Today's #1 Dating Problem: Love Maximization

Are you always looking around for something better: a better job, a better apartment... a better relationship?

For example, let's say you've finally found a pretty great love catch. Do you still find yourself tempted to keep going back to that large online dating ocean, in hopes of finding an even bigger, better, more 100% perfect catch?

If so, your search for the better might be making your life worse.

And that's not just my opinion--that's the opinion of Barry Schwartz, Ph.D., psychology professor at Swarthmore College, and author of The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less. After extensive research, Schwartz has concluded that excess proliferation of choice makes people more anxious and less happy--even clinically depressed at times. Schwartz defines people who tend to check out all the options as "maximizers" and believes they tend to question whether they've made the right choice, then later regret their choices.

Unfortunately, in today's online world, it's very easy to become a "love maximizer" with the tempting smorgasbord of dating choices constantly available. With so much choice, it's so easy to fall into the temptation of seeking an "upgrade"--even when your sweetie is total sweetie! Or you can wind up with "choice paralysis" and not be able to get into a relationship at all.

How does this happen? Schwartz cites a study with shoppers. Group #1 was offered free samples of six different jams. Group #2 was offered free samples of 24 jams. Afterwards, Group #1 was more likely to buy a jam than Group #2. This result doesn't seem logical. You'd guess that people would be more likely to find a jam when given a range four times as large. But the overabundance of choice seemed to freeze shoppers' decision-making skills.

Unfortunately, this same "brain freeze" affect can happen to daters when shopping for partners in that endless online parade of possibilities. "It's a satisfaction treadmill," says Schwartz. "The more options we have available, the more we think that another option out there is perfect."

The truth according to me? Rarely is anyone or anything perfect. And so the #1 biggest problem with choice is... well, it's really an illusion. Up-close and personal, all of that choice is not always grade-A material.

Here's another study I came across during the past few months and found intriguing. The research found that people exposed to a few minutes' worth of advertising, with its endless parade of nubile women and improbably handsome men, were likely to experience far greater discontent with their partner after viewing. Translation: Love is blindsided by too much choice. A good relationship can be totally destroyed by the blazing promise of better options... that don't really exist in the first place!

So what's the cure for this situation that makes us throw over budding relationships because we believe the grass is always greener?

1. Recognize that being a "love maximizer" actually minimizes your chances of finding a healthy, happy relationship.

2. Realize that you luckily have a choice in how you view choice! Next time you're tempted to two-time, think twice! Remind yourself that those many, many people who look so good from faraway look very different when viewed close up--when you can more clearly see their many, many flaws.

3. Accept that no one person is ever going to have every single thing you need. The goal is to find the person who has the most important things you need. Make a list of your top 3 dating deal-breakers and your top 3 partner must-have's. If your current special someone passes this 6-pack test, as I call it, you've got the basis of a very happy relationship--one not worth messing up with "maximizing" ways.

4. Once a week, spend a night luxuriating in your partner's 3 fantastic must-have's--and let it be known how much you appreciate him or her. Soon you'll turn yourself into a love energizer, instead of a love maximizer! And that's a terrific place to be.

For more advice on how to boost your happiness, check out HOW TO BE HAPPY DAMMIT or sign up for Karen's free Be Happy Dammit newsletter at notsalmon.com.

Comments

[Jessegirl]

You have to accept that butterflies will eventually fade no matter who your with. When this happens, it doesn't mean the love is gone, but rather it's at the next step forward. Some people are so fixated on those damn butterflies though. And remember : careful what you wish for.

[nastyvirus]

In other words, people get bored. Everybody's the same, and they're looking for someone different.

Someone who collects butterflies.

I don't. I simply smash the bugs.

[WIpatriot]

Gateway emotions to killing bigger things...watch out, can Iraq be far ahead for you?

[midwestvoter]

I just ended a relationship with a man that suffers from this condition. We seemed to have it all, amazing chemistry, insync sense of humor, work ethic, family values even an obsessive compulsion for cleanliness. When we were alone, life could not be better. But once we were in public, he had a roaming eye that was almost cartoonish. I finally had to let him go, telling him I deserved someone who was satisfied with just me. He is now calling and emailing again but I've moved on. He had a chance and was willing to risk it for something better and from the frequency of his calls and emails, he struck out. I am no one's consolation prize. :(

[Horus45]

When making a choice for a partner ALWAYS remember... Once a Cheater, Always a Cheater!

This goes for BOTH men and women.

So, if you fall in love with someone who is married and they cheated on their spouse to be with you, you can pretty much bet on the chances that the cheater will also CHEAT ON YOU!

These cheating types will never change and you are a FOOL if you think they will change for you!

[wmbear]

"LOVE MAXIMIZATION" -- WHAT AN ATROCIOUS PHRASE...

About on a par with the idea that more choices are bad. Where were these people taught to think? (Or, rather, not to think?...)

[harrync]

The article did not say "more choices are bad" in the sense of "more choices are Always bad". In the case of the jam choices, it said 24 choices are "worse" than six choices. My guess is that if they had compared one choice to six choices, six choices would have been "better" [in the sense of producing more sales.] And I doubt if the researchers would have been surprised by this. I think the correct statement of the thesis would be along the lines of "More choices are good up to a point, but at some point, additional choices actually inhibit beneficial action". In the case of jam, that point where beneficial action is inhibited is somewhere between six and 24 choices. Likewise, having 100 potential dates to choose from is probably better than having only 10 choices - but is trying to pick from the whole internet [10 million choices?] better than 100?

[dadw5boys]

Most women are always looking for the BBD. (BIGGER BETTER DEAL)

How can anyone care for someone who is always on the lookout for something better?

[shaunmarie]

Funny - I was just thinking the same thing about men.

[Beowolf741]

Well then it is clear both sexes can be guilty of doing it. NO monopoly on bad habits here.

[iambusto]

"People are as faithful as their options"

- Anonymous

[Weathermaker]

Chris Rock said this. I don't know if he was the first though...

[kegbot1]

This article hit home with me. This is me. I'm keeping this article saved to remind me of which attitudes to avoid.

[ChiMan1]

Things Will Be Looking Up!!! as soon as BHO gets elected, we won't have time to worry about this Love stuff, will will just be waiting for our next bowl of rice to be dispensed by some elitist government loyalist who will discern wheather we are deserving enough or not, you see Love takes a Back Seat to Hunger. Fool On! Wayne . .. Luv Ya!

[Horus45]

Cripes, can't you people EVER comment on an article without bringing politics into it?

Get a life you worthless partisan!

[ChristianEcon.com]

You're right--it happened in the 90's with Clinton; it's just going to happen again with Obama. Liberals!

[vmonter]

Why do they say that women in ads don't exist?

They're not animations. They're actual women.

So, they do exist.

And maybe men want to find them.

[livesimply]

Some BOYS want to chase fantasies. The "women" in ads are often teenagers or seriously thin, overly made-up models in their 20's. No doubt some are very nice and some are seriously messed up. Men do not look for the Madison Avenue "perfect" creation of a woman. They look for a human being to communicate and grow with...and, yes, that they are attracted to.

[davidwilton]

Marriage is a contract of possession and limitation. When we realize that, the prospect of partnership and relationships is no longer about maximization, but rather about appreciating everyone on their own terms.

[Dogma]

One man's possession is another man's commitment.

One man's limitation is another man's liberty.

You sound like someone who shouldn't get married. I agree with you, though; we should be appreciating everyone on their own terms, regardless if we are married to them or not.

[timeforachangenow]

"Marriage is a contract of possession and limitation"

not sure about you but I didn't sign a "contract" when I got married....8(

I signed a paper that represented a committment...8)

if you every think you "own" the other person then all is lost....8(

Marriage is not about ownership...it is about sharing a committment to each other...8)

me thinks it may be time for some remedial training...8)

[davidwilton]

Marriage may also be about commitment. That doesn't exclude or include the aspect of limitation. I think it is also still very much about possession, which doesn't necessarily imply broad control over one's partner (which could be of either sex, or the same sex). It could be more limited control that is unnecessarily constraining. Probably at this point, most people make marriage whatever they want. But the formal contract, recognized in law, is still old school. My comment is admittedly simplistic and can't explain the concept I'm trying to encapsulate.

[Guynemer]

I don't know what country you're from, but in the good 'ol USA marriage is a contract of choice.

[mabinog]

I don't buy that anymore. There has always been an aspect of possession to marriage and more so in during certain parts of history. While your feminist rhetoric makes a point and there is still plenty of people who consider marriage a contract of possession (see any number of fundie religionists and/or psychopathic control freaks) a lot of marriage are not about that at all.

[zann]

I agree with davidwilton, and I don't see any feminist rhetoric. At its foundation, marriage means you share the other's worldly goods, and have claim to their time and care in sickness and health. The "limitation" is not simply "forsaking all others", your partner's personal limitations hold you back too. This seems to dawn on people in the seventh year when all the good new mutual enrichment is taken for granted. Each realizes or imagines ways the other will hold them back.

[Delphine]

Well, hell, I only WISH I had several beaus to choose from. ONE man sitting across from me at dinner, ONE man - that's all I want. I can't even find that, and I'm no slouch in the looks, brains, or sense of humor department. Maybe it's this damn shallow commuter city I live in?

I don't know. I only know I wouldn't throw over the right guy for a "righter" guy.

If only I could find the right guy . . .

People who are married to their sweetheart don't get it. You are LUCKY you found him or her, you aren't more special or more beautiful, it wasn't some karmic unspoken thing you have that others don't, it's not that I don't think I deserve it or I want it too much or I'm too picky. It's that you were lucky enough to run into your soul mate, and the two of you work together to keep it alive. Puhleeze married/attached people, don't presume to educate the rest of us.

Someone actually said "Well, you need to find out why you need a partner" and my (unspoken) response was "Well, what was fucked up about you that you needed to get married?" I'd like a partner because I'm human. It's not because I'm broken in some way.

Anyway, yeah, I don't have a gaggle of guys to pick from, so those of you who ARE leaving good partners for greener grass - cut it the eff out.

[twogunmojo]

i have two full time women in my life...one is my wife and one is an old girlfriend from 15 years ago,,,both of them are perfectly happy with the relationship and they are both friends...but we do not engage in threesomes....i simply have two love relationships with two different women for different reasons...the trick is to love everybody the same....there can be no room for jealousy...i don't say this type of relationship is right for everyone but it is right for us

[timeforachangenow]

how do you keep your energy up???

Wheaties in the morning...8)

[brooklyncitizen]

eyes rolling

[RadioResearch]

Actualy, Delphine, I am one who appreciates the fact that so many guys leave good partners for greener grass because I find that their "discards" are usually the best women to be with anyway. So I prefer that they just keep it up and throw them off because once a woman figures out that she has never truly been appreciated she then learns to respond to real appreciation rather than superficial nonsense.

My ex of ten years "upgraded" to a man of considerable income as a result of her socioeconomic class orientation and economic security. They have a rather bland relationship and she has lamented to me that she gave up the best relationship or rather the first "real" relationship of her life. True love and soul mates don't always make it in the relationship game. Other factors often play a bigger role. Many people, especially women it seems, have a need for the security of marriage and other such institutions and thus feel that everyone should share in their insecurities. That's why they give us "advice."

[Delphine]

I think you're right. The people who give me "advice" aren't necessarily that chipper about their own marriages. In any event, I've been married, and I've been single, and I've (until now) been happier being single. I take care of myself, which means I can make choices without worrying about who is going to support me.

And therefore I don't have to marry for "security". In fact, I don't know that I want to get married again at all. But a companion (other than my dog) would be fantastic.

[ouroborous]

Lots of truth here...

Don't worry so much about marriage, or even "forever." Just be with someone who makes you happy, right now. Even THAT is hard to figure out sometimes, but when you find it, stick with it, and don't be afraid of the fact that it, too, will change.

Can't seem to make sense tonight. *sigh*

[Dogma]

You're a funny woman, Delphine. And you have a beautiful name. I looked a very long time for that combination until I met my now wife"Charlotte. Thank you for reminding me how lucky I am.

And don't fret, your number will come up soon...

[brooklyncitizen]

well being so focused on it may be pushing it away- but i can't give advice on this subject...lol
(still think it's too bad that we women are socialize to place so much weight on pairing up)

I love being single, and having my freedom and living my life on my own terms...all I can say is that for the coupledom to be worth it it has to be REALLY GOOD...there is no greater source of misery than being with the wrong person...but when you are single you date, you have companionship and you have friends...its a good deal....and i don't understand the motivation for seeking out someone for financial reasons...I'm totaling lacking the gold digging gene.

[ouroborous]

There's nothing wrong with wanting a partner.

It's when you need a partner that things get out of whack. I know that that will never come across the wire correctly, and I apologize in advance. But what I mean is that there is something about being able to let go that is special.

I've only been able to be happy once I've been willing to let whoever is my partner go. Oddly, that seems to strengthen my relationships.

[AgentMacGyver]

Does this apply to Hugh Hefner?

[anfractuous]

The same forces that convince you there's always a better other awaiting, lead you to believe there's also always a better YOU up ahead . So adding to the anxiety that the person you're with is not optimal, there's the ever present fear that you haven't lived up to your potential and are a failure. This places you in a double bind, since you aspire for someone better, but might not even deserve the one you're with.

[bigpaws23]

DEVO was right all along.

Don't get it? Try wikipedia.

[Delphine]

Ya know, that was a Stones song long before Devo covered it.

[bigpaws23]

Freedom of choice - is what you got
Freedom from choice - what you want!

[rbryanh]

Then again, perhaps the biggest barrier to enduring, satisfying relationships in our culture is exemplified by this article, which, like the "10,000 Beautiful Latin Women for Dating" ad HuffPost has parasitically attached to it, seems to regard them as the result of discriminating shopping.

Good relationships are something we create, not find. They're the product of honesty, loyalty, integrity, the will to follow through on commitments, the ability to keep a promise, flexibility, and the willingness to compromise.

If you want pleasure, hire a talented sex worker. If you need status, buy an expensive car. If happiness is your goal, get a nice dog. If you want equal parts satisfaction, boredom, and angst, work at at an intimate relationship.

[capitalismisntamoral]

'equal parts satisfaction, boredom, and angst ..."

hmm only 1/3 satisfaction, the other 2/3 are lousy.
gee, I'm glad I'm single.

Now if it was equal parts comfort, pleasure, satisfaction, and challenge.
That I could do.