Decision Psychology

 Now let’s look at another area, an area that requires Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee to make at times, life-altering choices. It has been stated in numerous articles, papers, and research studies that an unconscious rule of decision-making is that past experience=future choices. This many times interferes with the Tweedles ability to properly analyze potential risks–even when the evidence is right in front of them.  The Tweedles many times know the risk and danger a certain decision might bring—but they make the decision anyway.  A recent success or failure can wreak havoc on the Tweedles decision-making process.  Sometimes just “wanting” to do something can overwhelm all other practical considerations.  The Tweedles tend to make decisions based on what will reward them, and in making these decisions, they many times ignore important information.  Research studies in decision psychology seem to indicate that with the ever-increasing number of choices that the Tweedles face— the Tweedles tend to choose badly. And adding to these bad decisions is the fact that the Tweedles are not very good at learning from their mistakes.

In the field of decision-making psychology and behavioral economics referred to previously, a great deal of work has been done by Daniel Kahneman, Daniel Gilbert, Tim Wilson, George Loewenstein and others on the gap between “decision utility” (If I buy this vintage sports car it will make me happier) and “experienced utility” (I bought this vintage sports car and I feel no happier at all).

Why does this happen so often? Using the example above, a Tweedle truly believes that he will never get used to owning a vintage sports car–that the initial thrill will persist–but it quickly disappears. And he doesn’t appear to learn from the experience the next time a similar decision-making situation comes up. By the time the positive feeling from the car has worn off, Tweedle is off after the next big thing.  Gilbert and Wilson call this “miswanting”.  Ever wonder why it is that the Tweedles so quickly lose their appreciation of once-new pleasures? Have you ever been in their shoes–experienced this same situation?  This is a situation that the Tweedles encounter all too regularly.  How about we look at this example: when it first became possible for Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum to get a wide variety of fruits and vegetables at all times of year, they thought they had found heaven. They thought that this feeling would last indefinitely, that every time they went shopping they would marvel at the variety and abundance of choices. However, after a period of time, they started taking these “choices” for granted and would eventually get annoyed if the out of season, non-local fruit and vegetables bought in February weren’t perfect, sweet and juicy.  Having lost their appreciation for these “choices”, they move on to something else and the cycle repeats itself.

This set of examples also helps explain why dramatic consumption increases in affluent nations have not caused a corresponding increase in what is commonly referred to as the “happiness factor”.

Let us now move on to another topic–a topic that has been deservedly getting a lot of attention these days–healthcare “choices”.  This is an area that presents circumstances in which Tweedle cannot possibly be expected to choose wisely—not least of which is when our Tweedles counterpart (Dee or Dum) becomes very ill. The idea of choice in secondary healthcare is in reality an illusion when these types of choices are applied to real life situations. A study which included all NHS (National Health Service) admissions in a universal health care environment found than three-quarters of the admissions are the result of emergencies–urgent or maternity cases–which lend themselves to situations “where patients are generally unable to shop around”. Professor Julian Le Grand writes in his book, Motivation, Agency and Public Policy, that making sensible choices about healthcare is difficult for several reasons: lack of technical knowledge; weakness of will; being in a highly emotional state; or lacking experience of the options offered. In addition, it can be shown that in the majority of cases where medical decisions have to be made; Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee are more than willing to delegate authority (and choice) to medical experts. Research by U.S. surgeon and writer Atul Gawande shows that although two out of three people say they would want to choose their own treatment if they got cancer, among cancer patients themselves, only 12 per cent actually do so.  Additionally, when “choosing” to use public or private services, the Tweedles responsibility to make the right “choice” becomes even greater. If Tweedle Dee has the option to “choose” a hospital and doctor for Tweedle Dum’s heart surgery, how would Tweedle Dee feel if the operation goes wrong? In a slightly different scenario, if a Tweedles child has to go to public school, this non-choice decision may well provoke anger at the school and/or the child, but the blame is not on Tweedle Dee or Tweedle Dum:  They had no “choice” in the matter.

The danger of regret in whatever decision ultimately is made would normally not be a big issue—-if only Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee typically made wise decisions.