Decision paralysis: Gerd Gigerenzer on choosing good enough

Decision paralysis is going round a choice in the hope that one more round will make you sure. It rarely does. To get out, write the one or two things the choice has to get right, take the first option that meets them, match your alarm to whether the choice can be undone, and set a date. Ask one person once, decide on the day, and close it.

Gigerenzer is a psychologist who studies how people decide with simple rules of thumb. On Terra Xplore, a science channel of the German public broadcaster ZDF, the host Lisa Budzinski, a self-described long deliberator, asked him how he handles decisions (Terra Xplore, 5:05). His answer was that years of research had taught him to decide faster: "selbst Entscheidungen schneller zu treffen" (to make decisions faster myself). Faster doesn't mean careless. You inform yourself, he said, "aber dann gibt es einen Punkt, wo man weiß, jetzt kommt nicht mehr viel Information dazu" (but then there's a point where you know not much more information is coming). Then you need "den Mut haben, zu sagen: Ja, ich nehme die Option" (the courage to say: yes, I'll take that option).

Below: why more thinking doesn't settle a decision, how to choose good enough, and how to close the choice once it's made.

Why doesn't more thinking settle it?

1. Every round feels like progress

Going round a choice feels like getting closer to sure. Research on confidence suggests that, for some people, it works the other way. Sucharit Katyal and Stephen Fleming pooled four online experiments with 1,447 adults, who made simple judgments, such as which of two colors appeared more often, and then rated how sure they were. The more anxious participants grew less confident the longer they spent judging their own answers (Katyal & Fleming, 2026). These were lab judgments, not life decisions, and it's a link, not proof that worry caused it.

Writing about the study, Katyal drew a practical lesson: confidence depends on how you think more than on how long. If you tend to worry, thinking more isn't always better, Katyal wrote, and clear decision rules can keep doubt from spiraling (The Conversation Brasil). The steps below are rules of that kind.

2. Hunting for the best option keeps it open

Gigerenzer separates two ways of deciding (10:14). "Maximieren bedeutet, das Beste zu finden" (maximizing means finding the best), and nothing less. In his view, "das ist ein Rezept zum Unglücklichwerden" (that's a recipe for unhappiness), and for not deciding at all. His example: you want a pair of trousers, so you try one department store, then think there might be something better in the next, then a boutique, then another, until the shops close and you buy something. And you still don't know if you have the best (10:34).

The psychologist Barry Schwartz and colleagues measured that tendency. In seven samples of students and adults, 1,747 people in all, those who scored higher on always seeking the best option reported more regret and less happiness and life satisfaction (Schwartz et al., 2002). These were questionnaires at one point in time, so it's a link, not a cause. Schwartz later built the idea into his book The Paradox of Choice.

3. The real fear is the mistake

Why is choosing so hard? Gigerenzer's answer on the show: deciding means taking responsibility, and in the areas that matter (a partner, a job) you can get it wrong, and you only find out afterwards (6:04). That fear stops many people from deciding at all. His remedy is unglamorous: a bit of courage to make mistakes, since we make them all the time, and to learn from them (6:46).

More time going over a choice doesn't reliably buy more certainty. A rule does more.

How to choose good enough

4. Write the one or two things this choice has to get right

Later in the episode, Budzinski tries it on a real decision: choosing an espresso machine (12:21). Gigerenzer's first question is what the most important features are. Budzinski names three: not too big, not too expensive, and it has to froth milk (12:40). When colors and round versus square start to distract, he asks whether shape matters for this choice. It doesn't, so it's out (13:21).

Here's what that looks like in practice. On one page, write the one or two things this choice has to get right. Maybe cost and the commute, or time with your kids and your sleep. Whatever is truly yours. Everything else is a tiebreaker at most. From now on, those lines are the test.

5. Take the first option that meets them

The alternative to maximizing, Gigerenzer says, is what researchers call satisficing: "etwas zu finden, was gut genug ist" (finding something that's good enough, 10:57). His restaurant example (11:09): he decides on fish tonight and starts reading from the top. Salmon? He had that recently. Shrimp with avocado? That's good, so he takes it. He adds that for many people that's unbearable, because something better might come along (11:16).

Take the first option that passes your test. If two pass, either is fine, so pick one. That's the point of the test: it lets you stop.

6. Match the alarm to what can be undone

Not every choice deserves the same weight. On the Argentine podcast Psicología al Desnudo, the psychologists of Psi Mammoliti put it this way: the trouble starts when fear fires just as hard at decisions you can reverse (12:20). The trap is "poner el mismo nivel de alarma en todo" (putting the same level of alarm on everything, 12:50). The fix "no implica pensar más" (doesn't mean thinking more); it means "darle el peso que tiene cada decisión" (giving each decision the weight it actually has, 13:02). One question helps: "¿esto me va a importar dentro de un año o dentro de cinco?" (will this matter to me in a year, or in five? 15:26)

A choice you can undo can be made faster. But don't keep every door open on purpose. In a 2002 Harvard study, about two thirds of 89 students said they'd prefer a version of the study where they could change their choice later. Yet in a small photography class, students whose choice of print was final came to like it more than those who could still swap (Gilbert & Ebert, 2002). People wanted the open door, and the closed one sat better.

7. Set a date, and plan for the likely outcomes

Next, pick the day you'll decide by and write it on your page. Within two weeks is a good starting point for most everyday choices. Until then, give the choice a set time each day, such as a short slot in the early evening (worry time shows how), instead of letting it run all day.

When "what if it goes wrong?" takes over, plan for the likely outcomes only. Kirsty Ross, a clinical psychologist at Massey University in New Zealand, notes that planning for every possibility has "limited usefulness"; more helpful is "to make a plan for one or two of the more likely possibilities" and accept that some things may happen you haven't thought of (The Conversation). Our guide on how to stop worrying about the future goes further on the what-ifs.

Decide, and close it

8. Ask one person, once

When a choice stays open, it's tempting to ask everyone. Each new opinion adds an angle, and the circle starts again. The Italian psychologist Luca Mazzucchelli suggests the opposite: "smettere di fare interminabili sondaggi tra gli amici" (stop running endless polls among your friends, 1:07). Asking everyone, Mazzucchelli says, disconnects you from your own needs (1:23).

So ask one person who knows you and doesn't need you to choose their way. Tell them your one or two things, listen, thank them, and stop asking. No one to ask? Write what a good friend would tell you. You usually know.

9. Decide on the day, then close it

On your date, choose with your test. Psi Mammoliti's line is worth keeping: "Decidir no termina cuando lo pienso, termina cuando lo hago" (deciding doesn't end when I think it through; it ends when I act on it, 15:48). By that point, "ya no falta más información, falta movimiento" (it isn't more information that's missing, it's movement, 16:07).

Then close it. Closed means a new mood or an old doubt doesn't reopen it; only a new fact does. If a doubt shows up the week after, ask whether it's new or the same worry in a new coat. The French psychiatrist Christophe André offers a way to make peace with that: "si j'hésite, c'est qu'il n'y a pas de bon ou de mauvais choix, mais juste des options différentes" (if I'm hesitating, it's because there's no right or wrong choice, just different options), on France Culture (Les regrets, 2:08). Take time to think and ask, André says, then decide once and for all (2:36). Mazzucchelli's version is lighter: if it turns out wrong, "ottimo, hai imparato qualcosa" (great, you've learned something, 2:15). If you find yourself replaying the choice afterward, see replaying conversations in your head.

Back to the espresso machine

By the end of the episode, Budzinski had bought the machine and felt relieved. Part of what made it easy, the host admitted, was being able to send it back. Gigerenzer's reply is the heart of the approach: you shouldn't decide with one eye on undoing it; you make a decision and stand by it (14:21). If perfectionism is what keeps your choices open, our guide to perfectionism and procrastination may help too. Then pick one open choice and write its two things today.

This is wellness guidance about everyday worry and overthinking, not health care. It doesn't give medical advice, and it doesn't diagnose or treat anything. It isn't for anxiety disorders, panic, OCD, trauma or depression. If worry doesn't ease, or it starts causing problems at work, at home or with friends and family, see a doctor. See one too if what you're trying isn't helping.

To build this around a choice of your own, try the 1h Protocol to Reduce Worry and Overthinking, a program of practical education for adults. Its free first chapter finds which of five common loops yours follows (the Open Decision is one), shows the three parts that keep it going, and gives you one first step: your two things and a date. The full program takes about an hour: you catch one worry of your own and park it with one next step, set a short daily slot at your own time and place, and plan for the moment you're awake and it won't stop. For a choice that stays open, it adds your test, your date, one person to ask and a close. You leave with a page of the changes you chose, a card with your slot and three questions to ask when a worry starts, and a fourteen-day log with a day-7 question and a day-14 review in your calendar. If you're signed in, four one-tap check-ins follow by email on days 1, 7, 14 and 30. Start free

Frequently asked questions

Why can't I make a decision?

Often because going round the choice feels like getting closer to sure, so you keep going. In an online study of 1,447 adults, more anxious people grew less confident the longer they spent judging their own answers (Katyal & Fleming, 2026). Hunting for the very best option and fearing the mistake keep the loop going too.

What is analysis paralysis?

It's getting stuck weighing options without choosing, because there's always one more factor or one more option to check. Gigerenzer's way out: pick the one or two things that matter, and take the first option that meets them (Terra Xplore, 10:57).

How do I stop overthinking a big decision?

Give it edges. Write the one or two things it has to get right, set a date to decide, and give it a set time each day until then. Plan for the one or two likely outcomes, ask one person once, and on the day, decide and close it. Big choices deserve care, and a date keeps care from turning into a loop.

What does "good enough" mean in decisions?

It means choosing the first option that meets the standards you set, instead of searching for the best one. Researchers call it satisficing. In studies of more than 1,700 people, those who always sought the best option tended to report more regret (Schwartz et al., 2002).

What if I make the wrong choice?

You may, and no method can promise otherwise. Gigerenzer's advice is a bit of courage to make mistakes and to learn from them (6:46). If a new fact appears, reopen the choice; a new doubt alone doesn't count. If you keep replaying it, see how to stop overthinking.

Sources

This article draws on Prof. Gerd Gigerenzer's interview on Terra Xplore, on Psi Mammoliti, Luca Mazzucchelli, Christophe André and Kirsty Ross, and on the studies listed below. Quotes in German, Spanish, Italian and French are given in the original with our English gloss.

• FOBO: Was tun gegen die Angst vor einer falschen Entscheidung? (video, Lisa Budzinski with Gerd Gigerenzer, Terra Xplore, ZDF, German, 2025)
• Katyal & Fleming, Gender and anxiety reveal distinct computational sources of underconfidence (pooled analysis of four online experiments, 1,447 adults, 2026)
• Sucharit Katyal, Refletir sobre decisões pode aumentar ou diminuir confiança (researcher article, The Conversation Brasil, Portuguese, 2026)
• Schwartz et al, Maximizing versus satisficing: happiness is a matter of choice (questionnaire studies, seven samples, 1,747 students and adults, 2002)
• Barry Schwartz, The Paradox of Choice (book, 2004)
• Gilbert & Ebert, Decisions and revisions (experiments with Harvard students, 2002)
• Tomar decisiones y vencer la incertidumbre (podcast episode, Psi Mammoliti, Psicología al Desnudo, Spanish, 2026)
• Kirsty Ross, How can I stop overthinking everything? (expert article, The Conversation, 2024)
• Luca Mazzucchelli, Indecisione: come decidere ciò che è giusto per te (video, Italian, 2017)
• Christophe André, Les regrets (radio chronicle, France Culture, French, 2017)