Post-decisional Regret Research Articles

Impact of Actor's Initial State of Engagement in a Course of Action on Judgements of Post-decisional Regret and Joy: Revisiting Kahneman and Tversky (1982).

According to the phenomenon commonly known as action effect and vastly replicated across the judgment and decision-making literature, more regret is associated with decisions resulting from action than inaction. Action vs. inaction, however, might either refer to change vs. no change or doing something vs. not doing something. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of this variation in operationalization of action-inaction on the strength of action effect, for both positive and negative outcomes, across four different domains of employment, finance, education, and health. This was an experimental scenario-based study (N = 215) with four between-subjects conditions varying in outcome valence and the actor's initial state as either engaged or non-engaged in a particular course of action. Action effect was found to be stronger with respect to the initially engaged than the initially non-engaged decision-maker (ηp2 = .04), indicating that action as change results in a stronger action effect than action as doing something. The effect of the initial state was also moderated by domain. In addition, we both replicated and went beyond prior empirical literature regarding the effect of outcome valence and domain on action effect, with our findings being mostly consistent across joy and regret. Findings are discussed in light of the norm theory and its key concept of normality and contribute to the literature on moderators of action effect.

Regulating regret via decreasing goal level: Comparing maximizers and satisficers

Regret is an important emotion in the context of decision making and has many implications for the behavior of consumers. Although regret may be an inevitable outcome, it is possible to cope with it through various regulation strategies. This research investigates one of those strategies, namely, decrease the goal level strategy (DGL), in which one regulates regret by reevaluating the negativity of an outcome. Two properly powered and preregistered experimental studies find that the DGL strategy effectively works in regulating individuals' post-decisional regret. Besides, the DGL effect is moderated by individuals' maximizing tendency. When maximizers engaged in the DGL strategy, by reappraising their decision and recognizing positive alternative goals, they regulated their regrets more successfully. For satisficers, in contrast, who are by default more prone to adopt the protective “good enough” choice, engaging in a DGL strategy did not affect their regrets. 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.

Increasing Choices or Decreasing Hope? Explaining the Rising Prevalence of Depression From a Decision-Making Perspective.

In today's fast-moving society, we get a multitude of options available. However, choices once considered beneficial, are now being largely debated. In the face of rising prevalence of depression and being identified as the 'disease of modernity', this burden of increasing choices on the modern society needs to be re-evaluated. In this paper, we aim to elucidate the rising rate of depression in today's society with regard to the increasing number of choices, the decision-making process, and the consequent attribution of the decision-making situations. We also attempt to look at the role of culture, acknowledging its importance in depression and perception of choices. Lastly, a theoretical perspective is being outlined about how the increasing amount of choices being provided in today's society can give rise to a pessimistic attribution style among decision-makers. Decision-makers therein might be more likely to face post-decisional regret and self-blame, ultimately developing risk for depression. The way in which choices are perceived in a particular culture could either facilitate or act as a buffer to depression. Thus, the essential role that culture might play in moderating this relationship is also discussed.

If in Doubt Don't Act Out! Exploring Behaviours in Clinical Decision Making by General Surgeons Towards Surgical Procedures

Clinical decision-making (CDM) plays an integral role to surgeons work and has ramifications for patient outcomes and experience. The factors influencing a surgeons decision-making and the utility of cognitive decisional short cuts used in CDM known as 'heuristics' remains unknown. The aim of this paper is to explore how general surgeons make decisions in high-stake biliary tract clinical scenarios. This was a cross sectional survey comprising of two sections-a 'demographics section' and a 'clinical vignettes section'. Participants were recruited by an email distributed by the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Non-parametric testing examined relationships and content analysis was applied for clinical reasoning. 73 participants or 37.6% of the overall population completed the survey. 71.4% of these were male. Most (50%) were higher trainees with moderate levels of overall reflective practice in decision-making. A majority of participants chose conservatively in high-stake biliary tract clinical cases with disease factors (43.5%) weighted highest, followed by personal factors (41.1%) and patient factors (15.4%) in clinical reasoning. The presence of a 'hook' associated with commonly used heuristics did not significantly change decision-making behaviour. In high-stake scenarios, surgeons make conservative clinical decisions, predominantly dominated by disease and personal justifications. The utility of heuristics in lower-stake scenarios should be explored regarding clinical decision-making rationale and outcomes. Practitioners should consider use of patient factors in high-stake decisions to enable shared decision-making when appropriate which can reduce post-decisional regret and support the vision of patient-centred care.

The effects of option generation on post-decisional regret in everyday life decision-making: A field experiment

• We examined post-decisional regret in decisions with self-generated options. • We applied a metacognitive perspective on post-decisional regret. • We conducted a field experiment using a real-life decision. • Opposed to the choice overload effect, generating more options led to less regret. • Explicitly generating options resulted in less regret than not doing so. While previous studies on post-decisional regret have exclusively focused on externally provided options, the present study is the first to examine post-decisional regret in situations with self-generated options. Applying a metacognitive perspective, we predicted that a large option set-size leads to less post-decisional regret than a small option set-size. This hypothesis is in contrast to the classic choice overload effect which has been reported for externally provided options. Furthermore, we hypothesized that explicitly generating options results in less post-decisional regret than not doing so. We used a field experimental design to test our two hypotheses. On a Sunday morning, participants were asked to generate either three or six options for what they could do during the afternoon and to select one of these options. In a control condition, participants were not instructed to generate options. On Sunday evening, participants indicated how much they regretted not having done something else. Our results provide support for both hypotheses.

A Psychometric Validation of the Decisional Conflict Scale in Italian Cancer Patients Scheduled for Insertion of Central Venous Access Devices.

In oncological settings, high-quality decision-making takes place when an adaptive pattern of cognitive and behavioural processes occurs, potentially limiting post-decisional regret and leading to an increment of adherence to the final decision. An example of a choice that requires a patient's involvement in the decision-making during cancer treatment occurs when the insertion of Central Vascular Access Device (CVAD) is proposed for chemotherapy administration. The aim of the current study was to develop and evaluate the psychometric properties of an Italian version of the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), including its factorial structure and its accuracy in discriminating the level of uncertainty in a sample of cancer patients during their decision-making process for the insertion of a CVAD for intravenous (IV) chemotherapy administration. The study included 264 cancer patients with different diagnoses. To test the structural and psychometric properties of the Italian version of the DCS (DCS-ITA), exploratory factorial analysis was conducted followed by traditional classical test theory assessments of internal reliability and criterion validity. The Italian version of the DCS (DCS-ITA) demonstrated good internal consistency, acceptable construct validity, which was tested with exploratory factorial analysis, and good criterion validity, demonstrated by the ability of the scale to differentiate between patients who declared themselves certain about their choice and patients expressing uncertainty about the choice to make. Overall, the results of the study showed that the DCS-ITA is a psychometrically sound instrument that easily discriminates between patients who are experiencing a decisional conflict and those who are not. The DCS-ITA can be used as a valid and easy-to-use tool for the screening of the decisional conflict in oncological settings.

The relative effects of abstract versus concrete rumination on the experience of post-decisional regret

Abstract rumination is characteristic of depressed individuals, as is the tendency to experience post-decisional regret. We conducted two studies to test whether (i) abstract rumination is associated with post-decisional regret, and (ii) inducing the converse style of thinking, namely concrete rumination, would reduce post-decisional regret. In Study 1, participants identified a personally important decision that they regretted having made in the past 6 months, were instructed to think in either an abstract (n = 29) or concrete (n = 29) way about their decision, then rated the extent to which they regretted the decision. Participants in the abstract condition reported more regret than did participants in the concrete condition. Employing the same methodology used in Study 1, we replicated this finding in Study 2 (abstract condition: n = 34; concrete condition: n = 36). In both studies we additionally tested the prediction that abstract rumination leads to more counterfactual thoughts than concrete rumination. Neither study yielded evidence to support this hypothesis. Overall, the current research indicates that abstract rumination could play an important role in contributing to post-decisional regret and raises the clinical possibility that encouraging depressed individuals to engage in concrete rumination might alleviate post-decisional regret.

Mental contrasting of counterfactual fantasies attenuates disappointment, regret, and resentment

Negative emotions elicited by positive counterfactuals about an alternative past—“if only” reconstructions of negative life events—are functional in preparing people to act when opportunities to restore the alternative past will arise. If the counterfactual past is lost, because restorative opportunities are absent, letting go of the negative emotions should be the better solution, sheltering people from feelings of distress. In six experimental studies, the self-regulation strategy of mental contrasting (Oettingen, European Review of Social Psychology 23:1–63, 2012) attenuated the negative emotions elicited by positive fantasies about a lost counterfactual past, specifically, disappointment, regret and resentment. Mental contrasting (vs. relevant control conditions) led people to feel less disappointed when evaluating their lost counterfactual past compared with their current reality, indicating reduced commitment to the lost counterfactual past (Studies 1, 2, 3, and 4), and it attenuated post-decisional regret and resentment (Studies 5 and 6). These findings held when participants were induced to focus on lost counterfactual pasts for which they were responsible (Studies 4 and 5), for which they blamed another person (Study 6), or for which they deemed no one responsible (Studies 2 and 3). The findings are relevant for building interventions that help people to come to terms with their lost counterfactual past.

The Regret Elements Scale: Distinguishing the affective and cognitive components of regret

AbstractRegret is one of the most common emotions, but researchers generally measure it in an ad-hoc, unvalidated fashion. Three studies outline the construction and validation of the Regret Elements Scale (RES), which distinguishes between an affective component of regret, associated with maladaptive affective outcomes, and a cognitive component of regret, associated with functional preparatory outcomes. The present research demonstrates the RES’s relationship with distress (Study 1), appraisals of emotions (Study 2), and existing measures of regret (Study 3). We further demonstrate the RES’s ability to differentiate regret from other negative emotions (Study 2) and related traits (Study 3). The scale provides both a new theoretical perspective on regret, and a tool for researchers interested in measuring post-decisional regret.

Should retail trade companies avoid recruiting maximisers?

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to investigate differences in characteristics, job outcome experiences and attitudes of maximiser and satisficer decision-making style groups working in the retail trade.Design/methodology/approach– A survey of 140 participants who have accepted a job offer in the retail trade in the past six months in the USA was conducted on Amazon Mechanical Turk. The survey examined participants’ opinions and attitudes towards their present job and established which job information source(s) they had used to search for retail trade job-related information.Findings– The results show that compared to satisficers, maximisers exert more effort when searching job information, have higher uncertainty avoidance and need for cognition, and experience more post-decisional regret. In this sample, any significant differences between maximisers and satisficers in relation to job satisfaction, company commitment, and intention to quit their present job are restricted to certain groups. For recruitment information sources, while satisficers rely on their families and friends for information, maximisers are more likely to obtain job-related information from other sources such as online discussion forums.Practical implications– Even though some studies suggest that maximisers are unhappy with their choices, this research recommends that retail trade companies should not exclude maximisers from their recruitment pools. Retailers should enhance their candidate pools with both maximisers and satisficers by managing different recruitment information sources.Originality/value– Research of decision-making style in recruitment is relatively limited. This research illustrates the differences of attitudes between maximisers and satisficers towards their present retail job, and also demonstrates the preferences of maximisers and satisficers in recruitment information sources.

The Impact of Explicit Values Clarification Exercises in a Patient Decision Aid Emerges After the Decision Is Actually Made

To determine if particular values clarification exercises included in a patient decision aid had discernible impact on postdecisional regret in patients with early-stage prostate cancer. A multicenter randomized controlled trial compared 2 versions of a computerized patient decision aid: only structured information compared to the structured information plus values clarification exercises. Assessments were conducted during the decision aid visit; telephone follow-up interviews were conducted when patients made their decisions with their physician, 3 months after completing treatment, and >1 year later (per a mailing). Outcome measures included the Decisional Conflict Scale, the Preparation for Decision Making Scale, and the Decision Regret Scale. A total of 156 patients participated, 75 provided information only and 81 provided information plus values clarification exercises. The groups did not differ significantly on any outcome evaluated at the decision aid visit; in both groups, decisional conflict decreased immediately after using the decision aid. Between-group differences emerged after the decision was actually made. The values clarification exercises group reported higher Preparation for Decision Making Scale scores at the decision follow-up and at the >1-year follow-up. Regret did not differ significantly between groups at the 3-month follow-up but was lower for the values clarification exercises group than for the information group at the >1-year follow-up. The results suggest that the values clarification exercises led to better preparation for decision making and to less regret. The impact, however, only emerged after the decision was made.

Regret and Police Reporting Among Individuals Who Have Experienced Sexual Assault

Sexual assault (SA) and the underreporting of SA are highly prevalent in the United States. Since regret is a complex, negative emotion linked to decision making, studying regret within the context of reporting SA is important. To describe decisional regret regarding SA reporting. A cross-sectional, descriptive study design was used. The sample included 78 individuals, aged 18 to 25 years, who experienced SA during the past 5 years and completed an electronic questionnaire. A multiple regression model was generated to describe how selected independent variables explain variation in levels of regret. In the final model, four independent variables accounted for 33.3% (adjusted R (2)) of the variation in regret: weight change, stranger assailant, professional treatment, and police reporting. The findings inform clinical practice by describing post-decisional regret about the reporting of SA, and they provide a foundation to develop strategies (e.g., decision aids) that can assist clinicians to help patients as they struggle to make difficult health care decisions.

Randomized trial of a decision aid for individuals considering genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer risk

Despite the potential benefits of genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) risk, individuals can find the genetic testing decision-making process complicated and challenging. The goal of the current study was to measure the effectiveness of a tailored decision aid designed specifically to assist individuals to make informed decisions regarding genetic testing for HNPCC risk. In all, 153 individuals were randomized to receive the decision aid or a control pamphlet at the end of their first genetic counseling consultation. Of these, 109 (71.2%) completed the first questionnaire 1 week after consultation, whereas 95 (62.1%) completed the 6-month follow-up questionnaire. Although the decision aid had no significant effect on postdecisional regret or actual genetic testing decision, the trial results demonstrated that participants who received the decision aid had significantly lower levels of decisional conflict (ie, uncertainty) regarding genetic testing (chi-square(1) = 8.97; P = .003) and were more likely to be classified as having made an informed choice concerning genetic testing (chi-square(1) = 4.37; P = .037) than participants who received a control pamphlet. Also, men who received the decision aid had significantly higher knowledge levels regarding genetic testing compared with men who received the control pamphlet, whereas no such differences were found for women (chi-square(2) = 6.76; P = .034). A decision aid for individuals considering genetic testing for HNPCC is an effective intervention to reduce uncertainty and assist individuals to make an informed choice regarding genetic testing for HNPCC after genetic counseling.

Biased Forecasting of Postdecisional Affect

Although anticipated postdecisional regret is a significant contributor to people's decision-making processes, the accuracy of people's regret forecasts has yet to be assessed systematically. Here we report two studies to fill this lacuna. In Study 1, we found that subjects who made reasonably high offers overpredicted the regret that they experienced after they unexpectedly failed at a negotiation. In Study 2, we found that subjects overpredicted the rejoicing and marginally underpredicted the regret that they experienced when they received higher marks than they had expected for their course work. Systematic affective misprediction implies that people making decisions should discount the regret and rejoicing that they anticipate will be associated with potential outcomes arising from those decisions.

Regulatory mode effects on counterfactual thinking and regret

The present studies examined the influence of two regulatory mode concerns—a locomotion concern with movement from state to state and an assessment concern with making comparisons [see Higgins, E. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Pierro, A. (2003). Regulatory mode: Locomotion and assessment as distinct orientations. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 293–344). New York: Academic Press]—on engaging in counterfactual thinking and experiencing post-decisional regret. When contemplating a decision with a negative outcome, it was predicted that high (vs. low) locomotion would induce less counterfactual thinking and less regret, whereas the opposite would be true for high (vs. low) assessment. Locomotion and assessment orientations were measured as chronic individual differences in Study 1 and 2, and were induced experimentally in Study 3. In Study 1 and 3 a purchase scenario with a negative outcome was used to elicit counterfactuals and regret, while in Study 2 participants were asked to recall one of their own personal purchases that had a negative outcome. The results supported our predictions. We discuss the implications of these findings for the nature of counterfactual thinking and regret from the perspective of their relation to regulatory mode.

A randomized controlled trial of a decision aid for women considering genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer risk

To measure the effectiveness of a tailored decision aid (DA) designed to help women make informed decisions about genetic testing for breast/ovarian cancer risk. A total of 145 women were randomized to receive the DA or a control pamphlet at the end of their first genetic counseling consultation. Of these, 120 (82.8%) completed two questionnaires, 1 week and 6 months post-consultation. While the DA had no effect on informed choice, post-decisional regret or actual genetic testing decision, the trial showed that women who received the DA had higher knowledge levels and felt more informed about genetic testing than women who received the control pamphlet (chi(2)(2) = 6.82; P = 0.033; chi(2)(1) = 4.86; P = 0.028 respectively). The DA also helped women who did not have blood drawn at their first consultation to clarify their values with regards to genetic testing (chi(2)(1) = 5.27; P = 0.022). Women who received the DA were less likely to share the information with other family members than women in the control condition (chi(2)(1) = 8.78; P = 0.003). Decision aids are an effective decision-support strategy for women considering genetic testing for breast/ovarian cancer risk, and are most effective before the patient has made a decision, which is generally at the point of having blood drawn.

The cost of richness: The effect of the size and diversity of decision sets on post-decision regret.

Decision making is often made difficult by the knowledge that one has to live with the outcomes of one's choices and with the regret that these might engender. Formal theories propose that regret is proportional to the difference between the outcome of the option chosen and the expected outcome of the next best alternative that one may have chosen instead. It follows that the number of alternatives available for choice does not affect post-decisional regret. In this study, however, the authors proposed that regret is related to the comparison between the alternative chosen and the union of the positive attributes of the alternatives rejected. This general proposition yielded 2 hypotheses: (a) the larger number of alternatives from which one can choose and (b) the more diverse those alternatives are, the stronger the regret that an unsatisfactory choice would cause. These hypotheses were tested and supported by 4 experiments.

Consequences of regret aversion in real life: The case of the Dutch postcode lottery

Although ample research has shown that decisions may cause regret and that the anticipation of regret may influence decision-making, this previous research was largely limited to hypothetical choices with student participants. The current research replicates and extends these findings for real life lottery participation decisions in non-student samples. Four studies are reported in which two lotteries in the Netherlands, the Postcode Lottery and the National State Lottery, were compared. The State Lottery is a traditional lottery in which one has to buy a ticket with a number printed on it. In the Postcode Lottery, one’s postcode is the ticket number, and hence even if not participating one may still find out that one would have won had one played. As our research shows, this particular feedback that is present in the Postcode Lottery but absent in the State Lottery influences the level of anticipated post-decisional regret, and moderates the influence that anticipated regret has on lottery participation. Study 1, 100 street interviews, confirmed our expectations that the Postcode Lottery may elicit regret. Study 2 found under controlled conditions, that people anticipate more regret over not playing when there is feedback about the neighbors winning a prize in the Postcode Lottery than in the State Lottery. However, when this feedback is absent they anticipate equal amounts of regret over not playing. Study 3 replicated these findings for regret, while showing that the two lotteries do not differ with respect to envy and jealousy, emotions that might also be invoked in this context. Study 4 validated that, as we predicted, anticipations of post-decisional regret influence decisions to play the Postcode lottery, but not the State Lottery. These findings demonstrate the external and discriminant validity of anticipated regret for decision-making, and indicate its pragmatic relevance. The implications or recent developments in regret research are discussed.

Feedback-conditional regret theory and testing regret-aversion in risky choice

Regret is an aversive emotion experienced upon the discovery that, had a different choice been made, a higher level of utility would have obtained than actually did. Because regret can be anticipated prior to choice it can lead to regret-minimising decisions. It has been shown that the experience of post-decisional regret is generally dependent on discovering the outcome of foregone acts as well as chosen acts. The most popular version of regret theory does not include an explicit account of the impact of foregone act resolution on anticipated regret-aversion as a decision motive. This restricts its domain of applicability. This paper modifies regret theory to accommodate the impact of outcome feedback on anticipated regret-aversion. The theoretical and empirical implications of this new version of regret theory are discussed.

Anticipated regret, expected feedback and behavioral decision making

This paper addresses the effects of the anticipation of regret on decision making under uncertainty. Regret is a negative, cognitively based emotion that we experience when realizing or imagining that our present situation would have been better, had we decided differently. The experience of post-decisional regret is for a large part conditional on the knowledge of the outcomes of the rejected alternatives. A series of studies is reviewed in which it is shown that whether or not decision makers expect post-decisional feedback on rejected alternatives has a profound influence on the decisions they make. These studies, focusing on choice between gambles, consumer decision making and interpersonal decision making, also show that anticipated regret can promote risk-averse as well as risk-seeking choices. This review of empirical studies is followed by a discussion of the conditions under which we can expect the anticipation of regret to take place. Copyright © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.