Failed by the Syllogism

Barry Schwartz, the Swarthmore professor who works at the intersection of economics and psychology, describes the predominant syllogism of modernity as consisting of the following:

Freedom = Better Welfare

Choice = Freedom

therefore Choice = Better Welfare

(See Schwartz's Google TechTalk here.  Note: Video is more than an hour in length.)

The assumption that the terms of this syllogism are valid is so pervasive, Schwartz argues, that few of us are aware of how powerfully it drives strategy at the macro cooperate and governmental levels.  From yogurt brands at the supermarket to types of schools, the syllogistic inference is always that greater choice leads to greater welfare for more people.

Maybe this holds to a point--having a Home Depot and a Lowe's in close proximity to each other drives up sales for both brands.  But, and this is crucial, past a certain point, choice seems to paralyze.  Consumers make a choice from among, say, six brands of jam, while they simply walk out of the store rather than buy when faced with 24 brands.  I have suggested in this space and elsewhere that what parents face in choosing between independent schools and brands of pedagogy is more like the 24 brands of jam.  Except that they can't walk out; they have to make a choice among all the brands and flavors.

I used to think the result of this choice would be anxiety--and still believe this to a point--but a recent and very wonkish paper by Daniela Raeva, Eric van Dijk, and Marcel Zeelenberg provides evidence that the real emotional culprit is regret.  More precisely, these authors show that the anticipation of regret is just as powerful a motivator of behavior as the emotion itself, especially for individuals who are seeking to maximize their outcomes.  Since one can never really know whether the outcomes of something like education are being maximized, the school choice process seems front-loaded for regret.

One possible solution is to help consumers--parents, in the school situation--narrow the range of their options.  In reality, all 24 brands of jam are not equal to every customer.  Some may have an aversion to, say, strawberry, thereby removing a half-dozen or so jars from the calculus.  The same is true for schools; perhaps enough so that the real range of options becomes a more manageable number.  The problem with the syllogism is its universality.  Choice equals Better Welfare up to a point.