A growing body of psychological research indicates that our inherent tendency to tackle problems by adding more elements, rather than subtracting existing ones, could be making issues worse. This phenomenon, termed 'additive bias', suggests that when faced with challenges, from personal stress to complex global issues, individuals are more likely to seek out additional resources, habits, or responsibilities rather than simplifying or removing existing commitments.
This inclination is particularly evident in highly consumerist societies and among frequent social media users, where constant comparison and the promotion of new solutions can foster a mindset of 'more is more'. For instance, someone experiencing burnout might enrol in an hour-long meditation class instead of reducing a low-priority, stressful commitment. Similarly, to improve sleep, purchasing an expensive supplement might be preferred over simply cutting down on evening screen time. This tendency, according to a report by Diana Kwon for Scientific American, often leads people to find fault with subtractive solutions more readily than additive ones.
The impact of additive bias is amplified under conditions of 'heightened cognitive load', when individuals are juggling numerous concerns such as work deadlines, family responsibilities, and wider societal anxieties. Under such pressure, the mind's default to adding rather than subtracting becomes even more pronounced, potentially stalling or worsening the very problems one is attempting to address.
Further studies, including a collection of 2025 research papers published in Communications Psychology, examined how people approach mental health struggles. Researchers found that participants consistently recommended additive solutions, such as meditation and exercise, over subtractive ones like quitting smoking or reducing alcohol intake. Crucially, these additive solutions were often rated as more 'feasible and effective', even when the opposite approach offered a measurably easier and more efficient fix. The studies also noted that people tend to become more additive in their problem-solving as they age, and even AI tools like ChatGPT often default to additive advice.
The research highlighted a social dimension to this bias: participants were more inclined to accept additive mental health advice for themselves and recommend it to strangers. However, they were more likely to suggest subtractive advice only to close friends. The authors of the studies concluded that this bias has the potential to foster a social context where the default recommendation is always to 'do more', creating a cycle of increasing obligations and anxieties in a world where many already feel overwhelmed and short on time.