Learn to Be Happier with Second Best

When your first choice is unavailable, you may be more satisfied with something completely different 

Alain Schroeder Getty Images

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

You can't always get what you want—the car is too expensive, the restaurant already full, your favorite snack sold out—but you can do your best to choose the next most appealing option. Research suggests that when making that second choice, you might end up happier if you go for something very different from what you originally wanted.

In a series of studies published in May in Psychological Science, researchers probed participants' preferences by tempting them with gourmet chocolate. The scientists let subjects taste the fancy brand and then offered them a choice between a similar substitute (store-brand chocolate-covered peanuts) and a radically different substitute (a granola bar). Another set of participants got the same setup, but they were allowed to try both options before choosing. In the first experiment, 73 percent chose the generic chocolate, but in the second experiment, only 52 percent did—more participants presumably had realized they would be happier with the granola bar.

In an additional experiment, participants were assigned to eat some gourmet chocolate or a bite of either substitute, and then they were asked how much they still craved the original fancy chocolate. Those who ate the store-brand chocolate ended up craving the gourmet version more than those who ate the granola bar. In fact, those who ate the granola bar craved the gourmet chocolate no more than those who ate the fancy chocolate itself.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The fact that the similar substitute was less satisfying and left a stronger residual craving suggests the existence of a “negative contrast effect,” according to the researchers. “A poor replacement is worse in terms of ultimate satisfaction than something completely different that serves the same purpose,” explains Carey K. Morewedge, an associate professor of marketing at the Boston University School of Management and senior author of the study.

The finding is useful for people on restricted diets. Yet researchers also think this psychological phenomenon probably applies to a lot more than just food. The next time you find yourself in a situation where the thing you really want is not available, try a wildly different option and enjoy it without a second thought.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe