user14709: I'm always confused when should I accept an answer.I should pay attention to these factors when I accept an answer:

When I accept an answer to early, users who are searching for a question to answer don't view the question and the number of views drop down
In opposite side the users who want to learn always choose the questions have an accepted answer
Actually the accepted answer get more votes than other answers

so, when should I accept an answer like this.

user3624: I think it is a better to wait a while, even if a good answer is posted. Questions with accepted answers often recieve less attention, so you will maybe loose other potentially even better answers by accepting early. I don't see a problem with waiting e.g. one week before accepting, even if the technical limit is 15 minutes. Waiting before accepting will also give occasional users a better chance of answering, and will decrease the fastest gun in the west problem.

user5144: The usual policy is to tell people to accept an answer when it satisfactorily answers the question. You don't have to, if you can't decide between two or more answers.
For me it is not a problem to write an answer, when there is already an accepted one for a question. I do this when I feel I can contribute more to the question. The this with the voting is kind of a hen and egg problem. If the best answer is accepted, it is not unnatural that this answer gets more votes. But this is not always like this, I have seen questions where the accepted is not the highest voted answer. This might be because the first answer was accepted very soon and the person never looked again at this question when the new answer came up. You can also change the answer which is accepted.

14709: <p>I'm always confused when should I accept an answer.I should pay attention to these factors when I accept an answer:</p>

<ul>
<li>When I accept an answer to early, users who are searching for a question to answer don't view the question and the number of views drop down</li>
<li>In opposite side the users who want to learn always choose the questions have an accepted answer</li>
<li>Actually the accepted answer get more votes than other answers</li>
</ul>

<p>so, when should I accept an answer like <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/30396/what-is-the-explanation-for-the-smaller-number-of-trna-than-codons">this</a>.</p>
 3624: <p>I think it is a better to wait a while, even if a good answer is posted. Questions with accepted answers often recieve less attention, so you will maybe loose other potentially even better answers by accepting early. I don't see a problem with waiting e.g. one week before accepting, even if the technical limit is 15 minutes. Waiting before accepting will also give occasional users a better chance of answering, and will decrease the <a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/9731/fastest-gun-in-the-west-problem">fastest gun in the west problem</a>.</p>
 5144: <p>The usual policy is to tell people to accept an answer when it satisfactorily answers the question. You don't have to, if you can't decide between two or more answers.</p>

<p>For me it is not a problem to write an answer, when there is already an accepted one for a question. I do this when I feel I can contribute more to the question. The this with the voting is kind of a hen and egg problem. If the best answer is accepted, it is not unnatural that this answer gets more votes. But this is not always like this, I have seen questions where the accepted is not the highest voted answer. This might be because the first answer was accepted very soon and the person never looked again at this question when the new answer came up. You can also change the answer which is accepted.</p>
