
The Paradox of Choice: The Advantages of Closing a Few Doors - robg
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/26/science/26tier.html?ex=1361682000&en=d63c4602c083c62d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all
======
fleaflicker
There is a startup equivalent to destroying your retreat options (from "How
not to die"):

 _I wish every startup we funded could appear in a Newsweek article describing
them as the next generation of billionaires, because then none of them would
be able to give up. The success rate would be 90%. I'm not kidding._

~~~
SirWart
I definitely tell people I'm going to be working on a startup over the summer
to force myself to do it. It's a surprisingly effective method actually.

------
jkush
Jesus, this is so weird. I've been spending the last few weeks trying to
articulate a theory about the illusion of choice being used as a framework for
power (can you tell by that statement I haven't quite figured it out just
yet?).

The discussion yesterday (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=123081>) about
how to break out of paradigms and the Paradox of Choice are closely tied
together with the idea I'm working on.

~~~
robg
See also (where I got the more descriptive phrase in the title):
<http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/93>
[http://www.amazon.com/Paradox-Choice-Why-More-
Less/dp/006000...](http://www.amazon.com/Paradox-Choice-Why-More-
Less/dp/0060005688)

To me, it also ties in with embodiment theory
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=123243>). We think we'd rather have the
buffet, especially on first sight and with an empty stomach. But after gorging
ourselves we realize we would have much rather had one really good dish than
twenty mediocre ones.

~~~
jkush
I agree with you. What I'm more interested in however, is who really gets to
say what dishes are on the buffet? The cooks? The consumers? My gut tells me
the consumers have a lot less choice than it appears.

~~~
robg
If it's your restaurant, you do! Now, if you want to stay in business better
to offer a few dishes (not a buffet) that people would kill to eat delivered
by cooks who love great, simple food.

(And yes, we can run with this line of thought all day. Mmmmmmm, embodiment.)

~~~
lg
Ah, the Jobsian theory of restaurants.

------
mynameishere
I'm surprised by the war analogies. Withdrawals are an essential part of
military strategy.

~~~
ardit33
It is a good analogy. During WWII the soviet red army got smashed at the
beginning by the germans, and was in retread (lost a lot of men and
equipment). Millions of soldiers were captured. Hitler gave the order to
summary execute all commanders and communist members found in each unit.

Meanwhile, Stalin, pissed at the poor performance of its army, gave order to
execute all the commanders who retreated, or their units gave up to the
germans.

Giving up, ment certain death, retreating ment execution, so the red army
commanders; from simple captains, to even generals, were left with literally
one choice: Fight to their death.

At the end, we all know who won the war.

~~~
run4yourlives
That's a piss poor understanding of history.

The only thing that turned the tide of the war for the Russians was winter.
Stalin's kill 'em all approach had virtually no effect on the performance of
his army. In fact, Hitler's fight 'til the death orders ended up being laughed
at my German commanders.

When you're a nazi choosing to surrender to Stalin's red army, you understand
the true meaning of death.

~~~
ardit33
"That's a piss poor understanding of history. The only thing that turned the
tide of the war for the Russians was winter. Stalin's kill 'em all approach
had virtually no effect on the performance of his army. "

First of all, your "That's a piss poor understanding of history." is a pretty
crappy comment for a forum like this that wants to stay civil. I hope you
choose better wording and are not like this with your friends, and colleagues.

Second, attributing the defeat of nazis to weather, is trivalizing the whole
history. I am not saying Stalin's orders to not surrender won the war, but it
was a huge factor on the battle field, while you say it had no effect.

BBC - The Battle For Russia <http://joox.net/cat/44/id/1971071>

The nazis caught almost 2 million soviet prisoners in the first part of the
war. Imagine those people actually haven't given up, but fought to death, then
the outnumbered nazi machine would have never reached so close to Moscow (16
miles). One of the reason, after the war, a lot of ex-soviet prisoners, were
treated really bad, almost as traitors.

------
prakash
"Engage in combat fully determined to die and you will be alive; wish to
survive in the battle and you will surely meet death."

Uesugi Kenshin (1530—1578)

Applies equally to war & startups.

------
Tichy
That experiment sounds too funny - I think I would panic, too, if doors
suddenly started shrinking away.

~~~
robg
Honestly, to me it's perfectly explained by embodiment theory. A disappearing
door would seem to literally lock you in. Probably where their paradigm needs
more testing. Would the results hold if instead giftboxes were shrinking away?

------
edw519
And how does this apply to UI design? (What is the optimal number of ways to
do something, 1, many, or something in between?)

~~~
robg
I think the choice is to give as few as possible. Not only will that help
minimize development time, but you can always add based on what users demand.

------
ph0rque
Interesting... I find that sometimes, I am relieved when my choices shrink, or
put another way, some choices are made for me.

------
redorb
(Wish they would open a door) free open access to the site

------
walter_b_marvin
Intresting. I thought Cortez initiated this stradegy

