溫故知新 Old wisdom, today’s insight — ONGO
The Paradox of Choice: Why 24 Jams Sell Less Than 6
Iyengar & Lepper 2000 — when more options paralyze
Two Weekends at Draeger's
In 2000, at Draeger's, an upscale grocery store in Menlo Park, California, Sheena Iyengar (now a professor at Columbia Business School), then a Columbia doctoral student, set up two types of jam tasting booths. On Saturday, 24 varieties of jam were offered; on Sunday, only 6. Both days featured the same time slots, location, and display. The only variable was the number of options. Customers who sampled the jams received a $1 discount coupon. The final step involved tracking actual purchases at the checkout counter.
60% Stop, 3% Buy
At the 24-jam tasting booth, 60% of customers stopped to sample. The abundant selection piqued their curiosity. However, only 3% made a purchase. At the 6-jam booth, fewer customers stopped—40%—but a significant 30% of those who did made a purchase. When the range of choices was narrower, purchases increased by approximately tenfold. Iyengar's interpretation suggests that when faced with too many options, people fear regretting not making the 'best choice,' leading them to postpone the decision altogether. When cognitive load exceeds its limits, the decision-making system becomes paralyzed. This phenomenon was explored in the paper 'When Choice is Demotivating,' which posits that an abundance of choice can undermine motivation.
Simpler Menus Sell Better
Subsequent research has identified the same pattern across various domains. In 401(k) retirement plans, participation rates decrease as the number of fund options increases. Dating apps can lead to decision paralysis if the match pool is too large. Restaurant menus with more pages often result in lower average customer spending. Another study by Iyengar revealed that too many options also lead to lower satisfaction after a decision is made, often prompting regret like, 'Should I have chosen something else?' Choice may not always equate to freedom. The assumption that a society creating more options automatically leads to happier citizens falters when confronted with empirical data.
The Character for 'Many'
The Chinese character '多' (da), meaning 'many,' is composed of two instances of '夕' (xi), which means 'evening' or 'dusk'—suggesting a repetition of darkness, hence 'abundance' or 'many.' Chapter 22 of the 'Laozi' states: '曲則全, 枉則直, 窪則盈, 弊則新, 少則得, 多則惑'—'The crooked shall be made straight, the empty shall be filled, the worn-out shall be renewed. To have little is to gain, to have much is to be perplexed.' What Laozi observed 2,500 years ago, Iyengar measured with 24 jars of jam. While '多' appears to signify abundance, it is, in reality, an accumulation of darkness that paralyzes decision-making. The 21st-century trend of minimalism isn't merely a rediscovery of Laozi's insight; rather, it reflects how our brains are inherently designed to function more clearly when presented with fewer options.
