Over the past two decades, research on interindividual differences in decision-making has often focused on the distinction between maximizers, who (over)invest effort to find the best possible option, and satisficers, who select an option they consider good enough (Cheek & Schwartz, 2016). Although these constructs have been applied to various contexts such as consumer behavior, relationships, or job searches, there has been little consensus on their conceptualization and measurement, leading to inconsistencies in assessment and outcomes (Cheek & Schwartz, 2016; Misuraca et al., 2018). To address this issue, we positioned maximizing within a nomological network of personality and decision-making constructs and developed a new scale using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Using a daily diary study, we examined the costs associated with maximizing in daily life and its effects on mental health, including depression, anankastia, and anxiety.