雪娜·易嘉：选择的艺术Sheena_Iyengar_on_the_art_of_choosing

关于这场演讲
雪娜·易嘉致力于研究人类如何做出选择—以及后续感受。

在TED的讲台上，她举例畅谈不同的选择，从琐碎的（可口可乐与百事可乐）到重大的。

她突破性的研究成果帮我们揭示了有关抉择的种种惊人观念。

About this talk
Sheena Iyengar studies how we make choices -- and how we feel about the choices we make. At TEDGlobal, she talks about both trivial choices (Coke v. Pepsi) and profound ones, and shares her groundbreaking research that has uncovered some surprising attitudes about our decisions.
关于雪娜·易嘉
雪娜·易嘉研究人类如何做出选择（以及人类何以自信能做出对的选择）。

About Sheena Iyengar
Sheena Iyengar studies how people choose (and what makes us think we're good at it).
演讲稿
今天我将带领大家畅游世界18分钟。

我的研究所设在美国，不过让我们从地球的另一端，日本的京都启程。

十五年前，我曾住在那里一户日本人家，从事学术研究。

虽然之前我就想到会遇到文化冲突甚至误会，然而现实还是令我感到万般意外。

第一天，我走进一家餐馆，点了一杯加糖的绿茶。

愣了一会，服务生说，“绿茶里是不放糖的”。

我告诉他，“我知道，知道这个习惯，但是我想喝甜一点的茶”。

作为回应，他用更加客气的口吻，向我又解释了一遍，“人们是不往绿茶里放糖的”。

我告诉他，“我知道”，“日本人不往绿茶里放糖，但我就想往我的茶里放点糖”。

服务生对我的坚持感到吃惊。

他去请示经理了，很快，一场漫长的沟通开始了。

最终经理走到我的身边，对我说，“非常抱歉，我们店里没有糖”。

好吧，既然喝不到我喜欢的绿茶，我就点了杯咖啡。

这回，服务生迅速为我送上。

而在杯托里，好好躺着两块糖。

我没能享用到一杯香甜绿茶，并不是由简单的误会所导致的，这源于两种文化对于选择的理解有根本差异。

从美国人的视角来看，顾客付钱，并根据个人喜好提出合理的需求，就有权得到满足。

引用汉堡王的广告词，美国人的方式即“随己所愿”，原因正如星巴克所宣传的，“幸福自己选择”。

但是从日本人的观点来看，他们有责任帮助他人掩盖无知。

在这个事例中，他们努力帮助我这位无知的客人，以防我做出错误的决定。

简而言之，在日本文化中，我喝绿茶的方式是不对的，他们所作是在尽己所能帮我挽回面子。

在美国人看来，日本人的做法，无异于剥夺了我们的某种权力。

美国人认为，美国文化中的，选择权最好遵循人类先天普遍的欲望。

不幸的是，这一信念根植的假设，在很多国家以及文化中是不被认可的。

有时，在美国本土也站不住脚。

我想在此谈谈其中一些假设，以及与之有关的问题。

听我讲的同时，希望你们各自思考自己脑中的假设，想想你的成长背景是如何塑造这些观念的。

第一种假设：如果选择与你息息相关，那么必须自己拿主意，只有这样才能保证个人的喜好兴趣得到充分的考虑，而这恰恰是成功的关键。

在美国，选择主要由个人做出。

人人听从自己意愿，甚至不考虑别人的喜好或建议，我们称之为“忠于自我”。

那么这种选择方式对于个人，又有什么好处呢？马克·里颇和我做了一系列的研究，意图给出一个答案。

其中一项研究是在洛杉矶的日本城进行的，我们邀请七岁到九岁的英裔及亚裔美国孩子来协助研究。

我们将孩子们分成三组。

第一组孩子由史密斯小姐接见，给出了六大主题字迷游戏。

孩子们自己选择想完成的主题，还需自己决定用哪只马克笔作答。

第二组孩子进入实验室，来到同样的房间，面对同样的字谜。

但这一次，由史密斯小姐告诉他们要完成哪一组，以及要使用的马克笔。

接着，第三组进来了。

史密斯小姐告诉孩子们，他们的母亲已经选出了要完成的字谜以及使用的笔。

事实是，无论是史密斯小姐告知的，或是母亲告知的，被告知的内容与第一组完全相同。

然后者是自己选择的。

遵循这一流程，能确保三组孩子完成同样活动，因而得以对他们的表现进行比较。

实验操作上的，细小差异对孩子们的表现产生了巨大影响。

英裔美国孩子，自己进行选择，相比完成既定任务的孩子，他们完成量是后者2.5倍。

谁进行了选择并不重要，但凡任务是由其它人选定的，他们的表现都会受到影响。

事实上，当被告知母亲参与选择之后，有些孩子感到十分尴尬。

一个叫玛丽的女孩问道，“你们竟然问了我妈妈？”
与此形成反差的是，亚裔孩子当被告知是母亲的选择，他们表现的最好。

自己选择的孩子成绩次之，垫底的是那些完成史密斯小姐选择的孩子。

有一个叫川岛夏美的女孩，在活动结束临离开时走到史密斯小姐身边，拽着她的裙摆对她说，“您能告诉我妈妈，我照她说的做了吗？”那些来自移民家庭的第一代子女，深受他们父母选择方式的影响。

对他们来说，做出选择并非只是展现自我的途径，也是通过遵照他们信任和尊重之人的意思做出选择，建立社群和融洽的过程。

如果这些孩子有忠于自我的观念，对他们来说，自我，恐怕并非代表个体，而是一个集体的概念。

不论是取悦关键人物，还是满足自己的喜好，都可以为我们带来成就感。

或者，你会认为，个人的喜好的形成，也会受到其它特定个体偏好的影响。

自己选择表现最优的假设，仅当这些个体完全同他人隔离时才成立。

与此相对，当两个或两个以上个体，发现他们的选择和成效彼此密切关联时，他们更倾向于通过选择集体行为，来放大彼此的成就。

坚持独立自主的选择，无论是对于个人表现，还是成员关系都不利。

但这恰美国人所追求的典范行为。

在此观念下，相互依存的观念，以及个体易缪性便很容易被忽视，这让个体将选择看做是一种私人的、自我界定的行为。

在此种典范观念下成长的人，会觉得这种典范很是激励人心。

但是认为面对独自选择的施压，人人表现卓越的假设是错误的。

第二个假设，反映出美国人对于选择的观念，即方案越多，选择越优。

这一观念导致的结果是，目前沃尔玛已提供十万种不同的商品，亚马逊有两2700万册书籍，以及默契（交友网站）——多少来着——1500万的相亲人员资料。

按此逻辑，你肯定能在那找到意中人。

让
我们回到东欧，检验下这个假设。

我采访了那些曾经的共产主义国家居民，他们都经历过向民主的资本主义国家转变的过渡期。

最有趣的启示并非出自他们的回答，而是对于我的款待的反应。

我为前来参与访谈的客人准备了些饮料，可口可乐，健怡可乐，雪碧——确切的说有七种。

第一阶段的访谈是在俄罗斯进行的，其中一个参与者对于饮料的评论让我措手不及。

“无所谓，都是苏打水，都一样”。

这一观点着实令我吃惊。

打那之后我开始为所有的参与者提供这七种不同的苏打水，同时问他们，“这里有多少种选择？”无一例外，在他们眼里，这七种苏打水不过是一种选择。

要么是苏打，要么不是。

当我又多加了果汁和水后，选择增加到三种——果汁，水，苏打。

再想想顽固的美国人，不仅对饮料口味十分讲究，对不同品牌也是非常在意。

研究结果显示，其实很难区分可口可乐和百事的口味，当然我们都知道可口可乐才是正确的选择。

同其他国家的人相比，当今的美国人要面对更多的广告，更多的选择。

这些选择不仅代表着产品，同时也是个人身份的一种标签。

当自主选择与越多越好两种观念相结合，我们发现有么些人能分辨出事物的细微差别，从而做出不同选择。

但是对于东欧人来说，消费品的忽然增加，如同洪水猛兽。

他们还没来的及抗议自己无力承受，就已深陷洪流之中了。

当被问及“说起选择，你会想到哪些词汇以及形象”时，来自华沙的格力高尔斯说，“对我来说是恐惧，因为容易陷入两难的境地，我已经习惯了没有选择”。

来自基辅的鲍丁就新消费市场的感受说，“产品太多，根本不需要那么多东西”。

来自华沙调查机构的社会学家如是解释，“老一辈的人们经历了从物质匮乏到物质大大丰富的突变，没有机会学习该如何适应这一转变。

”一个叫托马斯的波兰年轻人说，“我不需要二十种口香糖来选。

我的意思不是说不需要选择，但是很多选择都没有必要。

”
事实上许多选择并没有太多不同，选择的价值就取决于，我们能感受到可选物之间差异的能力。

美国人一生都在学习如何“找不同”。

我们从小就接受这种训练，以至于相信这是一种与生俱来的能力。

事实上，虽然人类对于选择都有着基本的需求，我们对其看法却有着诸多不同。

当人们无法区分可选物的不同，或是候选太多要做太多的类比和比对时，选择的过程都会令人迷茫而沮丧。

非但没有作出好的选择，还被他们所压垮，有时甚至害怕再做选择。

选择不再提供机会，而是增加限制。

它不再是解放的象征，而成了令人窒息又毫无意义的琐事。

换言之，当选择蜂拥而至，人们没有做好准备时，选择权带来的结果可能适得其反。

其实不仅是其他国家的人们会感受到日益众多的选择带来的压力，美国人也渐渐发现，无尽的选择似乎只是说起来好听。

受限于生理、精神、情感，人类不可能做完所有的选择，甚至是在一间杂货铺里，更别提我们一生中所有的选择。

我所从事的一系列研究显示，当人们被予以十种以上选择时，他们往往表现更糟，无论这些选择关乎卫生保健、投资，还是其他什么关键领域。

尽管如此，很多人仍然认为，我们应该自己选择，且要尽量多的完成。

这样我们来看看第三个，也许是最有问题的一个假设，“永远不要拒绝选择”。

为了验证这一观点，让我们先回美国，再跨过大西洋区法国看看。

芝加哥城外，苏珊和丹尼尔·米切尔夫妇就快要有他们的第一个宝宝了。

他们甚至给孩子起好了名字，随祖母，叫芭芭拉。

当苏珊怀孕七个月时，她开始出现宫缩，因此被送进了急救室。

孩子通过破腹产顺利降生，却出现了大脑缺氧。

因为不能自己呼吸，她被戴上了呼吸器。

两天后，医生给出米切尔一家一个选择。

是要立即摘除呼吸器，这种情况下，她几个小时内就会死亡。

还是继续使用呼吸器，这种情况下，或许几天内会死亡。

如果
她有幸活了下来，也会进入永久性植物人状态，无法行走、交流、与人互动。

这家人作何选择？换做任何一个家长该怎么做？
西蒙娜·鲍蒂和克里斯蒂娜·奥法里，与我一同完成了这项研究。

我们对法国和美国的父母亲进行了采访，他们都曾经历过相同的悲剧。

在任何一种情况下，当呼吸器被移除，婴儿都会死，但是其中仍然有着巨大的差别。

在法国，是医生决定该不该以及何时该移除呼吸器。

而在美国，最终的决定权在父母手上。

我们很是好奇，这一操作差异会否影响到父母如何面对丧子之痛。

结论是肯定的。

甚至是一年之后，美国父母还就此事耿耿于怀。

相较之，法国父母则不然。

他们更倾向于说类似这样的话，“孩子和我们在一起的时间虽如此之短，却教会了我们许多。

他赋予我们看待人生的全新视角。

”
美国的家长则更可能说这样的话，“如果不是那样呢？”另一个家长抱怨，“我觉得他们就是故意折磨我，他们怎么能让我做这种事呢？”还有一位家长表示，“我觉得自己参与了执行了一起死刑。

”但是当这些美国家长被问及，是否愿意医生代他们做决定时，他们异口同声的表示“绝不”。

他们难以想象，要把决定权交由他人。

虽然做此决定让他们久久不能释怀，深陷内疚与愤怒之中，相当一部分人甚至罹患抑郁，他们无法接受放弃选择的权力。

因为这与他们所接受的教育，以及对选择权力和目的的信仰背道而驰。

乔安·蒂蒂安在她的文章《白色专辑》中写道，“我们自我选择，只为生存。

我们诠释见闻，做出抉择。

我们将现实世界破碎的画面，串成连续的故事情节，只有这样才能使我们真实经历的变幻莫测的情景定格。

”美国人的故事，美国梦的故事，都是基于一个认知，即选择地无限性。

这一点赋予我们自由、幸福、成功，它将世界带到我们手边，告诉我们，“你可以心想事成”。

这听起来棒极了。

因而不难理解，美国人为何不愿修正这一观念。

但当你仔细审视，会发现它的漏洞。

渐渐你发现同一个故事，有不同的版本。

美国人总是热衷传播他们自由选择的观念，坚信他们将会并且理应保持着开明坦诚的态度。

但是纵观古今，事实并非如此。

我们试图理解的现实生活中那些千变万化的情景，具有地域差异，没有哪个版本一通百通。

而且，如果美国人会因在其观念中加入新的视角，而有所裨益。

罗伯特·弗罗斯特（美国诗人）曾说，“诗意会在翻译中荡然无存”。

他是想要告诉我们，再美丽动人、富于启发的观点，也很难用其它语言表达。

但约瑟夫·布鲁德斯基（苏联诗人）却认为，“诗意乃翻译中获得的部分”。

他是想说翻译也是一个再创作的过程，是一项变革性的活动。

在翻译中面临抉择时，通过参考不同翻译版本的叙述手法，而非仅参考其中之一时，我们会收获更多感悟。

面多众多版本，我们大可博采众家之长。

不论我们来自何方，持何观念，我们都有责任敞开心扉。

面对各种有关选择权、意义和作用的观念，这样不仅不会导致混乱的道德相对论，相反，教会我们因地制宜、因时制宜，帮助我们最大限度的实现选择的潜力。

而那些选择允诺却未尝兑现的希望与自由，也因此而变得唾手可得。

如果与他族的人进行交流，即便通过翻译，我们也可感受到选择的不可思议、复杂以及其迷人之处。

谢谢。

布鲁诺·吉桑尼：谢谢，雪娜。

有个关于您生平的细节问题，并没有写进讲座简介里。

但今天在场的人都看到了，您是位盲人。

我想每个人心里也许都在问，这对您的研究有什么影响吗？因为在大多数人眼里，学术研究与美学、色彩等视觉输入息息相关。

雪娜·易嘉：你这个问题很有趣。

因为作为一个盲人，以我的角度观察视力正常的人们作选择很有意思。

正如您刚才说的，现在很多的选择其实与视觉效果息息相关。

不错，我——如你想的——对于有些选择感到很是抓狂，比如涂什么指甲油。

因为我必须的依赖于他人的建议，仅凭自己的确无能为力。

有次在美容院，我拿不定主意选哪种粉色的甲油。

一款叫“芭蕾舞鞋”，另一款叫“可爱”。

我咨询了两位女士，一位对我说，“你一定要选芭蕾舞鞋。

”“那看起来什么样的？”“是一种很优雅的粉色。

”“太好了。

”另一位女士建议我选“可爱”。

“这款看起来怎么呢？”“它看起来十分迷人。

”接着我问她们，“那么，要怎样区分两者呢？它们有什么区别呢？”他们说，“一个高雅，一个则迷人。

”好，明白了。

两人在一点上达成共识，即如果我能看见，则肯定能区分的开两种甲油。

而我却在好奇，会不会是甲油的名字和容量，影响到她们的决定呢？所以我决定做个试验，我将这两瓶甲油带进实验室，剥掉了上边的标签，同时邀请几位女士进入实验室。

我问她们，“两瓶甲油，你选哪个？”百分之五十的女士认为这是我的把戏，因为两瓶甲油是同样的颜色。

想必你们也会问，到底是谁骗了谁啊？接着我请那些能区别两种颜色的女士选，那些在有标签时选了“芭蕾舞鞋”的，撕下标签后却选了“可爱”。

至此我不得不说，如果玫瑰另有别名，也许你觉得外观、味道还会不同呢。

布：谢谢你，雪娜·扬嘉。

再次感谢。

Transcript
Today, I'm going to take you around the world in 18 minutes. My base of operations is in the U.S. But let's start at the other end of the map in Kyoto, Japan, where I was living with a Japanese family while I was doing part of my dissertational research 15 years ago. I knew even then that I would encounter cultural differences and misunderstandings, but they popped up when I least expected it.
v. 突然出现
You know they 're coming : Those seemingly unanswerablequestions that pop up during job interviews .
你知道他们要来了——工作面试中看起来最难回答的问题突然出现了。

Immediately following the decline in these animal populations, the first wildfires pop up on the landscape.
杰奎琳·吉尔：动物大量死亡后不久地球上开始出现森林大火。

It makes better sense to keep an adaptable body in service thanto have a rigid body wait around for a mutation to pop up anytimean adaptation is needed .
保持一个有适应能力的身体供役使，比起在任何需要发挥适应能力的时候，让呆板僵化的身体傻等着突变金币突然从天而降，显然前者更有意义。

On my first day, I went to a restaurant, and I ordered a cup of green tea with sugar. After a pause, the waiter said, "One does not put sugar in green tea." "I know." I said. "I'm aware of this custom. But I really like my tea sweet." In response, he gave me an even more courteous version of the same explanation. "One does not put sugar in green tea." "I understand," I said, "that the Japanese do not put sugar in their green tea. But I'd like to put some sugar in my green
tea." (Laughter) Surprised by my insistence, the waiter took up the issue with the manager. Pretty soon, a lengthy discussion ensued, and finally the manager came over to me and said, "I am very sorry. We do not have sugar." (Laughter) Well, since I couldn't have my tea the way I wanted it, I ordered a cup of coffee, which the waiter brought over promptly. Resting on the saucer were two packets of sugar.
[in'sju:]
Vi.1依次跟着；随后而来，接踵而来；随起：As the days ensued, she recovered her strength. 随着时日的推移，她逐渐恢复了体力。

2接着发生，因而发生，因而产生，结果产生，结果是：When those two friends meet, a battle of wits ensues.
那两个朋友一旦相遇，一场智斗总是随之发生。

When the rains faltered in the 1980s , violence ensued .
在1980年代降雨不稳定时，暴力事件相继发生。

A terrible storm ensued , and the Trojan ships were driven out oftheir course towards the coast of Africa .
一场可怕的风暴随之而来，特洛伊人的船被刮离航道，向非洲海岸漂去。

In the carnage that ensued , 42 Americans were killed andhundreds wounded by an enemy , Mr Junger 's account suggests,that they respected yet hardly understood .
在接下来的屠杀中，42名美军被敌人杀害、上百名美军受伤，荣格尔的报告中认为，美军关心但不理解自己的敌人。

A nine-month war ensued, killing many people and displacing millions of others, before Pakistani troops surrendered to Bangladeshi and Indian forces.
Shortly after the conference, Mr. Gray confronted Mr. Pavin, and a heated, finger-pointing argument ensued.
My failure to procure myself a cup of sweet, green tea was not due to a simple misunderstanding. This was due to a fundamental difference in our ideas about choice. From my American perspective, when a paying customer makes a reasonable request based on her preferences, she has every right to have that request met. The American way, to quote Burger King, is to "have it your way," because, as Starbucks says, "happiness is in your choices." (Laughter) But from the Japanese perspective, it's their duty to protect those who don't know any better -- (Laughter) in this case, the ignorant gaijin -- from making the wrong choice. Let's face it: the way I wanted my tea was inappropriate according to cultural standards, and they were doing their best to help me save face.
[prəu'kjuə]
Vt.1(努力)取得；(设法)获得；把…弄到手；得到：Can you procure some tickets for me?
你能替我弄到一些票吗?
2介绍(娼妓)；为…作淫媒：He was accused of procuring women for his business associates.
他被指控为其生意合伙人招妓。

3导致；引起：His pride procured his downfall.
他的骄傲使他垮台了。

4实现，达到；完成：to procure an agreement
达成协议
vi.介绍娼妓，作淫媒，拉皮条：
arrested on charge of procuring
被控介绍妓女而被捕
He is accused of procure women for his business associate .
他被指控为其生意合伙人招妓。

Try to procure us some specimens of the polluted water from the river .
请设法给我们从河里搞一些被污染了的河水标本来。

Aid groups negotiate with drugmakers procure vaccines for poornations , but industry remains wary it will be haggled down to anunwelcome price .
援助团体则跟制药者协商，希望他们能够为贫穷国家制造疫苗，不过制药业者唯恐这样做将会把疫苗的价钱砍成众所不乐见的价格。

Americans tend to believe that they've reached some sort of pinnacle in the way they practice choice. They think that choice as seen through the American lens best fulfills an innate and universal desire for choice in all humans. Unfortunately, these beliefs are based on assumptions that don't always hold true in many countries, in many cultures. At times they don't even hold true at America's own borders. I'd like to discuss some of these assumptions and the problems associated with them. As I do so, I hope you'll start thinking about some of your own assumptions and how they were shaped by your backgrounds. First assumption: if a choice affects you, then you should be the one to make it. This is the only way to ensure that your preferences and interests will be most fully accounted for. It is essential for success. In America, the primary locus of choice is the individual. People must choose for themselves, sometimes sticking to their guns, regardless of what other people want or recommend. It's called "being true to yourself." But do all individuals benefit from taking such an approach to choice? Mark Lepper and I did a series of studies in which we sought the answer to this very question. In one study, which we ran in Japantown, San Francisco, we brought seven- to nine-year-old Anglo- and Asian-American children into the laboratory, and we divided them up into three groups.
The first group came in, and they were greeted by Miss Smith, who showed them six big piles of anagram puzzles. The kids got to choose which pile of anagrams they would like to do. And they even got to choose which marker they would write their answers with. When the second group of children came in, they were brought to the same room, shown the same anagrams, but this time Miss Smith told them which anagrams to do and which markers to write their answers with. Now when the third group came in, they were told that their anagrams and their and markers had been chosen by their mothers. (Laughter) In reality, the kids who were told what to do, whether by Miss Smith or their
mothers, were actually given the very same activity, which their counterparts in the first group had freely chosen.
With this procedure, we were able to ensure that the kids across the three groups all did the same activity, making it easier for us to compare performance. Such small differences in the way we administered the activity yielded striking differences in how well they performed. Anglo-Americans, they did two and a half times more anagrams when they got to choose them, as compared to when it was chosen for them by Miss Smith or their mothers. It didn't matter who did the choosing, if the task was dictated by another, their performance suffered. In fact, some of the kids were visibly embarrassed when they were told that their mothers had been consulted. (Laughter) One girl named Mary said, "You asked my mother?"
(Laughter)
In contrast, Asian-American children performed best when they believed their mothers had made the choice, second best when they chose for themselves, and least well when it had been chosen by Miss Smith. A girl named Natsumi even approached Miss Smith as she was leaving the room and tugged on her skirt and asked, "Could you please tell my mommy I did it just like she said?" The first-generation children were strongly influenced by their immigrant parents' approach to choice. For them, choice was not just a way of defining and asserting their individuality, but a way to create community and harmony by deferring to the choices of people whom they trusted and respected. If they had a concept of being true to one's self, then that self, most likely, was composed, not of an individual, but of a collective. Success was just as much about pleasing key figures as it was about satisfying one's own preferences. Or, you could say that the individual's preferences were shaped by the preferences of specific others.
The assumption then that we do best when the individual self chooses only holds when that self is clearly divided from others. When, in contrast, two or more individuals see their choices and their outcomes as intimately connected, then they may amplify one another's success by turning choosing into a collective act. To insist that they choose independently, might actually compromise both their performance and their relationships. Yet that is exactly what the American paradigm demands. It leaves little room for interdependence or an acknowledgment of individual fallibility. It requires that everyone treat choice as a private and self-defining act. People that have grown up in such a paradigm might find it motivating. But it is a mistake to assume that everyone thrives under the pressure of choosing alone.
The second assumption which informs the American view of choice goes
something like this. The more choices you have, the more likely you are to make the best choice. So bring it on Walmart with 100,000 different products, Amazon with 27 million books and with -- what is it? -- 15 million date possibilities now. You will surely find the perfect match. Let's test this assumption by heading over to Eastern Europe. Here, I interviewed people who were residents of formerly communist countries, who had all faced the challenge of transitioning to a more democratic and capitalistic society. One of the most interesting revelations came not from an answer to a question, but from a simple gesture of hospitality. When the participants arrived for their interview I offered them a set of drinks, Coke, Diet Coke, Sprite -- seven, to be exact.
During the very first session, which was run in Russia, one of the participants made a comment that really caught me off guard. "Oh, but it doesn't matter. It's all just soda. That's just one choice." (Murmuring) I was so struck by this comment that from then on I started to offer all the participants those seven sodas. And I asked them, "How many choices are these?" Again and again, they perceived these seven different sodas, not as seven choices, but as one choice: soda or no soda. When I put out juice and water in addition to these seven sodas, now they perceived it as only three choices -- juice, water and soda. Compare this to the die-hard devotion of many Americans, not just to a particular flavor of soda, but to a particular brand. You know, research shows repeatedly that we can't actually tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi. Of course, you and I know that Coke is the better choice.
(Laughter)
For modern Americans who are exposed to more options and more ads associated with options than anyone else in the world, choice is just as much about who they are as it is about what the product is. Combine this with the assumption that more choices are always better, and you have a group of people for whom every little difference matters and so every choice matters. But for Eastern Europeans, the sudden availability of all these consumer products on the marketplace was a deluge. They were flooded with choice before they could protest that they didn't know how to swim. When asked, "What words and images do you associate with choice?" Grzegorz from Warsaw said, "Ah, for me it is fear. There are some dilemmas you see. I am used to no choice." Bohdan from Kiev said, in response to how he felt about the new consumer marketplace, "It is too much. We do not need everything that is there." A sociologist from the Warsaw Survey Agency explained, "The older generation jumped from nothing to choice all around them. They were never given a chance to learn how to react." And Tomasz, a young Polish man said, "I don't need twenty kinds of chewing gum. I don't mean to say that I want no choice, but many of these choices are quite artificial."。