Ariely, D. And Norton, M.I.

Ariely, D. And Norton, M.I. (2011). "From thinking too little to thinking too much:

a continuum of decision making." Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive

Science, Vol. 2, No. 1 (2011): 39 -- 46.

This article presents an overview and explanation of the available literature on decision-making. More specifically, the authors characterize the field as dominated by the examination of two particular types of decision-making patterns: those involving the risks and consequences if thinking too little about a pending choice and those involving the risks and consequences of thinking too little about a pending choice. The authors explain the difference by reference to everyday situations and then illustrate the ways that thinking too little and that thinking too much can lead to sub-optimal decisions based on the available information. The authors provide examples in empirical studies to illustrate specific types of decision-making errors and tendencies of both types and conclude that while either approach can lead to mistakes, it is possible for decision-makers to improve decision-making efficiency by appreciating the conceptual distinction between thinking too much and thinking too little and by understanding some of the broad tendencies that typically account for avoidable errors.

Main Points of Article

There are several different ways that thinking too little manifests itself in bad decision-making, such as perpetuating bad habits and meaningless habits. Some of the examples of empirical research about too little thinking attributable to bad habits would be the way that habitual heavy popcorn-eating movie goers continue to eat the same amount of popcorn even when it is stale; the way middle-age adults continue eating habits they developed when they were much younger; the way patients already taking medications are less likely to consider announced side-effects than patients who have not yet started taking those drugs; and the way parents who have previously treated children with cold medications are less likely to heed official warnings against doing so than parents who have never previously done so. Meanwhile, some of the examples of empirical research about too little thinking attributable to meaningless habits would be the way that some people continue eating at the same restaurant instead of trying others simply because they once made the entirely arbitrary choice to eat there.

Some of the examples of empirical research about too thinking too much include studies in which the independent variables were: thinking about too many issues; thinking irrelevant issues; and merely being presented with too many options. For example, electronics store customers typically expand the range of their considerations beyond those they originally maintained based on the options cited by salespeople; food tasters exhibit less strong preferences when directed to consider additional information besides their "gut" reaction; and individuals faced with too many flavor options were less likely to purchase any yogurt than those given some options but not as many.

Conclusion

The article provides a helpful introduction to the concept that decisions are partly dependent on the process by which they are made. The authors used previously published research effectively to illustrate the ways that both thinking too little and thinking too much typically manifest themselves in everyday life. The article would likely help individuals at both ends of the spectrum (or in situations corresponding to decision-making mistakes of either type) reduce their relative susceptibility to those mistakes, patterns, and tendencies simply by raising awareness of those connections to decision-making.

Aldao, a., Nolen-Hoeksema, S., and Schweizer, S. "Emotion-regulation strategies

across psychopathology: A meta-analytic review." Clinical Psychology

Review, Vol. 30, No. 2 (2010): 217 -- 237.

Summary

This article considered of a meta-analytic review of data pertaining to six typical strategies of regulating emotion in relation to four different types of psychopathology. More specifically, the researchers considered the following emotion-regulation strategies: acceptance, avoidance, problem solving, reappraisal, rumination, and suppression; and they considered them in the context of each of the following psychological disorders: anxiety, depression, eating, and substance-related disorders. The method employed by the researchers consisted of primarily of systematic literature searches of studies presenting data about any of the six emotion-regulation strategies in the context of any of the four types of psychological disorders. The authors also conducted various supplementary searches of available databases, articles with potentially relevant literature cited as references, and solicited colleagues for their experience and recommendations identifying relevant sources of additional data. The data analysis suggested that certain types of emotion-regulation strategies are more likely to be associated with psychological dysfunction than others and also that at least one prominent psychotherapeutic approach may rely too heavily on assumptions not borne out by the results of those data analyses.

Main Points of Article

The data analyses indicated that maladaptive emotion-regulation strategies such as ruminations, avoidance, and suppression were all associated more with psychopathology than were adaptive emotion-regulation strategies such as acceptance, reappraisal, and problem-solving. Perhaps more importantly, the data analyses also suggested that the connection between specific emotion-regulation strategies and particular psychopathology also varies considerably as a function of psychotherapeutic approach. In general, maladaptive strategies were associated with psychopathology much more frequently than adaptive strategies. The implication drawn in that regard is that the presence of maladaptive emotion-regulation strategies is more important as a predictor of psychopathology than the mere absence of adaptive emption-regulation strategies. More specifically, the researchers also considered each emotion-regulation strategy in relation to each form of psychopathology separately. That series of analyses provided empirical evidence explaining the clinical observation that mood-related psychopathologies such as depression and anxiety are more closely underlying problems in relation to emotion regulation than are externalizing psychopathologies such as eating disorders and substance abuse.