. Ironically, maximizing doesn’t lead to the optimal result."
Full article at http://blog.idonethis.com/satisficing/