You’re recalling something that resonates with the broader psychological findings—but the most recent and robust evidence doesn't fully support the idea that making
quick decisions about moderately costly choices leaves you
just as satisfied as deliberate decision‑making. Here's the current research landscape:
What Recent Research Actually Shows
1. Quick = Biased, Slow = More Accurate
A 2024 study from the University of Utah found that
faster decisions are more influenced by biases, whereas those who take longer tend to make more accurate, less biased choices—even in everyday contexts like choosing between pizzas or selecting a college. (
ScienceBlog.com,
attheu.utah.edu)
2. “Sleep On It” Improves Rationality
Other recent studies highlight that delaying decisions—e.g., “sleeping on it”—can reduce the impact of initial impressions and produce fairer, more balanced choices. (
Medbound)
3. Even Micro‑Delays Help
Classic experiments (though older) found that adding even a tiny delay—like 50 milliseconds—allows attention to filter irrelevant information and improves accuracy in split-second decision tasks. (
TIME)
4. Too Many Options Cause Regret
The phenomenon of
choice overload shows that when people face too many similar options, they often feel overwhelmed and later regret their decision—even when they spend more time deciding. (
Wikipedia)
5. Nature of Decision Matters
- Simple, routine choices are often handled efficiently by our fast, intuitive “System 1” thinking.
- Complex or unfamiliar decisions benefit from System 2’s deliberate, thoughtful processing. (Psychology Today, SpringerLink)
6. Heuristics & Emotions Play a Role
Heuristics (mental shortcuts) help us decide quickly, but can also introduce biases. And emotional states—especially under time pressure—can distort our judgment. (
Verywell Mind,
Wikipedia)
Verdict: Quick Choices ≠ Equivalent Satisfaction
So while you might have read something suggesting that fast decisions can be just as satisfying as slow ones in moderately impactful scenarios, the weight of recent evidence leans the other way:
quick decisions often lead to biases and less accurate outcomes—and aren’t generally tied to equal satisfaction.
That said, satisfaction depends on context:
- If the decision is low-stakes or routine, speed can be efficient without major downsides.
- For moderate to high-stakes decisions, taking time generally improves both outcome and satisfaction—unless overwhelmed by too many choices, which can backfire.
Interestingly, being a "
satisficer" (settling for “good enough”) rather than a "
maximizer" (trying for the optimal) tends to lead to greater satisfaction and less regret—especially in crowded choice environments. (
Wikipedia)
