title: To do or not to do: desirability and consistency mediate judgements of regret.
abstract: In 4 studies, the authors demonstrated that when errors associated with action were inconsistent with decision nakers' orientation, they were undesirable and produced more regret than did errors associated with inaction. Conversely, when errors associated with action were consistent with decision makers' orientation. they were desirable and produced less regret than did errors associated with inaction. Desirability and consistency mediated this relationship, independent of mutability. These results were obtained when judgments and decisions to act or not act were made in close temporal proximity to one another as well as when participants reflected on their past decisions. The authors provide an analysis of when counterfactuals would and would not be expected to mediate judgments of normality and regret.
authors: Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 27402, USA. jjseta@uncg.edu
authors: J J
authors: JJ
authors: Seta
authors: T
authors: T
authors: McElroy
authors: C E
authors: CE
authors: Seta
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003073:Cognitive Dissonance; D003657:Decision Making; D004644:Emotions; D006801:Humans; D007389:Internal-External Control; D007600:Judgment; D009042:Motivation; D012309:Risk-Taking