No abstract

The role of counterfactuals in judgments of affective reactions to outcomes was examined. Subjects read about individuals who experienced gains or losses as a result of either deciding to take action and make a change or deciding not to take any new action. In addition, the salience of the counterfactual alternative was manipulated. Past results were replicated in the case of negative outcomes: Individuals who lost money on the basis of action were judged as feeling worse than those who lost money on the basis of inaction. This occurred under both high and low salience of the counterfactual. With positive consequences, however, exaggerated affect for outcomes associated with action rather than inaction occurred only when the counterfactual alternative was made highly salient. Implications for the construction and use of counterfactuals are discussed, and a process model is developed on the basis of the data and the proposed conceptualization.

Consideration of counterfactual alternatives to negative outcomes, particularly when the counterfactuals change those outcomes, has repeatedly been shown to intensify regret and judgments of blame. Two studies examined the influence of the relevance of the counterfactual to future behavior on Ss' judgments of regret and self-blame after a negative outcome. Results indicated that a dispositional tendency to consider the future consequences of current behavior can ameliorate the negative affect caused by thinking about how a negative outcome could have been avoided. Results also suggested that this amelioration is particularly likely to occur when Ss are induced to focus on the future. These findings are discussed in terms of understanding the positive functions counterfactuals may serve, particularly with respect to the determination of future behavior. "Everything is relative." -a very smart personThere is no single objective standard by which people can judge their outcomes. In lieu of such an objective standard, people evaluate their outcomes by comparing them with possible alternatives (cf. Festinger, 1954;Thibaut & Kelley, 1959). Although there are many types of alternatives with which people can compare their actual outcomes (e.g., comparisons with their own past outcomes or with others' outcomes), one of the most potent standards people may use to evaluate outcomes is the standard of imagined alternative outcomes. The construction and use of alternatives to reality, called counterfactual thinking (e.g.

No abstract

No abstract