Nudge Wiki

Concept

Regret and Counterfactual Thinking

emotion decision-making motivation

Daniel Pink's research (see The Power of Regret) argues regret — imagining how a decision could have gone differently, a form of counterfactual thinking — is one of the most common human emotions and, contrary to "no regrets" popular philosophy, functionally useful rather than something to suppress.

Prevalence. In Pink's 4,489-person American Regret Project, only 1% of respondents said they never look back and wish they'd done things differently; 82% report thinking about regret at least semi-regularly. A 2016 Swedish tracking study found participants regretted roughly 30% of the decisions they'd made in the previous week. Regret requires "mental time travel" — negating what actually happened and reimagining an alternative — a cognitive capacity that develops around age 7–8; people with certain neurological conditions (orbitofrontal cortex lesions, some forms of Huntington's or Parkinson's disease) or sociopathy typically cannot experience it.

Regret improves performance when confronted rather than avoided. A study of negotiators whose first offer was accepted found those who most regretted not asking for more prepared more thoroughly for their next negotiation and achieved better results in it (see Galinsky Negotiation Regret Studies). Neal Roese's research found deliberately inducing regret about a just-completed puzzle or anagram task improved speed and accuracy on a subsequent one (see Rose Anagram Regret-Induction Study). A blackjack study found participants who knew they'd keep playing generated far more regret-driven strategy revisions than participants who believed they'd only play once (see Markman Blackjack Regret Study) — Pink's summary: "without regret, there'd be nothing stopping us wasting all our cash at the casino." A UK study found simply priming the thought of regret ("if I did not exercise… I would feel regret") measurably increased actual gym attendance (see Abraham Sheeran Exercise Regret-Prompt Study).

A regretful loss hurts more than an equivalent plain loss. A 2004 study had participants spin one of two computerized roulette wheels; losing after learning the other wheel would have won produced measurably worse feelings than an equivalent loss with no such counterfactual information (see Gambling Wheel Regret Study (2004)).

Four core regret categories, found across 21,000 crowdsourced submissions from 109 countries: foundation regrets ("if only I'd done the work" — small early decisions compounding into later consequences, e.g. finances, health, education); boldness regrets ("if only I'd taken the chance" — declining to start a business, ask someone out, or take a risk); moral regrets ("if only I'd done the right thing"); and connection regrets ("if only I'd reached out" — relationships allowed to quietly drift apart). For every person who regretted taking a bold risk that failed, Pink found roughly 60 people who regretted not taking a bold risk — inaction is regretted far more often than action.

Inaction regret rises with age (Episode 94). People in their 20s report roughly equal numbers of action and inaction regrets; by the 50s–70s, inaction regrets outnumber action regrets 2:1 to 3:1. Pink's explanation: action regrets can often be undone, mitigated, or reframed with a silver lining (a bad marriage that still produced good children; a regretted tattoo that can be removed), while inaction regrets are "metaphysically impossible" to undo and so linger. Social/connection regrets are felt most acutely of all regret types, per a 2012 study, because they threaten a fundamental sense of belonging (see Morrison 2012 Social-Regret Intensity Study).

The first-instinct fallacy. A 2005 study of over 1,500 university exam answers found students who switched their answer were more likely to switch to the correct one, yet the same students overwhelmingly predicted (74%) that switching would produce more regret than sticking with their gut instinct — no student predicted regretting sticking with a wrong answer (see Kruger Wirtz Miller 2005 First-Instinct-Fallacy Study).

Coping with existing regret: an "inward, outward, forward" process. Inward: practice self-compassion rather than harsh self-criticism (20 years of research finds no evidence self-criticism is effective) and recognize the regret as part of a shared human condition. Outward: convert the regret from an abstract, "blobby" emotion into concrete language, by writing or talking about it — a technique with real measured wellbeing benefits (see Lyubomirsky Regret-Writing Wellbeing Study) — and by self-distancing, addressing yourself in the second/third person ("what should you do" rather than "what should I do") to overcome "Solomon's Paradox" (being wiser about others' problems than one's own); see Self-Distancing. Forward: deliberately extract an explicit, actionable lesson from the regret rather than merely dwelling on it.

Counterfactual direction shapes Olympic medalists' happiness. Facial-expression studies of medal-podium athletes find bronze medalists appear happier than silver medalists — bronze medalists engage in downward counterfactual thinking ("at least I didn't finish fourth and get no medal"), while silver medalists engage in upward counterfactual thinking ("if only I'd been a little faster, I'd have won gold") (see Olympic Medal Facial-Expression Counterfactual Study). The same anchoring logic explains why people resist a strictly-better lottery-ticket trade in a well-known thought experiment, for fear of the regret if the ticket they gave away would have won (see Powerball Ticket-Trade Regret Thought Experiment).

Extends, and is likely the same broader research tradition as, Relationships and Wellbeing (Harvard Study of Adult Development) — Pink cites the Grant Study's finding that strong relationships (more than money, fame, IQ, or genes) predict lifelong happiness, arguing one mechanism is that people with strong relationships have someone to process their regrets with rather than wallowing alone.

Re-cited in a year-end recap, no new figures (Episode 109). Pink restates the 2:1-to-3:1 inaction-to-action regret ratio by the 50s-70s, and the 1,500-exam/74% first-instinct-fallacy study.

Discussed in

  • Episode 93 — Dan Pink- -No regrets- That-s bullsh-t
  • Episode 94 — Dan Pink- -Here-s what you-ll regret when you-re older
  • Episode 109 — 5 things I learned from psychology experts in 2022 (year-end recap re-citation)

Related