we propose that the bias towards additive solutions might be further compounded by the fact that subtractive solutions are also less likely to be appreciated. P

we propose that the bias towards additive solutions might be further compounded by the fact that subtractive solutions are also less likely to be appreciated. People might expect to receive less credit for subtractive solutions than for additive ones. A proposal to get rid of something might feel less creative than would coming up with something new to add, and it could also have negative social or political consequences — suggesting that an academic department be disbanded might not be appreciated by those who work in it, for instance. I think there is probably a huge social component. Leaving existing stuff alone and adding something will get a lot less push back than removing something. It is also a risk averse solution. You have to understand a problem space fairly well and be confident you are correct in order to effectively cut and have any hope that people will generally be happy with the outcome. It can be done, but it tends to be a lot harder. So it is also something we are simply inculcated with because adding stuff is the thing we experience the most often as the way things get handled.