Robust satisficing via regret minimizing

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.