Rabbit holes

[carlos.q]

Nor surprisingly this thread has become its very own rabbit hole...

[TSherbs]

TS-
You're getting there: why would one think the study I cited is accurate?
.

my lord

I was right.





Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[TSherbs]

Nor surprisingly this thread has become its very own rabbit hole...

word

I'm done.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[kazoolaw]

TS-
You performed the same critical analysis as I've advocated through the thread.
You've just begun.
Be informed.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Unable to respond over the weekend as I tend to go to my other home and leave the devices behind.

There are a number of issues that may need addressing here.

1. Being skeptical is okay, as long as one doesn't make a virtue of it to the exclusion of reasonable proofs.

2. It's quite difficult to get funding to merely replicate the work of another researcher.

3. No human (social) research will produce identical results on replication, not even with the same participants.

4. The whole project that Gelman mentions should be examined carefully for how similar the results of replicated studies are to the original.

5. There are statistical tests for part 4.

6. Small studies (i.e. with a small sample size) tend to be less accurate than large studies.

7. Replicating small studies is likely to spotlight part 6.

8. To replicate large studies, see part 2.

9. See part 1.


If it is assumed that peer review has deemed the question appropriate, the method appropriate and followed correctly, the choice of outcome appropriate, and the statistic used relevant to the question and the data, then one should have a reasonable degree of confidence in the conclusions of a study.

I have no doubt that there is some shonky science getting published.


All of that detracts from the OP which sought to examine the potentially negative relationship between choice and happiness when the degree of choice exceeds a given level. There is quite a lot of evidence that this is likely.

It is not my intention to single out or castigate the pen hobby, merely to use it as an example among all similar pursuits, and because this is a pen forum!

Much like those who cite an individual outlier example in the pen hobby as though that somehow invalidates all the data, the same goes with regard to the pen hobby in the set of all hobbies, and greater still all these hobbies in the set of all (ultimately) all the choices we make in life. Each choice involves an element of stress - that is a given, even if it is tiny and unnoticed. How many choices do we have to make in life? And among how many options? The point from the OP faces this question, with acquiring pens one very small part of it.

[Chuck Naill]

I feel this way also about trying to consider Sailor pens. I'll start thinking about them, look them up, and then get flummoxed by the array of similar looking pens all with different names, different gold marks, and then all those nib size options. First, spending money is always a stress for me, so in the case of Sailor I just never feel that I know enough to make the right decision. So, better safe than sorry, and I move on without ever putting a pen in the cart.

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

The stress of spending money perhaps rather than number of choices?

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Consider this: if there was just one pen on the market, the choice would appear to lie only in the decision to spend the money or not. However, having the money free to spend is not the only consideration, there is also the question of value, or utility, or need.

Many are in the position of being able to afford an item, yet refrain from purchasing it for one reason or another.

Add to this example a multitude of other pens and pen specification options and the decision making process becomes increasingly complex.

Further, add other external effects such as peer pressure and so on...

The potential for indecision and doubt is there.

[Chuck Naill]

Okay, I'll play along. Consider that if only one pen did exist many would pass and use a different writing tool.

Sure. I could afford a MB 149 but at an opportunity loss for something else I would rather have or that someone in my family needs. I find no stress at all in not being able to have something if I can satisfy a need for another.

You mentioned you want a midnight blue 51, do you get stressed that you can't find one. I mean, there are many colors for vintage 51's, but you only want one.

You mean like peer pressure that suggests if you haven't used this or that pen you have not lived? Well, that's just some people talking.

I see indecision and doubt as good. They represent a part of how humans go about deciding how to live.

I am sure some folks are wired in a way that they need others to tell them what they want. My daugher tells her three 9 year olds to pack their own clothes. She said they did a good job and showed up fully prepared, even a jacket and face masks. People tend to figure it out.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

As before, I raised the issue as a theoretical type of discussion point, not an examination of individual strategies. Indecision and doubt cause varying degrees of internal conflict. This can accumulate across a spectrum of decision areas to a level where it affects our happiness.

With the P51, I am only really interested in the midnight blue. So, that decision has been made. However, the scarcity of decent examples is slightly irritating. Psychological irritation is a form of stress.

[Chuck Naill]

Was there stress felt in deciding which color 51 you wanted?

[Empty_of_Clouds]

No, but not all stress is direct. In this case the stress is derived from the scarcity, but that wouldn't have been an issue if I had chosen a different colour! So, the stress is connected to the choice one way or another.

[Chuck Naill]

Yes, I can agree your point. I've been trying to point out that having many choices is not bad or stress leading, which appeared to be your point. Scarity of choice can actually be a great stress if the need is severe.

If there were mostly midnight blue 51's, would you still be interested?

[Empty_of_Clouds]

For clarity, my OP isn't suggesting that having lots of choices always leads to significant stress and lowering of happiness states, only that it can do.

If there were mostly midnight blues? I would still have chosen it, as it is my favourite of the P51 colours. It's scarcity is not a driver of my choice, in other words.

[Chuck Naill]

Well, your OP did imply if not specifically indicate you felt too many choices resulted in not being happy. I realize at this point you may be getting tired of the discussion and I mean no harm.

"It would seem, from a cursory reading, that having too many choices reduces our happiness in significant ways. And yet, here we are in a culture of rampant consumerism.

So, I am a bit baffled. Is our assessment such that the supposed happiness assigned to acquisition outweighs the apparently well-known happiness that accrues with living more simply?"

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Firstly, the OP was a speculation on the subject, prompting discussion and exploration. It is a little unfair to suggest I inculde things that were only brought to light later in the discussion.

Secondly, it's not about being told what to do, or being accepting such a direction. All of us, without exception, are guided to some extent by others. Whenever we read a review we are taking on the opinion of another. In the absence of information on a product we are left with marketing and reviews. Sure one can make a leap in the dark, but that is an uninformed decision.

Thirdly, despite what some may think, living more simply is not just about divesting oneself of possessions. It requires a shift in perception and of values. Otherwise the desire to acquire remains a constant threat.

[Chuck Naill]

The OP was not written as a speculation or the language would not support such an assertion.

Perhaps you have a misconception of the concept of marketing. And, if you're not a business person, you think any definition is acceptable. It is absolutely not the intent of modern marketing theory to force the consumer to purchase what the factory produces. The true therory is to identify, anticipate, and satisfying the customer/market/consumer....whatever you want to call it.

Living simply takes many forms. To suggest that less is always more is to be naive. So, in context, the Lamy Al-Star should satisfy most everyone if the need was something affordable, useable, and bombproof. Others want something else where the Al-Star just would not satisfy. Having a Lamy choice simply would not make life more. Sometimes it takes a Bauhaus Lamy 2000.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

I won't quote the whole OP but:

It would seem, from a cursory reading, that having too many choices reduces our happiness in significant ways. And yet, here we are in a culture of rampant consumerism.

So, I am a bit baffled. Is our assessment such that the supposed happiness assigned to acquisition outweighs the apparently well-known happiness that accrues with living more simply?

Bolded parts, first is speculative interpretation, second is clearly a request for exploration of the subject.

In my next post I quoted Schwartz thus:

"Autonomy and Freedom of choice are critical to our well being, and choice is critical to freedom and autonomy. Nonetheless, though modern Americans have more choice than any group of people ever has before, and thus, presumably, more freedom and autonomy, we don't seem to be benefiting from it psychologically."

— quoted from Ch.5, The Paradox of Choice, 2004

Bolded part is clearly again a speculation, the use of the word 'seem' is a dead giveaway.

Fair enough on the use of the term 'marketing'. I am using it in the sense of selling, so happy to accept this is incorrect (I am not a business person obviously).

Living simply takes many forms. To suggest that less is always more is to be naive. So, in context, the Lamy Al-Star should satisfy most everyone if the need was something affordable, useable, and bombproof. Others want something else where the Al-Star just would not satisfy. Having a Lamy choice simply would not make life more. Sometimes it takes a Bauhaus Lamy 2000.

No, just no. I haven't suggested that less is always more. My remark about living simply relates specifically to mindset, which for someone immersed in and subject to the pressures from a consumerist society will almost certainly require a perspective change. Living simply requires a different focus.


On a personal note, while I can accept that I may not be the most skilled writer with regard to conveying meaning, I find it extraordinary for anyone to gainsay my intention after I've already made my intention clear in multiple follow-up posts.

[Chuck Naill]

Yes, you changed/clarified/moderated your intent later. That said, having many choices does not lead to stress. Other factors may lead to stress as you've mentioned.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Sorry, that is just wrong. I haven't changed my intent at all, it's still the same as in the OP, i.e. to explore this topic. What has changed a bit is my understanding of the topic, and of the ways some people approach it. Nothing wrong with that, and in fact this is the very purpose of starting a discussion, to learn.


You are making this bold assertion: "... having many choices does not lead to stress". However, you haven't presented any compelling evidence to support this view. A single anecdotal self-report does not constitute a counter-argument. I do appreciate that this is your personal held belief though.

It seems relatively clear that the research evidence supports the view that increasing available options can lead to a decrease in life satisfaction, and that the likely mechanism is stress related to internal conflict. Until I see significant evidence to the contrary I must concur.

[Chuck Naill]

Sorry, that is just wrong. I haven't changed my intent at all, it's still the same as in the OP, i.e. to explore this topic. What has changed a bit is my understanding of the topic, and of the ways some people approach it. Nothing wrong with that, and in fact this is the very purpose of starting a discussion, to learn.


You are making this bold assertion: "... having many choices does not lead to stress". However, you haven't presented any compelling evidence to support this view. A single anecdotal self-report does not constitute a counter-argument. I do appreciate that this is your personal held belief though.

It seems relatively clear that the research evidence supports the view that increasing available options can lead to a decrease in life satisfaction, and that the likely mechanism is stress related to internal conflict. Until I see significant evidence to the contrary I must concur.

I like having choices and the more the merrier. Perhaps I don't get bogged down in some of the issues that others have since I pretty well know what I want to afford or prefer. This helps to eliminate the hundreds and allows me to consider the dozens.

Soon, I will be house shopping. I would much rather have several than one or two. I would rather have many car colors than one. Pens are a pleasant pass time that I would hate to see turn into a stress maker.