The influence of anticipated counterfactual regret on behavior

Three experiments tested the hypothesis that the anticipation of counterfactual regret influences decision making and behavior. This hypothesis was examined under conditions of uncertainty in which the behavioral alternatives were equally desirable (or undesirable) and there was no clear default alt...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Psychology & marketing 2000-04, Vol.17 (4), p.345-368
Hauptverfasser: Hetts, John J., Boninger, David S., Armor, David A., Gleicher, Faith, Nathanson, Ariel
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Three experiments tested the hypothesis that the anticipation of counterfactual regret influences decision making and behavior. This hypothesis was examined under conditions of uncertainty in which the behavioral alternatives were equally desirable (or undesirable) and there was no clear default alternative. In Experiment 1, participants read a scenario in which the salience of anticipated counterfactual regret associated with two behavioral options was manipulated. Their behavioral intentions demonstrated avoidance of the option associated with salient counterfactual regret. Experiment 2 examined behavior in a gaming situation in which participants chose whether or not to purchase insurance to protect their treasure. Participants who anticipated counterfactual regret made insurance purchase decisions in a way that minimized the chances of experiencing this regret. To rule out several alternative explanations for the results of the first two experiments, the content of the anticipated counterfactual and the salience of anticipated regret were orthogonally manipulated in a third experiment. As expected, the influence of the anticipated counterfactual on insurance‐buying behavior was significantly stronger when the associated regret was salient than when it was not. These findings are discussed in terms of both their positive and negative implications for the self in decision‐making contexts. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
ISSN:0742-6046
1520-6793
DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1520-6793(200004)17:4<345::AID-MAR5>3.0.CO;2-M