Mathematical model suggests aiming for above average yields best outcomes
The Story
A mathematical model developed by researchers suggests that aiming for merely above average, rather than setting extremely high ambitions, tends to produce the best outcomes in various life scenarios. The work was described in the journal Physical Review E and reported by The Guardian on May 29, 2026. The model was created after earlier research found that fisheries performed best when boats stopped searching once they reached higher-than-average catches. In the model, agents represent people searching for a reward, rejecting offers below their threshold and accepting those that clear it. The researchers found that optimal satisfaction came from setting the bar above average, but not excessively so, and that being overly ambitious led to worse outcomes than being underambitious by the same margin. The authors acknowledge that real life is more complex than the model, and one researcher hesitated to quantify relationships in that way. The findings also highlight the danger of judging success based on distorted views from social media highlights.
Key Facts
- The model was created by researchers including Matt Burgess (University of Wyoming), Kath Landgren (Stanford University), and Ryan Langendorf (University of Colorado Boulder).
- The model explores thresholds for satisfaction in situations such as salary negotiation, flat rental, parking spots, and dating.
- When agents were overambitious (threshold far above the mean reward), they fared worse on average than underambitious agents.
- It paid to be more ambitious when rewards were erratic, such as in a housing market with extremes, or to avoid a deep recession while aiming for a boom.
- Agents with a distorted view of the world (based on social media highlights) became chronically dissatisfied and missed achievable rewards.
- Peter Ayton, director of the Centre for Decision Research at Leeds University Business School, said the model provided thought-provoking insight despite being simpler than real decisions.
- The late Norman Vincent Peale, a promoter of positive thinking, is cited for the advice to “shoot for the moon,” which the model suggests needs tweaking.
Conflicting Reports
No conflicting reports identified in the source article.
Still Unclear
How well the mathematical model applies to complex real-life decisions, such as dating, remains uncertain, as the authors acknowledge real life is more complex.
Misconceptions
No widespread misconceptions addressed in the source article.
Key Figures
- Matt Burgess – economist at the University of Wyoming
- Kath Landgren – postdoctoral fellow at Stanford University
- Ryan Langendorf – theoretical ecologist at the University of Colorado Boulder
- Peter Ayton – director of the Centre for Decision Research at Leeds University Business School
- Norman Vincent Peale – late US clergyman and promoter of positive thinking (mentioned)
Sources: The Guardian
