Robust Satisficing via Regret Minimization

Marcel Zeelenberg

Journal of Marketing Behavior, 2015, vol. 1, issue 2, 157-166

Abstract: 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.

Keywords: Regret; Maximizing; Robust satisficing (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/107.00000010 (application/xml)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:now:jnljmb:107.00000010

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Marketing Behavior from now publishers
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Lucy Wiseman ().