Decision makers faced with an opportunity to learn the outcome of a foregone alternative must balance anticipated regret, should that information be unfavorable, with the potential benefits of this information in reducing experienced regret. Counterfactual seeking, the choice to learn more about foregone alternatives, may be a functional, regret-regulating strategy for individuals already experiencing regret. Counterfactual seeking increases in response to dissatisfying outcomes (Studies 1 and 2). Counterfactual seeking is generally able to reduce dissatisfaction (Study 2), regardless of whether individuals personally chose to view this information or were randomly assigned to do so (Study 3). Moreover, both imaginative (vs. factual) thoughts about the foregone option and upward (vs. downward) counterfactual thoughts play a role in this improvement in satisfaction (Study 4). Regret thus has a complex influence in how individuals engage with counterfactual information.
AronsonE. (1969). The theory of cognitive dissonance: A current perspective. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 2-35). New York, NY: Academic Press.
2.
BrehmJ. W. (1956). Postdecision changes in the desirability of alternatives. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 52, 384-389.
3.
BuhrmesterM. D.KwangT.GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality data?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3-5.
4.
EpstudeK.RoeseN. J. (2008). The functional theory of counterfactual thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 168-192.
5.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
6.
FestingerL.WalsterE. (1964). Post-decision regret and decision reversal. In FestingerL. (Ed.), Conflict, decision, and dissonance (pp. 112-127). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7.
FrijdaN. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
GilbertD. T.PinelE. C.WilsonT. D.BlumbergS. J.WheatleyT. P. (1998). Immune neglect: A source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 617-638.
9.
KahnemanD.MillerD. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93, 136-153.
10.
LandmanJ. (1993). Regret: The persistence of the possible. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
11.
NorthcraftG. B.AshfordS. J. (1990). The preservation of self in everyday life: The effects of performance expectations and feedback context on feedback inquiry. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Making, 47, 42-64.
RoeseN. J. (1994). The functional basis of counterfactual thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 805-818.
14.
RoeseN. J. (1997). Counterfactual thinking. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 133-148.
15.
RoeseN. J.SummervilleA. (2005). What we regret most . . . and why. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1273-1285.
16.
SaffreyC.SummervilleA.RoeseN. J. (2008). Praise for regret: People value regret above other negative emotions. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 46-54.
17.
SchwartzB.WardA.MonterossoJ.LyubormirskyS.WhiteK.LehmanD. R. (2002). Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1178-1197.
18.
ShaniY.TykocinskiO. E.ZeelenbergM. (2008). When ignorance is not bliss: How feelings of discomfort promote the search for negative information. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 643-653.
19.
ShaniY.ZeelenbergM. (2007). When and why do we want to know? How experienced regret promotes post-decision information search. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20, 207-222.
20.
SmallmanR.RoeseN. J. (2009). Counterfactual thinking facilitates behavioral intentions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 845-852.
21.
SobelM. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In LeinhartS. (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp. 290-312). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22.
SummervilleA. (2011). The rush of regret: A longitudinal analysis of naturalistic regrets. Social Psychological and Personality Science. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/194855061140507210.1177/1948550611405072.
23.
SweenyK.MelnykD.MillerW.ShepperdJ. A. (2010). Information avoidance: Who, what, when, and why. Review of General Psychology, 14, 340-353.
24.
VicaryA. M.FraleyR. C. (2007). Choose your own adventure: Attachment dynamics in a simulated relationship. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1279-1291.
25.
WellsG. L.GavanskiI. (1989). Mental simulation of causality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 161-169.
26.
WilsonT. D.GilbertD. T. (2003). Affective forecasting. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 345-411.
27.
ZeelenbergM. (1999). Anticipated regret, expected feedback, and behavioral decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 93-106.
28.
ZeelenbergM.BeattieJ.van der PligtJ.de VriesN. K. (1996). Consequences of regret aversion: Effects of expected feedback on risky decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 148-158.
29.
ZeelenbergM.InmanJ. J.PietersR. G. M. (2001). What we do when decisions go awry: Behavioral consequences of experienced regret. In WeberE. U.BaronJ.LoomesG. (Eds.), Conflict and tradeoffs in decision making. Cambridge series on judgment and decision making (pp. 136-155). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
30.
ZeelenbergM.PietersR. (1999). Comparing service delivery to what might have been. Journal of Service Research, 2, 86-97.
31.
ZeelenbergM.PietersR. (2007). A theory of regret regulation 1.0. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17, 3-18.
