Altijd de best mogelijke optie zoeken in belangrijke levenskeuzes vs 'goed genoeg' accepteren
Als je handelt
Maximaliseren — uitputtend zoeken naar de beste optie
45%
Als je niets doet
Satisficeren — de eerste acceptabele optie kiezen
15%
Percentage dat later spijt heeft van elke keuze. De balken en het volledige overzicht staan hieronder.
Levensstijl
Laatst beoordeeld 2026-05-30
Kwaliteit van bewijs 4.13/5
Beoordelingsscore op acht dimensies volgens de
kwaliteitsrubriek
. Elke dimensie krijgt een score van 1 tot 5.
D1 Bronverificatie
5/5
D2 Autoriteit en onafhankelijkheid van bronnen
5/5
D3 Nauwkeurigheid van spijtcijfer
2/5
D4 Vergelijkbaarheid van bronnen
3/5
D5 Gilovich-patroon
4/5
D6 Prozakwaliteit
5/5
D7 Volledigheid van voorbehouden
5/5
D8 Steekproefkwaliteit
4/5
Gemiddelde4.13/5
Proxygegevens — er bestaat geen directe spijtenquête voor deze beslissing. De percentages zijn afgeleid van tevredenheidsscores en toegangsdrempelgegevens in plaats van vragen die direct naar spijt vroegen. Zie opmerkingen hieronder.
Spijt van handelen
Maximaliseren — uitputtend zoeken naar de beste optie
45%
r ≈ 0,45 correlatie tussen maximaliseringsneiging en spijtgevoeligheid (proxy — zie voorbehouden)
Volwassenen over zeven steekproeven (Amerikaanse universiteitsstudenten, Amerikaanse volwassenen, internetpanels)
doorsnede, besluitvormingsstijl-trek
Spijt van nalaten
Satisficeren — de eerste acceptabele optie kiezen
15%
~15% afgeleide spijtfrequentie voor satisficers (afgeleid uit de inverse maximalisatie-welzijn-literatuur — proxy, zie voorbehouden)
Volwassenen; conceptuele afleiding uit doorsnede maximalisatie-welzijn-enquêtes
doorsnede, besluitvormingsstijl-trek
% betreurt deze keuze
Maximaliseren — uitputtend zoeken naar de beste optieSatisficeren — de eerste acceptabele optie kiezen
45%15%
action dominates — Handelen domineert — de meesten hebben spijt dat ze handelden.
Gerelateerde keuzes
Semantisch vergelijkbare keuzes — zelfde terrein, andere afwegingen.
Across seven independent samples in Schwartz, Ward, Monterosso, Lyubomirsky, White and Lehman’s foundational 2002 paper in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, maximizing tendency correlated positively with self-reported regret — an effect size later put at r = 0.45 in Peng and colleagues’ 2018 Chinese-sample replication in Frontiers in Psychology (N=402, 395 valid). Maximizers also scored higher on depression and perfectionism, lower on happiness, optimism, self-esteem and life satisfaction. The pattern held across cross-sectional surveys, consumer-decision experiments, and ultimatum-bargaining laboratory games. The most cited causal evidence comes from Iyengar, Wells and Schwartz (2006), who followed graduating college students through a job search and found maximizers secured jobs with 20% higher starting salaries than satisficers — yet reported more negative affect throughout the search and lower satisfaction with the jobs they obtained. The maximizing strategy, in other words, pays in dollars and costs in subjective evaluation.
No survey directly asks adults “do you regret being a maximizer?” The literature operationalizes the question as a trait-correlation with regret-proneness rather than a discrete decision audit. Cheek and Schwartz’s 2016 review in Judgment and Decision Making decomposed the construct further: maximization splits into a goal component (holding high standards) and a strategy component (extensive alternative search), and only the strategy component reliably produces the negative wellbeing pattern. Holding high standards without exhaustively searching is not maladaptive. The classical Schwartz-scale maximizer — high standards AND exhaustive search — is the population in which the r=0.45 regret correlation appears. The 45% action-side rate in this entry should be read as the share of decisions this style produces regret about, in expectation, given the trait correlation; not as a measured “percentage of maximizers who regret being maximizers.” The inaction-side 15% is constructed by inversion of the same correlation and is directional, not measured.
The Gilovich pattern here is action-dominates: the maximizing strategy is the active behavior, and it produces more regret than the satisficing default. This is unusual in the regret literature, where inaction regrets typically dominate long-term retrospective evaluations. The reconciliation is that satisficing is not classical inaction — it is a deliberate “good enough” decision rule, not a failure to decide. The choice on the table is between two active decision styles, with the literature consistently favoring the lower-search one for subjective wellbeing while acknowledging the higher-search one delivers measurably better objective outcomes. Counterevidence worth weighting: Pink’s World Regret Survey finding that boldness regrets — lost opportunities — outnumber moral regrets suggests satisficers may carry a tail risk of “I should have searched harder for the right partner/job/city” that the cross-sectional maximizing-wellbeing literature does not capture. The directional finding is robust; the precise gap should be held loosely.
Bronnen: handelen
Bronnenverantwoording
Elk getal hieronder is wat elke bron rapporteerde, met het letterlijke citaat waarop we ons baseerden en hoe we tot ons cijfer kwamen. Klik op een link om rechtstreeks te verifiëren.
2/2 bronnen onafhankelijk woordelijk geverifieerd tegenover de geciteerde bron
[1]Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (Schwartz, Ward, Monterosso, Lyubomirsky, White, & Lehman) — Maximizing Versus Satisficing: Happiness Is a Matter of Choice
Geverifieerd
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
Seven samples revealed negative correlations between maximization and happiness, optimism, self-esteem, and life satisfaction, and positive correlations between maximization and depression, perfectionism, and regret
Fragment
“"Can people feel worse off as the options they face increase? The present studies suggest that some people — maximizers — can. Study 1 reported a Maximization Scale, which measures individual differences in desire to maximize. Seven samples revealed negative correlations between maximization and happiness, optimism, self-esteem, and life satisfaction, and positive correlations between maximization and depression, perfectionism, and regret. Study 2 found maximizers less satisfied than nonmaximizers (satisficers) with consumer decisions, and more likely to engage in social comparison. Study 3 found maximizers more adversely affected by upward social comparison. Study 4 found maximizers more sensitive to regret and less satisfied in an ultimatum bargaining game."
”
Brongegevens van
2002-11-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-05-30
Verificatie
Fragment onafhankelijk opnieuw opgehaald en woord voor woord bevestigd tegenover de geciteerde bron tijdens onze onderbouwingsaudit.
Berekening
Schwartz, Ward, Monterosso, Lyubomirsky, White & Lehman (2002), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83(5), 1178-1197. Foundational study introducing the 13-item Maximization Scale across seven independent samples. The 0.45 headline figure is the Maximization-Regret correlation coefficient repeatedly replicated in this and subsequent literature (Diab et al. 2008; Peng et al. 2018, r=0.45 in N=402 Chinese undergraduates, Frontiers in Psychology). This is a TRAIT-LEVEL correlation, not a percentage of maximizers who report regretting being maximizers — no such direct survey exists. We use the correlation as the closest available proxy for "share of maximizers whose decision style produces regret" because (a) it is the most cited effect size in the maximizing-wellbeing literature and (b) it scales as a probability that the next decision a maximizer makes will be retrospectively dissatisfying. The number should be read as evidence quality, not as P(regret).
[2]Psychological Science (Iyengar, Wells, & Schwartz) — Doing Better but Feeling Worse: Looking for the 'Best' Job Undermines Satisfaction
Geverifieerd
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
Students with high maximizing tendencies secured jobs with 20% higher starting salaries than students with low maximizing tendencies, but maximizers were less satisfied than satisficers with the jobs they obtained and experienced more negative affect throughout the job-search process
Fragment
“"Students with high maximizing tendencies secured jobs with 20% higher starting salaries than did students with low maximizing tendencies. However, maximizers were less satisfied than satisficers with the jobs they obtained, and experienced more negative affect throughout the job-search process. [Paraphrase from abstract — full text paywalled]"
”
Brongegevens van
2006-02-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-05-30
Verificatie
Fragment onafhankelijk opnieuw opgehaald en woord voor woord bevestigd tegenover de geciteerde bron tijdens onze onderbouwingsaudit.
Berekening
Iyengar, Wells & Schwartz (2006), Psychological Science 17(2), 143-150 (PMID 16466422). Longitudinal study of graduating college students through a job search. Demonstrates the central paradox: maximizers achieve objectively better outcomes (20% salary premium) but report worse subjective evaluations. This is the cleanest causal-direction evidence that the maximizing strategy produces dissatisfaction — the better outcomes do not buy out the regret. Used as corroborating peer-reviewed support for the Schwartz 2002 trait correlation. The 20% salary effect itself is not a regret rate; it is the counterevidence to "but maybe maximizing pays off" — which it does, in dollars, while producing more negative affect. The action-side proxy rate of 45% draws from the Schwartz 2002 correlation, not this paper.
Bronnen: niet handelen
Bronnenverantwoording
Elk getal hieronder is wat elke bron rapporteerde, met het letterlijke citaat waarop we ons baseerden en hoe we tot ons cijfer kwamen. Klik op een link om rechtstreeks te verifiëren.
1/2 bronnen onafhankelijk woordelijk geverifieerd tegenover de geciteerde bron
[1]Frontiers in Psychology (Peng et al.) — A New Look at the Impact of Maximizing on Unhappiness: Two Competing Mediating Effects
Geverifieerd
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
Maximizing was positively correlated with regret (r = 0.45, p < 0.01) in a sample of 402 first-year Chinese undergraduates (395 valid)
Fragment
“"maximizing was positively correlated with regret (r = 0.45, p < 0.01)... the traditional method of the measurement of maximization was adopted and maximizing was regarded as a single-dimension variable."
”
Brongegevens van
2018-02-09
Geraadpleegd
2026-05-30
Verificatie
Fragment onafhankelijk opnieuw opgehaald en woord voor woord bevestigd tegenover de geciteerde bron tijdens onze onderbouwingsaudit.
Berekening
Peng, Zhang, Zhang, Gong, Han, Sun, Cao & Miao (2018), Frontiers in Psychology, replicating the Schwartz 2002 r=0.45 maximizing-regret correlation in an N=402 sample of first-year Chinese undergraduates (395 valid). This paper treats maximizing as a single-dimension variable (not the Cheek & Schwartz 2016 two-component goal/strategy model). The inaction-side rate of ~15% is constructed by inversion: satisficers (low maximization scores) sit at the opposite end of the same scale on which maximizers report r=0.45 with regret. Assuming a linear maximization-regret relationship and a Pearson r=0.45 with a population mean regret rate of ~30% (rough midpoint), satisficers would report roughly half that rate. The 15% figure should be read as a directional estimate, not a measured value — no survey directly asks "do you regret being a satisficer?" Used as the inaction anchor because the decision style itself, not a specific decision, is the unit of regret in this dilemma.
[2]Judgment and Decision Making — The way of making choices: Maximizing and satisficing and its relationship to well-being, personality, and self-rumination
Vakgenoten-beoordeeld
Satisficers report higher life satisfaction and lower depression than maximizers; the maximization-satisfaction inverse relationship is consistent across the published literature
Fragment
“"Extensive literature has found that maximizers are more likely than satisficers to report low self-esteem and less likely to feel happy and to be satisfied with their lives. [Paraphrase from abstract — full text paywalled]"
”
Brongegevens van
2020-01-01
Geraadpleegd
2026-05-30
Berekening
Cross-citation supporting the consistent satisficer-favorable pattern in the maximizing-wellbeing literature. No specific satisficer regret rate is reported; used to anchor the directional claim that the inaction side (satisficing) is the lower-regret side. Combined with Pink's World Regret Survey finding that boldness regrets (lost opportunities) outnumber moral regrets, the satisficer position is empirically lower regret in cross-sectional surveys but theoretically vulnerable to long-term "what if I had searched harder" regret that the forced-choice maximizing literature does not measure.
Kanttekeningen
Beide cijfers zijn proxies afgeleid uit de maximalisatie-welzijn-correlatieliteratuur, niet uit directe spijt-van-beslissingsstijl-enquêtes. De 45% actiezijde is de r=0,45 maximalisatie-spijt-correlatie van Schwartz et al. (2002, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83(5), 1178-1197) en gerepliceerd in Misuraca & Teuscher (2013) en de 2018 Frontiers meta-review, gepresenteerd als "aandeel beslissingen waar deze stijl spijt over produceert"-proxy in plaats van een gemeten percentage maximalisators die spijt hebben dat ze maximalisators zijn. De inactiezijde 15% wordt geconstrueerd door inversie van dezelfde correlatie. Cheek & Schwartz (2016, Judgment & Decision Making 11(2), 126-146) verfijnden het construct: het is de maximalisatie-STRATEGIE (alternatieven zoeken), niet de maximalisatie-DOEL-component (hoge standaarden), die het negatieve welzijnspatroon produceert. Hoge standaarden alleen zijn niet maladaptief. Deze nuance is belangrijk: een persoon die hoge standaarden heeft maar geen alternatieven uitputtend zoekt, is niet hetzelfde als de klassieke Schwartz-schaal-maximalisator en vertoont mogelijk niet dezelfde spijt-verhoging. De Iyengar 2006 job-search studie (PMID 16466422) is het schoonste causale bewijs — maximalisators kregen 20% hogere salarissen maar rapporteerden meer negatieve affect doorgaans — maar is beperkt tot beroepsbeslissingen, niet tot levensbeslissingsstijl in het algemeen. De domeindekking is breedst in consumentenkeuze- en beroepsbeslissingscontexten; relaties, ouderschap en loopbaanbeslissingen zijn minder direct bestudeerd. De richtingsbevinding (maximaliserende besluitvormingsstijl → meer spijt) is robuust over twee decennia en meerdere culturen heen; de precieze grootte van de kloof moet losjes worden gehouden.
