Abstract Decision‐making literature establishes that maximizers, who always strive for the best option, paradoxically experience lower wellbeing. The current study aims to discover the conditions that attenuate or exacerbate the detrimental effect of maximization on wellbeing by using a large‐scale meta‐analysis based on 683 effect sizes from 108 papers, spanning 47,245 unique respondents. We develop a conceptual framework for the literature and classify potential moderators of the maximization‐wellbeing relationship along two dimensions: (i) whether they enable the decision‐maker to focus on the choice process or the choice outcome, and (ii) the extent to which they contribute to choice complexity, expecting that process (vs. outcome) focus and less complex choices can assuage maximizers’ wellbeing deficit. Our meta‐analysis supports our expectations for all the choice focus moderators, but not for all the choice complexity moderators. Alongside theoretical and practical implications, we offer a framework to guide future research that should uncover when choice complexity moderators most accurately explain the wellbeing of maximizers.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 20 citations exist upstream.