In this week’s edition of Pop Psychology, I want to highlight T.I.’s club anthem “Whatever You Like.” Aside from being a worthy chart-topper, the Atlanta rapper’s track highlights one of our culture’s biggest myths: that more choice is a good thing. While the idea that more choices are always the best alternative seems intuitively true, recent research has illustrated a beautiful irony - the more choices we have, the less likely we are to choose anything.
One of the most reliable forms of marketing today is to shower consumers with choices, as advertisers assume that more options leads to more satisfied customers. In fact, such relentless variety can even become a brand’s trademark, like the 57 different types of Heinz products or the 31 flavors at Baskin-Robbins. And although T.I. is not necessarily selling a product (but I’m sure Patron loves the free advertising), it’s clear from “Whatever You Like” that the soon-to-be jailed lyricist has a similar mindset when it comes to the power of options. In the song, T.I. proudly gives his current love interest free reign to get whatever her heart desires, as the chorus promises:
Stacks on deck
Patron on ice
And we can pop bottles all night
Baby you can have whatever you like
I said you can have whatever you like
Unfortunately, there is plenty of research that illustrates how more choice is actually detrimental to consumers. Perhaps the best example comes from a 2000 paper by Sheena Iyengar and Mark Lepper. In their study, the authors (or more likely their underpaid undergraduate research assistants) set up a tasting booth for various jellies at a supermarket. Sometimes, the booth would only have six jellies (the limited-choice condition); other times, there would be a whopping 24 jellies (the extensive-choice condition). The researchers tracked how likely people were to approach the table as well as how often these consumers actually bought a product.
At first, Iyengar and Lepper's results seem to validate the current “choice is better” advertising model, as customers were much more likely to approach a table with 24 options than a table with only six. However, there were no differences between groups in terms of the total jellies sampled. In other words, it didn’t really matter if a shopper saw six or 24 products, as everyone only tasted around 1.5 jellies. As a result, those shoppers with 24 jellies to choose from did not gain a more thorough knowledge of the product. More choices do not lead to more tasting— just more products you could have tasted.
Even more striking is the data concerning whether or not shoppers actually bought a jar of jelly (all of which were being sold at a discount). 30% of the customers sampling six jellies actually bought a jar, as compared to only 4% of the customers who approached a table with 24 jellies. Paradoxically, more choices resulted in less purchases. The data suggest that the more options you have, the less likely you are to actually make a decision. The authors conclude that “an extensive array of options can at first seem highly appealing to consumers, yet can reduce their subsequent motivation to purchase the product.”
Unfortunately, this message is clearly lost on T.I., who revels in the choices that his wealth affords him, bragging:
My chick can have what she want
And go in any store for any bag she want
And know she ain't never had a man like that
To buy you anything your heart desire like that
Sure, T.I.'s woman can buy whatever she likes, but that means she probably won't. The lesson to be learned is unlimited choices is not exactly a good thing. As Swarthmore psychology professor Barry Schwartz writes, “the fact that some choice is good doesn’t necessarily mean that more choice is better.” What's true for marketers is also true for T.I.: when it comes to relevant psychological research, it's clear they don't know all about that.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.