According to Yalom, the experience of loss is present in almost every decision we make, as saying yes to one thing simultaneously means saying no to another. This tension manifests in everyday situations, such as when choosing one scoop of ice cream from a vast selection. Many rely on familiar routines, others seek the healthiest or newest flavors, and some conform to the preferences of their social group or family, even if they do not particularly like that flavor, and then justify to themselves that it is not so bad after all. This process helps avoid cognitive dissonance, which is the psychological discomfort stemming from acting contrary to one’s own value judgments.
The same mechanism can be observed in political decision-making: an abundance of options leads to decision fatigue, and the human mind tries to alleviate this burden by using simplifying strategies.
Psychology calls these cognitive shortcuts heuristics. The availability heuristic refers to the tendency to perceive topics we hear about frequently as more salient, while the framing heuristic suggests that the wording and communicative packaging of a political message significantly influence voter attitudes.
During such processes, several cognitive biases manifest: confirmation bias leads us to seek information that confirms our preexisting beliefs and to exclude contradicting evidence; the halo effect causes a positive impression of a politician to influence our judgment of all their characteristics, thus rendering their decisions seemingly more valid compared to opponents; status quo bias inclines us to preserve familiar conditions; strategic voting involves supporting the more viable candidate rather than the most liked one; and naive realism is the belief that our own perspective is more objective than others’.
An important role in this process is played by learned helplessness, which means that some individuals or communities learn that no matter what they do, they cannot influence the situation. Consequently, they give up trying and passively accept the current state, sometimes by abstaining from voting or by invalidating their ballot through alternative markings such as drawings or scribbles.
This phenomenon often appears at the societal level when people feel a lack of control over events and therefore refrain from active participation in decisions, similar to an abusive relationship in which the abuser exerts perceived power and control over the other party. Learned helplessness, combined with authoritarian governmental attitudes, can significantly contribute to political apathy, ultimately leading to the dominance of a statistical minority’s opinion. Resolving this requires awareness, regaining a sense of control, and sustained effort.
Thus, the freedom to choose entails responsibility and challenges on multiple levels, while psychological mechanisms—such as heuristics, biases, and learned helplessness—equally influence our decisions. With awareness and cognitive effort, autonomous and responsible choice can be preserved, grounded not merely in impulsive reactions or the acceptance of external circumstances.
Written by Veronika Hajba
Continue exploring:
Psychology Behind Hate Campaigns of FIDESZ
Government’s Migration Strategy – Illusion of Security Over Growth