Rabbit holes

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Of course, the literature on this mainly uses qualitative measures. Note that the term 'measure' is the one preferred by the research. Unless I am misunderstanding what you have written, it seems as though you are suggesting that a subjective measure is somehow of less value than an objective one. Heh! In my work there is constant argument between those who want to ascribe a cold, hard number to a phenomenon, and those who don't think this is appropriate to the questions being asked of a population. Perhaps this will always be so, but in my mind (and obviously tons of other people's) both kinds of measures add richness and depth to our understanding.

If I may go back to my "Does your income meet your needs" example. In an empirical sense it could be argued that once "needs" have been defined it would be a simple task of accounting to determine income vs expenditure. However, the question is worded this way because people view "needs" in different ways and not just as (say) roof over head, food on table, clothing. One person may say that they consider books a "need" for their mental health. For another those books are not a "need" but they may find that socialising is a ""need" for them with respect to their sense of place or value in a community (which may impact on their satisfaction with life).

It's complicated, and often beyond my understanding even though I use a lot of these tools (both quantitative and qualitative) in my daily work.

[TSherbs]

I'm curious, Kazoolaw. Do you deny the validity of the research into stress and choice that people have been posting here? As EOC pointed out, the research was not trying to quantify or measure the stress. It was looking at its effects on decision-making in choice (these effects are measurable).

Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[Chuck Naill]

Has anyone here experienced stress because of the number of choices if they had reliable information, income, interest, and time to do the research?

It can be stressful if we lack the information. There is stress from not having enough money. If we are really not interested and only doing so because we have to, this can be irritating. If we have to make a quick decision or lack the time, this could lead to discomfort.

[Empty_of_Clouds]

In this hobby consider the number of posts about the agony of choice, or those talking about buyer's remorse. Then there is the mythical ladder, that you simply must climb because Big Pens says so, and that supposedly leads to a holy grail of pens. Then there is the marketing hype and how it ties in with the fear of missing out. Or the need to be part of a group in general. In our hobby there are a lot of choices. Information is imperfect. There are no standard measures for anything, all is subjective. Disparate opinions abound. There are a multiplicity of limiting factors to accessibility. There is a great deal of peer pressure. There is elitism and clique formation. Some may feel the need for external validation or approval.

I could go on and on... and on (and indeed have done so often ) but I guess the point is that whenever there is uncertainty in the decision making process there exists some level of stress. And because we are assailed daily with multiple choices across a range of subjects, both important and trivial, the stress becomes cumulative. While a degree of stress is essential for optimal function, at some level it will begin to erode satisfaction/happiness.

[Chuck Naill]

In this hobby consider the number of posts about the agony of choice, or those talking about buyer's remorse. Then there is the mythical ladder, that you simply must climb because Big Pens says so, and that supposedly leads to a holy grail of pens. Then there is the marketing hype and how it ties in with the fear of missing out. Or the need to be part of a group in general. In our hobby there are a lot of choices. Information is imperfect. There are no standard measures for anything, all is subjective. Disparate opinions abound. There are a multiplicity of limiting factors to accessibility. There is a great deal of peer pressure. There is elitism and clique formation. Some may feel the need for external validation or approval.

I could go on and on... and on (and indeed have done so often ) but I guess the point is that whenever there is uncertainty in the decision making process there exists some level of stress. And because we are assailed daily with multiple choices across a range of subjects, both important and trivial, the stress becomes cumulative. While a degree of stress is essential for optimal function, at some level it will begin to erode satisfaction/happiness.

Okay, I think you should have said this in your opening post.

1. Agony of choice can stem from more than many choices.
2, Buyers remorse can result from failing to research the product and impulse acquisitions.
3. Never heard of a mythical ladder, but I do know that unless you have had an experience with a particular pen, you're left out of the conversation during a discussion. In other words, don't slam a MB149 unless you've had one.
4. By "Big Pen" perhaps you're referring to members who have been into the hobby and provide restorations and help to other hear. I see them as having something to say whether I follow their advice or not. Their information is freely given, but it does not say that I am not also responsible to act wisely according to the personal resources I have available.
5. Holy Grail is just something people throw around on many forums. It's something usually connected with hard to find and expensive. I don't have a hold grail anything and I suspect not many others do as well. Whether its Ping Eye 2 square grooved irons, a pre war Martin D-28, a Lloyd Loar mandolin, a first generation Gillette Aristocrat, or a MB149, none of these take the place of talent. Holy Grail is what those with less talent seek after. Those with talent know that they can do pretty well with any old thing.
6. Marketing hype is something that's been bantered about here on this thread quite a bit. I don't understand the distain. Don't we have a mind or are we so mindless that the marketers can just lead us down the path to destruction? Good grief!! Companies today are listening today to what people want in the goods and services that are available. Some of you need to take a university business class because your concepts of marketing is archaic.
7. The fear of missing out is more of a psychological defect than a problem with marketing philosophy. It is what a emotionally driven person brings to their life. It is always living in the future when happiness might be realized.
8. I've been able to find any information about pens of interest. I restored my first Esterbrook when Anderson Pens suggested I look at videos for re-sacing these old pens. I just don't understand that information is not available.

Yes, we are not going to agree I suspect, but that's okay. That's why they make chocolate and vanilla ice cream.

[penwash]

Somehow I don't think anyone here read my post other than TSherbs.

I succinctly summarized the factors (there may be more) that can contribute to anxiety or mild stress when faced with choices.

Oh well, whatever, I'm done here.

[catbert]

Somehow I don't think anyone here read my post other than TSherbs.

I succinctly summarized the factors (there may be more) that can contribute to anxiety or mild stress when faced with choices.

Oh well, whatever, I'm done here.

Everyone went down their own rabbit holes ...

[catbert]

Has anyone here experienced stress because of the number of choices if they had reliable information, income, interest, and time to do the research? ...

More often than I care to admit. Jon's tile example is a perfect illustration.

In addition, though we like to think of ourselves as rational decision-makers, other (subconscious, often irrational) factors are involved.

[TSherbs]

Everyone went down their own rabbit holes ...

Wait.

There's a world outside of my underground den?

[Empty_of_Clouds]

Somehow I don't think anyone here read my post other than TSherbs.

I succinctly summarized the factors (there may be more) that can contribute to anxiety or mild stress when faced with choices.

Oh well, whatever, I'm done here.

Read it, reinforced it.

What bothers me a bit here, as in a number of other threads, is the insistence by an individual (doesn't matter who it is) that because they don't feel influenced by something then surely nobody else will be. This is quite frankly an absurd position to take when the scientific literature is quite clear that a particular influence affects the majority of a given population. An understanding of normal statistical distribution should alleviate this issue, and yet many do not appear to understand the implication.

Bottom line here is that it is well-known and understood that increasing the number of options is positively correlated with stress levels and negatively correlated with satisfaction/happiness. Pen and ink manufacturers have, over the last few years, appeared to ramp up the production of as many option as they could manage. This can and does lead to stress for pen enthusiasts, as has been noted previously by the volume of posts concerning the difficulty in making choices or in assessing choices after they have been made. More broadly, the breadth of choices in our 1st world lives is often immense, and most people suffer some kind of downtick in happiness when facing it, irrespective of claims to be a perfectly rational person (such an animal does not exist).

Another bit that bothers me is that we, as more experienced fountaineers than the average beginner, actively (if often unwittingly) promote uncertainty for the beginner. No doubt the same can be said for many other hobbies.

[TSherbs]

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

[penwash]

Somehow I don't think anyone here read my post other than TSherbs.

I succinctly summarized the factors (there may be more) that can contribute to anxiety or mild stress when faced with choices.

Oh well, whatever, I'm done here.

Read it, reinforced it.

What bothers me a bit here, as in a number of other threads, is the insistence by an individual (doesn't matter who it is) that because they don't feel influenced by something then surely nobody else will be. This is quite frankly an absurd position to take when the scientific literature is quite clear that a particular influence affects the majority of a given population. An understanding of normal statistical distribution should alleviate this issue, and yet many do not appear to understand the implication.

Bottom line here is that it is well-known and understood that increasing the number of options is positively correlated with stress levels and negatively correlated with satisfaction/happiness. Pen and ink manufacturers have, over the last few years, appeared to ramp up the production of as many option as they could manage. This can and does lead to stress for pen enthusiasts, as has been noted previously by the volume of posts concerning the difficulty in making choices or in assessing choices after they have been made. More broadly, the breadth of choices in our 1st world lives is often immense, and most people suffer some kind of downtick in happiness when facing it, irrespective of claims to be a perfectly rational person (such an animal does not exist).

Another bit that bothers me is that we, as more experienced fountaineers than the average beginner, actively (if often unwittingly) promote uncertainty for the beginner. No doubt the same can be said for many other hobbies.

Actually, I don't recall ever feeling stressed over the choices for both inks and pens (of course I do stress over other things, I'm just another human being).

Because I knew from the start that I probably won't be able to get even close to exhaust the variety of pens out there, so I don't even try. I treat this hobby like a long journey, where I encounter one pen at a time without worrying about what I'm missing.

Kinda like bringing a camera on a road trip, I used to stress over how many "good shots" I'll be producing, and in the end I was just exhausted. When I turn around and just enjoy the trip, I get more satisfying photographs out of it.

Strangely, by employing this perspective (back to pens), it doesn't diminish the sense of wonder, awe or excitement when I get a new pen, or drooling over pens that I can't afford, and it also didn't stop me from hunting for certain pens (or bargains on broken and unrestored pens in my case). The only thing I don't feel is anxiety (let alone stress).

But this thread brings out a good question, and I certainly recognize the anxiety over choices from both beginners and more seasoned FP people.

[TSherbs]

Actually, I don't recall ever feeling stressed over the choices for both inks and pens (of course I do stress over other things, I'm just another human being).

Because I knew from the start that I probably won't be able to get even close to exhaust the variety of pens out there, so I don't even try. I treat this hobby like a long journey, where I encounter one pen at a time without worrying about what I'm missing.

Kinda like bringing a camera on a road trip, I used to stress over how many "good shots" I'll be producing, and in the end I was just exhausted. When I turn around and just enjoy the trip, I get more satisfying photographs out of it.

Strangely, by employing this perspective (back to pens), it doesn't diminish the sense of wonder, awe or excitement when I get a new pen, or drooling over pens that I can't afford, and it also didn't stop me from hunting for certain pens (or bargains on broken and unrestored pens in my case). The only thing I don't feel is anxiety (let alone stress).

But this thread brings out a good question, and I certainly recognize the anxiety over choices from both beginners and more seasoned FP people.

The Zen of letting go is something we would all benefit from.

Ooo, look, something shiny on eBay....gotta go!

[kazoolaw]

I'm curious, Kazoolaw. Do you deny the validity of the research into stress and choice that people have been posting here? As EOC pointed out, the research was not trying to quantify or measure the stress. It was looking at its effects on decision-making in choice (these effects are measurable).

https://www.nature.com/news/over-hal...y-test-1.18248

Deny, can't because I haven't read them all.

Require each to prove validity, seems like a small thing to to ask.

[TSherbs]

I'm curious, Kazoolaw. Do you deny the validity of the research into stress and choice that people have been posting here? As EOC pointed out, the research was not trying to quantify or measure the stress. It was looking at its effects on decision-making in choice (these effects are measurable).

https://www.nature.com/news/over-hal...y-test-1.18248

Deny, can't because I haven't read them all.

Require each to prove validity, seems like a small thing to to ask.

Thanks for this link.

Did you look at it closely? The reproduction results were more "similar" over all than dissimilar. Take a look at all the blue areas in both columns. The blue shaded areas in both columns all represent various levels of having "similar" results. Only the black area is "not at all similar." The 39% is only those that "matched" the original results. But in the "no" category, for some reason, there are many shaded examples of tests having some kind of "similar" results. I don't see why reproduced tests in social sciences have to have "matching" results to be valid (that is the suggestion in this article). Why don't all those other lighter blue squares with "similar" results lend credibility to the original? How "similar" do results have to be to be called a "match" (and thus be deemed "valid")?

What is your standard of "proof" that you are asking for? In this thread here, let's say half the people state that they abstain from some purchases out of stress of choice. Is your point that you do not consider their self-reporting accurate or valid? Is your point that individuals cannot testify to their own subjective state of mind or behavior?

[kazoolaw]

Is similar the same?

Re your FPG study of your last paragraph: 1/2 the people state they abstain from some purchases out of stress of choice. Where might there be doubts?

They might have "said" so to you, but I don't see that number of statements in this topic. Did you both hear and report accurately?

Abstain from "some" purchases: 1, 100, 1,000? Do they never purchase or do they delay a purchase,or all forever?

How much stress? Stress [I]only[I] from the number of choices? Life stresses? Then there's the place we came in: how much stress causes abstention? But it's subjective and self-reported, so how would we know? Does it vary from day-to-day?

Is it only stress from pens? Inks? Stationery? Why or why not, and what does that say about the validity of their statements?

Why would one assume the accuracy or validity of a self-reported complaint? People testify to their subjective state of mind, complaints, and perceptions all the time. Why would assume they are accurate, true, or correct? There can be an issue of secondary gain.

We make judgments daily about the accuracy of what we're told. You watch a child take a cookie and then say, when confronted, "l didn't take it."

Why should we assume that subjective and unverifiable statements from anonymous people are accurately given, reported, and interpreted?

[TSherbs]

Kazoo, do you put people through all this who say, "I love you"?

You're beginning to sound insincere to me, like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

I mean, technically no system ever measures anything exactly, no matter how objective it appears to be: not weight, not mass, not energy, not light, etc. But I guess that you prefer these measurements over peoples' statements about their feelings or behaviors.

Carry on.



Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[kazoolaw]

TS-
It's hard to tell if you miss my point, or choose to ignore it.
People remain people, and defy ready quantification.
If you judge sincerity on whether someone agrees with you then you'll always reject constructive criticism as insincere.
If everyone you meet says they're your friend, they're not.
If you think every study is both true and accurate I hope your disappointment when you find that's not always the case is not too painful.
Be well.

[TSherbs]

If you think every study is both true and accurate I hope your disappointment when you find that's not always the case is not too painful.

Since these studies only point out correlations for their test groups and do not make claims beyond that, I never expect them to be any "truer" than that. They never claim to make absolute generalizations, and never claim that all test subjects respond the same way. Similar to how not all identical molecules react to reagents in the same way. No experimental results are exactly reproducible every time. I was asking above, how often do you expect EXACTLY the same results in an experiment for it to be valid in your eyes? I am reading every word you say, please don't suggest otherwise.

The study report you linked, which I read every word of, never defined what they meant by "similar results" vs "very similar results," etc, so I don't accept their conclusions, especially when they included "similar results" in the "did not match" category. Until this contradiction is explained to me and what these terms mean, I don't find that link very indicative of anything.

Again, if "match" means EXACTLY the same results, then I would argue that an impossible standard was set up in order to undermine all tests that don't get exactly the same results a second time. Again, why aren't "very similar results" good enough to support the validity of a social experiment including humans (or any kind of animal)? These experiments only claim correlations, so why subject them to this extreme standard when they don't make absolute claims to begin with?





Sent from my Moto E (4) using Tapatalk

[kazoolaw]

TS-
You're getting there: why would one think the study I cited is accurate?
Sometimes our view of accuracy is tinted by our own biases.
A bit of scepticism is healthy.
Careful, your second paragraph sounds like something I could have written.
Be well.