There are many reasons why making decisions can be tough, including the fear of making a wrong choice and the impact of strong emotions on our judgment at any given moment.
As American psychologist and philosopher William James famously put it: “There is no more miserable human being than one in whom nothing is habitual but indecision.”
Indeed, indecision can leave us feeling stuck, as even simple tasks become difficult to finalize.
Luckily, Paul Glimcher, a Professor of Neuroscience and Physiology from New York, has identified a straightforward approach we can adopt to make better choices.
His 2022 paper, ‘Efficiently irrational: deciphering the riddle of human choice’, explores how individuals find it challenging to decide or solve problems when faced with more than four options.
Glimcher attributes this to our tendency to lose focus when comparing multiple options, even if we subconsciously recognize the best choice.
The research highlights a mechanism called ‘divisive normalization’, used to evaluate the pros and cons of a decision efficiently based on the informational context.
For example, when choosing among six candy bars, your preferred candy might signal less strongly to your brain due to the presence of less desirable options, according to CNBC.
During the Fast Company Innovation Festival, Glimcher elaborated: “If I ask you to take away the worst candy bar, then your next-worst candy bar … [eventually] you’re getting more and more confident about what the best option is.”
While this might seem straightforward, Glimcher believes it aids in managing ‘decision fatigue’ for everyday choices, although it also slightly increases it, as he noted to CNBC.
Other experts emphasize that factors like the time of day, developing habits, and seeking medical aid can contribute to reducing ‘decision fatigue’, according to the AMA.
Glimcher suggests that ‘picking the best and eliminating the worst’ is a natural skill for humans, as our brains react strongly to more appealing options.
However, this process becomes complicated when faced with too many choices.
An abundance of options can pose a challenge because, although each decision is easier, the overall process can be more time-consuming.
Glimcher uses the example of a monkey choosing between two cups, highlighting the difficulty in distinguishing the brain’s neuronal activity, leading the brain to reassess the options to identify ‘the new choice’, as reported by The Atlantic.
He added: “When we get into modern circumstances where large companies are producing huge numbers of options for us to choose among … it has a huge effect on your performance.”