Don’t shoot for the moon: aiming for ‘above average’ is key to success, maths suggests
Researchers suggest that aiming for 'above average' rather than overly ambitious goals can lead to better outcomes. A mathematical model indicates that individuals who set their thresholds slightly above the average tend to achieve greater satisfaction. This approach can be applied to various life scenarios, including job hunting and decision-making.
- ▪Aiming for merely above average is often more effective than striving for the highest possible goals.
- ▪The model shows that people who are too ambitious may end up worse off than those who are moderately ambitious.
- ▪The findings highlight the importance of understanding the full range of possibilities rather than just focusing on exceptional cases.
The Guardian — Science publishes from United Kingdom and files mainly under science. We currently carry 54 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | The Guardian — Science |
| Canonical URL | https://www.theguardian.com/science/2026/may/29/dont-shoot-for-the-moon-aiming-for-above-average-is-key-to-success-maths-suggests |
| Publication time | Fri, 29 May 2026 13:00:51 GMT |
| Retrieval time | 2026-05-29T13:25:00.511Z |
| Last seen | 2026-05-29T13:25:00.511Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | iMElTuRll1Hd |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
One example tested in the model was hunting for a job with a particular salary. Agents rejected offers below the threshold and accepted those that met it. Photograph: skynesher/Getty ImagesView image in fullscreenOne example tested in the model was hunting for a job with a particular salary. Agents rejected offers below the threshold and accepted those that met it. Photograph: skynesher/Getty ImagesScienceDon’t shoot for the moon: aiming for ‘above average’ is key to success, maths suggests Model created by researchers shows better outcomes are often more likely when people are not too ambitiousIan Sample Science editorFri 29 May 2026 09.00 EDTLast modified on Fri 29 May 2026 09.01 EDTSharePrefer the Guardian on GoogleIt is the end of an idiom for motivational speakers.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at The Guardian — Science.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from The Guardian — Science
