Counterfactual thinking
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (May 2008) |
|
|
This article or section is written like a personal reflection or essay and may require cleanup. Please help improve it by rewriting it in an encyclopedic style. (May 2008) |
|
|
Sections should be added to this article, to conform with Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Please discuss this issue on the talk page. This article has been tagged since May 2008. |
Psychologists describe counterfactual thinking as that which occurs when a person thinks about an option that was not selected, usually with regret. As human beings, it is extremely easy and likely to be influenced by events that never occurred. We often find ourselves wondering “what if” in certain circumstances, even though that “what if” does not actually exist. Daniel Kahneman and Dale Miller (1986) studied this phenomenon. Counterfactual thinking is the tendency to create thoughts of events that could have happened given the chance and circumstances, but instead did not actually occur. In other words, the opposite of the actual event at hand is imagined in order to stage what could or might have happened under the same circumstances. There are various types and forms of counterfactual thinking, each resulting differently. The psychological impact of events, positive or negative, depend largely on the way in which we imagine the “what if” factor. For example, if an individual were to think about a result that is better than the actual event that occurred, he or she is likely to experience feelings of frustration, grief, anger, or even a feeling of insecurity. On the other hand, if the result that is conjured is worse than the actual result, the individual is much more likely to feel a sense of satisfaction, joy, relief, or appreciativeness.
When Is It Used?
As true with any psychological phenomenon, individuals do not always engage in counterfactual thinking after every event in their lives. Research by Neal Roese and Amy Summerville (2005) demonstrate that three certain areas of life trigger counterfactual thinking the most. Counterfactual thinking is found most commonly in the education, career, and romance portions of an individual's life. In 2000, Byrne and McEleney conducted research showing that an individual is most likely to engage in counterfactual thinking after he/she took action that in the end resulted negatively. In comparison, an individual is less likely to engage in counterfactual thinking when the outcome was negative due to a lack of action. Additional findings by Victoria Medvec and Kenneth Savitsky (1997) suggest that when an individual is slightly above the drop off point, between winning something and completely losing everything, the chance of counterfactual thinking increases. For example, a winner of a third place ribbon in a contest may exude more happiness than that of a first place winner. This is because the third place is so very close to winning nothing at all that it allows the individual in that place to easily imagine what it may have been like had they not have gotten the last ribbon. The first place ribbon is much farther from the bottom, therefore making the first place individual much less susceptible to conjuring up thoughts about what it would have been like if he/she had not won at all.
Additional Sites:
http://www.psych.uiuc.edu/~roese/Roese%20(1997).pdf http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/cogsci2001/pdf-files/1078.pdf
 |
This article is uncategorized. Please categorize this article to list it with similar articles. (May 2008) |
