How We Decide

loss aversion, which we discussed earlier. The effect helps explain why people are much more likely to buy meat when it's labeled 85 percent lean instead of 15 percent fat.

Mischel's results were very surprising, at least to him. There was a strong correlation between the behavior of the four-year-old waiting for a marshmallow and that child's future behavior as a young adult. The children who rang the bell within a minute were much more likely to have behavioral problems later on. They got worse grades and were more

orbitofrontal cortex,

At first glance, it seems strange to think of psychopaths as decision-makers.

The anchoring effect demonstrates how a single additional fact can systematically distort the reasoning process.

Mistakes aren't things to be discouraged. On the contrary, they should be cultivated and carefully investigated.

Choking is merely a vivid example of the havoc that can be caused by too much thought. It's an illustration of rationality gone awry, of what happens when we rely on the wrong brain areas. For opera singers and golf players, such deliberate thought processes interfere with the trained movements of their muscles, so that their own bodies betray them

the €100,000 offer, but at least you won't leave empty-handed. The upshot of all this is that you badly miscalculate the risk. You keep on chasing after the possibility of a big gain because you can't accept the prospect of a loss. Your emotions have sabotaged common sense. Loss aversion is an innate flaw. Everyone who experiences emotion is vulner

The only people who are immune to this mistake are neurologically impaired patients who can't feel any emotion at all. In most situations, these people have very damaged decision-making abilities. And yet, because they don't feel the extra sting of loss, they are able to avoid the costly emotional errors brought on by loss aversion. Consider this e