Final answer:
The act of choosing a solution that is 'good enough' is called satisficing, which differs from using heuristics or algorithms for problem-solving, and is not related to rationalization or confirmation bias.
Step-by-step explanation:
The act of choosing a solution that is "good enough" is referred to as satisficing. This concept was introduced by Herbert Simon to describe a decision-making strategy that aims for a satisfactory or adequate result, rather than an optimal solution. In the context of economics and decision theory, satisficing is a method of coping with the impossibility of assessing all possible options to pick the absolute best one.
By contrast, a mental shortcut used to facilitate problem-solving or decision-making without exhaustive processing is known as a heuristic, while an algorithm would represent a defined, step-by-step procedure to arrive at a definitive solution. When an individual seeks out information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs or ideas, this is identified as a confirmation bias. And, when someone justifies behavior by substituting acceptable reasons for the actual, perhaps less acceptable, ones, this action is called rationalization.
If we consider how individuals approach maximizing their utility, they commonly do so via incremental adjustments, analyzing the marginal utility and tradeoffs between different goods or decisions, rather than selecting a "good enough" option immediately.