Maximizers Abandon More Before Decisions,Regret More After Decisions,and Re-Maximize More for Second-Time Decisions: Real-World Analysis of Online Consumer Behaviors
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025
Maximizers Abandon More Before Decisions,Regret More After Decisions,and Re-Maximize More for Second-Time Decisions: Real-World Analysis of Online Consumer Behaviors
Maximizers, as opposed to satisficers, are defined as decision-makers who consider many alternatives to make the best choice. We adopted records in Taobao (the largest e-commerce platform in China) in 2022 to quantify individual maximization strategy inclination (the number of within-subcategory items that a consumer account considers prior to a first-time purchase). Using this index, we examined whether real-world behaviors in Taobao could be explained by three aspects of theories suggested by previous studies on maximizers, namely, pre-purchase decision paralysis, post-purchase regret (maximization paradox), and the Sisyphus effect. The results revealed that maximizers (vs. non-maximizers) are more likely to end decision-making processes with abandonment, rely on their evaluations instead of those of others, ruminate alternatives even after decisions, retract decisions, and express dissatisfaction about decisions. When evaluating options for the second time, maximizers even construct a larger candidate option set. Most between-person effects remained significant after controlling within-person variations.
BuiM.KrishenA. S.BatesK. (2011). Modeling regret effects on consumer post-purchase decisions. European Journal of Marketing, 45(7/8), 1068–1090. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090561111137615
3.
BüttnerO. B.FlorackA.LederH.PaulM. A.SerfasB. G.SchulzA. M. (2014). Hard to ignore: Impulsive buyers show an attentional bias in shopping situations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5(3), 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550613494024
4.
CarrillatF. A.LadikD. M.LegouxR. (2011). When the decision ball keeps rolling: An investigation of the Sisyphus effect among maximizing consumers. Marketing Letters, 22(3), 283–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-010-9125-y
5.
ChangS. E.YuC. (2023). Exploring gamification for live-streaming shopping-influence of reward, competition, presence and immersion on purchase intention. IEEE Access, 11, 57503–57513. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3284033
6.
CheekN. N.SchwartzB. (2016). On the meaning and measurement of maximization. Judgment and Decision Making, 11(2), 126–146. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500007257
7.
ChowdhuryT. G.RatneshwarS.MohantyP. (2009). The time-harried shopper: Exploring the differences between maximizers and satisficers. Marketing Letters, 20(2), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-008-9063-0
8.
DankwahJ. B.KwakwaP. A.NnindiniS. I. (2024). Why did I buy this? Examining the relationship between consumer ethnocentrism, celebrity endorsement and post-purchase regret. Cogent Business and Management, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2381865
9.
Dar-NimrodI.RawnC. D.LehmanD. R.SchwartzB. (2009). The maximization paradox: The costs of seeking alternatives. Personality and Individual Differences, 46(5), 631–635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.01.007
10.
GeX.HouY. (2025). Social influence during public crises: Weekly dynamics and adaptive patterns of conformity to the collective following the COVID-19 outbreak. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 122(25), e2500008122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2500008122
GuY.ChengX.ShenJ. (2023). Design shopping as an experience: Exploring the effect of the live-streaming shopping characteristics on consumers’ participation intention and memorable experience. Information and Management, 60(5), 103810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2023.103810
13.
HarrisP.RileyF. D.HandC. (2021). Multichannel shopping: The effect of decision making style on shopper journey configuration and satisfaction. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 58, 102286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102286
14.
HuberF.KöcherS.VogelJ.MeyerF. (2012). Dazing diversity: Investigating the determinants and consequences of decision paralysis. Psychology and Marketing, 29(6), 467–478. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20535
15.
IyengarS. S.WellsR. E.SchwartzB. (2006). Doing better but feeling worse: Looking for the “best” job undermines satisfaction. Psychological Science, 17(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01677.x
16.
KhareA.ChowdhuryT. G.MorganJ. (2021). Maximizers and satisficers: Can’t choose and can’t reject. Journal of Business Research, 135, 731–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.07.008
17.
KozyrevaA.WineburgS.LewandowskyS.HertwigR. (2023). Critical ignoring as a core competence for digital citizens. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 32(1), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214221121570
18.
KurienR.PailaA. R.NagendraA. (2014). Application of paralysis analysis syndrome in customer decision making. Procedia Economics and Finance, 11, 323–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(14)00200-7
19.
KurtoğluR.ÖzbölükT.HacıhasanoğluP. (2022). Revisiting the effects of inward negative emotions on outward negative emotions, brand loyalty, and negative WOM. The Journal of Brand Management, 29(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-021-00257-3
LimS. H.LeeS.KimD. J. (2017). Is online consumers’ impulsive buying beneficial for e-commerce companies? An empirical investigation of online consumers’ past impulsive buying behaviors. Information Systems Management, 34(1), 85–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2017.1254458
22.
ManolicăA.GuțăA.RomanT.DragănL. M. (2021). Is consumer overchoice a reason for decision paralysis?Sustainability, 13(11), 5920. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115920
23.
MayerJ. D.BryanV. M. (2024). On personality measures and their data: A classification of measurement approaches and their recommended uses. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 28(3), 325–345. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683231222519
24.
MisuracaR.FaraciP.GangemiA.CarmeciF. A.MiceliS. (2015). The decision making tendency inventory: A new measure to assess maximizing, satisficing, and minimizing. Personality and Individual Differences, 85, 111–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.043
25.
MisuracaR.FaraciP.RuthruffE.CeresiaF. (2021). Are maximizers more normative decision-makers? An experimental investigation of maximizers’ susceptibility to cognitive biases. Personality and Individual Differences, 183, 111123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111123
26.
MisuracaR.FasoloB. (2018). Maximizing versus satisficing in the digital age: Disjoint scales and the case for “construct consensus.”Personality and Individual Differences, 121, 152–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.09.031
27.
ParkerA. M.FischhoffB.BruinW. B. D. (2007). Maximizers versus satisficers: Decision-making styles, competence, and outcomes. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(6), 342–350. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500000486
28.
PolmanE. (2010). Why are maximizers less happy than satisficers? Because they maximize positive and negative outcomes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23(2), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.647
29.
PolmanE.MaglioS. J. (2022). Effects of maximizing on choosing a product and using it over 1 month. Personality and Individual Differences, 196, 111702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111702
30.
RauthmannJ. F. (2024). Personality is (so much) more than just self-reported Big Five traits. European Journal of Personality, 38(6), 863–866. https://doi.org/10.1177/08902070231221853
31.
RoetsA.SchwartzB.GuanY. (2012). The tyranny of choice: A cross-cultural investigation of maximizing–satisficing effects on well-being. Judgment and Decision Making, 7(6), 689–704. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500003247
32.
SchwartzB.WardA.MonterossoJ.LyubomirskyS.WhiteK.LehmanD. R. (2002). Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1178–1197. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.5.1178
33.
ShaniY.ZeelenbergM. (2007). When and why do we want to know? How experienced regret promotes post-decision information search. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.550
34.
ShinerR. L. (2015). Maximizers, satisficers, and their satisfaction with and preferences for reversible versus irreversible decisions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(8), 896–903. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550615595271
35.
SimonH. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63(2), 129–138. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042769
36.
TongX.ChenY.ZhouS.YangS. (2022). How background visual complexity influences purchase intention in live streaming: The mediating role of emotion and the moderating role of gender. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 67, 103031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103031
YangM.ChiouW. (2010). Looking online for the best romantic partner reduces decision quality: The moderating role of choice-making strategies. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 13(2), 207. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0208
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
