3 Surprisingly Smart ‘Life Hacks’ Backed by Psychology (Yes, Even the Pen One)

Introduction:

Life hacks—those clever little shortcuts to make daily life easier—sometimes sound like something your overly confident uncle came up with after two beers. But every now and then, a life hack hits just right. Today, we’re unpacking three quirky yet oddly insightful life hacks and diving into the psychology behind why they actually make sense. Buckle up, because yes, even the “capless pen trick” has scientific backing.

1. The Decision Dilemma: When in Doubt, Pick the Second One

“When you don’t know which one out of the two to choose, choose the second one, because if the first one fulfills your needs, you wouldn’t think of the second one.”

Why It Makes Sense:

This hack taps into Cognitive Dissonance Theory and the sneaky workings of Choice Overload. When your brain starts eyeing the second option, it’s because the first didn’t fully satisfy your gut instinct. It’s your mind’s way of nudging you towards the choice you might regret less.

Example in Real Life:

You’re staring at two desserts: chocolate cake and tiramisu. You’re leaning towards the tiramisu because the chocolate cake didn’t win your heart outright. Go for the tiramisu. Your brain “low-key” already chose it.

Psychological Concepts:

• Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957)

• Choice Overload (Iyengar & Lepper, 2000)

Takeaway: When torn between two options, the second choice might already be your brain’s backup plan for happiness.

2. The Capless Pen Trick: Borrowed, Not Stolen

“When someone borrows a pen from you, remove the cap, so that she remembers the pen belongs to you.”

Why It Makes Sense:

This hack leverages the Zeigarnik Effect, which suggests people remember interrupted tasks better than completed ones. A capless pen feels… incomplete. It doesn’t look right, and that tiny disruption sticks in the borrower’s memory.

Example in Real Life:

Your colleague borrows your expensive fountain pen. Without the cap, it’s like lending someone a shoe without laces. They’ll probably return it—if only to stop feeling weird about it.

Psychological Concepts:

• Zeigarnik Effect (Zeigarnik, 1927)

• Pattern Disruption Theory

Takeaway: A missing cap isn’t just a quirk—it’s a psychological anchor. Your pen will come home safe.

3. The Hesitation Principle: If You’re Not Sure, Don’t Buy It

“When you are hesitant about buying something, don’t buy. Because if you really need it, you wouldn’t hesitate.”

Why It Makes Sense:

This advice aligns with Dual-Process Theory, which suggests we have two systems of thinking:

• System 1 (Emotional Brain): Fast, instinctive decisions.

• System 2 (Rational Brain): Slow, deliberate analysis.

If you’re hesitating, System 2 is working overtime, and that’s often a sign you don’t truly need the item.

Example in Real Life:

You’re eyeing yet another overpriced gadget online. You hesitate. That’s your System 2 quietly whispering, “Do you really need another kitchen appliance you’ll use once and forget about?”

Psychological Concepts:

• Dual-Process Theory (Kahneman, 2011)

• Analysis Paralysis

Takeaway: If hesitation creeps in, let it be your wallet’s best friend.

Conclusion:

Who knew that tiny decisions—like picking between two desserts, lending pens, or deciding on a shopping cart impulse—could be backed by real psychological principles? These aren’t just life hacks; they’re brain hacks.

So next time you’re caught in indecision, hand over a pen, or hover over the “buy now” button, remember: psychology has your back.

Which of these hacks will you try first? Or do you have your own sneaky little trick backed by science? Share it with us below!

References:

1. Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press.

2. Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper, M. R. (2000). When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79(6), 995-1006.

3. Zeigarnik, B. (1927). Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen. Psychologische Forschung, 9(1), 1-85.

4. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.