Robust satisficing via regret minimizing

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Schwartz (2015) argues that a rational decision-maker should not always strive for maximization. In cases where it is not possible to assign probabilities and/or weights to the possible outcomes of choice alternatives, Schwartz argues it is better to engage in robust satisficing, ensuring a good enough outcome when things go awry. Schwartz thus argues that robust satisficing is normatively valid. I focused in my comment on whether it may also be descriptively valid. I propose that in everyday decision making, robust satisficing may occur via regret minimization. Hence, counterfactual thinking and anticipated emotions may be the proximal psychological processes for robust satisficing.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)157-166
JournalJournal of Marketing Behavior
Volume1
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015

    Fingerprint

Cite this