To do or not to do: Desirability and consistency mediate judgments 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.

Action orientation, consistency and feelings of regret

“…Our results supported our hypotheses and prior research for both hypothetical and realistic situations (e.g., Kuhl & Beckmann, 1994;Seta et al, 2001). Stateoriented individuals reported relatively high levels of regret and did not differ in regret responses regardless of whether the situation involved an action or inaction.…”

“…Prior research involving consistency and regret (e.g., Camacho et al, 2003;Connolly & Zeelenberg, 2002;Pieters & Zeelenberg, 2005;Seta et al, 2001) has found that, when actions/inactions are inconsistent with the decision maker's orientation (intention), relatively greater regret is felt than when they are consistent. Research in PSI theory has demonstrated that state-oriented individuals have difficulty regulating negative affect, are chronic worriers and are relatively unable to dispense with negative states.…”

“…One approach deals with how regret can arise as a function of consistency/inconsistency between a person's orientation and action/inaction of an evaluative choice. In a series of studies, Seta, McElroy and Seta (2001) demonstrated that, when the decision maker adopts an orientation of acting (e.g., risk-taker) errors associated with actions are more consistent and lead to relatively less feelings of regret. On the other hand, errors associated with inactions are more inconsistent with the action orientation and lead to comparatively greater feelings of regret.…”

“…Specifically, research has demonstrated that consistency factors between people and their behavior also play an important role in understanding the regret process (e.g., Connolly & Zeelenberg, 2002;Pieters & Zeelenberg, 2005;Seta, McElroy & Seta, 2001). One as-pect of the consistency-regret relationship that remains largely uninvestigated is how individual difference factors influence reliance on consistency information.…”

Regret as autobiographical memory

“…It has also been shown to be sensitive to a number of manipulations and can depend on such things as whether an action is consistent with a person"s personal orientation (Seta, McElroy & Seta, 2001) ,whether information about prior (Zeelenberg, van der Bos, van Dijk, & Pieters, 2002) or alternative (Ritov & Baron, 1995) outcomes is available to the decision-maker, whether an outcome is seen as reversible (Abendroth & Diehl, 2006), and whether the decisions being judged are presented in a within-or between-subjects design (N"gbala & Branscombe, 1997;Zhang, Walsh & Bonnefon, 2005). The action effect continues to be explored in scenario studies (Byrne & McEleney, 2000;Feeney & Handley, 2006;Walsh & Byrne, 2007;Zeelenberg, van der Bos, van Dijk & Pieters, 2002).…”