Regret is an important emotion in the context of decision-making and has many implications for consumer behavior. Although regret can be an inevitable outcome, it is possible to deal with it through various regulatory strategies. This research investigates one of these strategies: the strategy of decreasing the goal level, with which regret is regulated from the reassessment of the negativity of a result. Three experimental studies find that the DGL strategy effectively works in regulating individuals' post-decisional regret. In addition, the observed effect is moderated by the maximizing tendency. When maximizers engaged in the strategy of decreasing the goal level, reevaluating their decision and recognizing positive alternative goals, they more successfully regulated their regrets. For satisficers, in contrast, who are by default more likely to adopt the “good enough” protective choice, engaging in such a strategy did not affect their regrets. In addition, the perception of valid effort was observed as na important mediator useful to explain such effects. These results contribute to the literature on regret by empirically testing DGL as an effective regret regulation strategy, showing mechanisms that can help individuals to effectively cope with regret

2018o Estudo 1 e Estudo 2 e 3 é explicada pelo argumento de que o Estudo 1 refere-se a um arrependimento pela compra, enquanto os Estudos 2 e 3 referem-se a um arrependimento pela decisão. Portanto, é defendido que, em algumas situações, o risco social e pisicológico podem reduzir a influência do risco financeiro, mesmo quando houve investimento financeiro. Palavras-chave:Arrependimento. Autoestima. Risco social. Risco psicológico. 5 ABSTRACTRegret is the only emotion that is uniquely tied to decision making. Understanding the elements that lead to negative decision-related emotions, such as regret, can be useful in understanding post-choice evaluation and repurchase intent (Inman, Dyer, & Jia, 1997; Tsiros & Mittal, 2000). The present research aims to broaden the understanding of this topic, evaluating the effect of self-esteem on regret. It is suggested that individuals with low selfesteem (LSEs) experience greater regret than individuals with high self-esteem (HSEs).However, the type of decision (action vs. inaction), the perceived risk of the situation and the responsibility attribution for the outcome should also be considered. No previous studies were found that examined these relationships in consumer situations. A decision negative outcome, when made public, can trigger threats that stem both psychological and social risk consequences and different reactions according to the individual's level of self-esteem. The influence of the decision outcome was analyzed by the presence of negative comments or lack of praise. Three laboratory experiments were performed and the results were analyzed using the moderation and mediation Process models. In all studies, a significant interaction effect between self-esteem and decision-making was found. HSEs reported different levels of regret for action and inaction contexts, while LSEs reported similar levels of regret in both conditions. When individuals are criticized, regret pattern was similar to that observed when they are not praised. When they act, HSEs feel less responsible for a poor outcome; however, being criticized or failing to be praised because of a failure to act has raised the levels of regret and attribution of internal responsibility of these individuals. The difference between the pattern of regret between Study 1 and Study 2 and 3 is explained by the argument that Study 1 refers to a purchase regret, while Studies 2 and 3 refer to a regret for the decision. Therefore, it is argued that in some situations, social and psychological risk can reduce the influence of financial risk, even when there is a financial investment.