【正文】 m describing to you today are designed to help you manage your choices better for you, you can use them on yourself, better for the people that you are serving. Because I believe that the key to getting the most from choice is to be choosy about choosing. And the more weamp。 concretize make it real。39。39。39。39。39。39。39。39。39。39。quot。quot。39。39。39。39。39。quot。quot。39。quot。amp。39。39。39。quot。39。39。39。39。39。quot。39。d like you to clap your hands. So for my first question for you today: Are you guys ready to hear about the choice overload problem? (Applause) Thank you.
　　So when I was a graduate student at Stanford University, I used to go to this very, very upscale grocery store。m going to want to know your answers. So when I ask you a question, since Iamp。re doing at managing those choices?
　　Today I want to talk about one of the biggest modern day choosing problems that we have, which is the choice overload problem. I want to talk about the problem and some potential solutions. Now as I talk about this problem, Iamp。資料共分享，我們負責傳遞知識。TED英語演講稿：如何讓選擇更容易　　簡介：面對商場里五花八門的商品，你的選擇恐懼癥又犯了嗎? 美國哥倫比亞大學商學教授Sheena Iyengar研究如何讓你在做選擇時更容易。39。39。 at least at that time it was truly upscale. It was a store called Draegeramp。s their olive oil aisle. They had over 75 different kinds of olive oil, including those that were in a locked case that came from thousandyearold olive trees.
　　So I one day decided to pay a visit to the manager, and I asked the manager, amp。 And he pointed to the busloads of tourists that would show up everyday, with cameras ready usually. We decided to do a little experiment, and we picked jam for our experiment. Hereamp。s good for our waistlines but it turns out that this choice overload problem affects us even in very consequential decisions. We choose not to choose, even when it goes against our best selfinterests. So now for the topic of today: financial savings. Now Iamp。s likelihood to save more for tomorrow. And what we found was that indeed there was a correlation. So in these plans, we had about 657 plans that ranged from offering people anywhere from two to 59 different fund offerings. And what we found was that, the more funds offered, indeed, there was less participation rate.
　　So if you look at the extremes, those plans that offered you two funds, participation rates were around in the mid70s still not as high as we want it to be. In those plans that offered nearly 60 funds, participation rates have now dropped to about the 60th percentile. Now it turns out that even if you do choose to participate when there are more choices present, even then, it has negative consequences. So for those people who did choose to participate, the more choices available, the more likely people were to pletely avoid stocks or equity funds. The more choices available, the more likely they were to put all their money in pure money market accounts. Now neither of these extreme decisions are the kinds of decisions that any of us would remend for p