Counterfactual comparisons and affective styles in the aftermath of traumatic events

Abstract

Traumatic events often lead to counterfactual comparison (CFC), defined as comparing one’s current attributes to that of a hypothetical mentally simulated alternative that might have occurred but is counter to the facts. CFC can differ in its direction and in terms of the referent of action. The mentally simulated alternative may be evaluated as more favorable (upward CFC) or less favorable (downward CFC) and the counterfactual alteration (e.g., preventing the event) may have been performed by oneself (self-referent) or others (other-referent). The frequency and engendered affective valence of CFC differ between trauma survivors and correlate with PTSD symptoms. However, knowledge about the mechanism involved is lacking. Individuals differ in how they regulate the engendered affective valence following CFC, suggesting that dispositional affect regulation styles may be implicated in this relationship. We therefore examined the affective styles of adjusting, concealing, and tolerating and their relationship with CFC frequency and engendered affective valence. In 556 individuals who had encountered at least one traumatic event, we examined this question separately for (1) upward self-referent CFC, (2) upward other-referent CFC, (3) downward self-referent CFC and (4) downward other-referent CFC. Most effects were found for upward (rather than downward) CFC and particularly for upward self-referent CFC. The frequency of engaging in upward self-referent CFC was associated with all three affective styles and with engendered affective valence. Different emotion regulation processes appear to be associated with more frequent engagement in upward self-referent CFC and more negative engendered affective valence. Theoretical and clinical implications are discussed.