Counterfactual thinking.

By N. Roese. 1997

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda: Counterfactually-Guided Policy Search (2018, background): “Social psychologists theorize that such cognitive processes are beneﬁcial for improving future decision making (Roese, 1997).”
Unbiased Scene Graph Generation From Biased Training (2020, neutral): “It means “counter to the facts” [46], and takes one step further that assigns the “clash of worlds” combination of values to variables.”
Spreading the blame: The allocation of responsibility amongst multiple agents. (2010, unknown): “Although the relation between causal and counterfactual judgments has been extensively investigated (Kahneman & Miller, 1986; Roese, 1997), the Structural Model has not yet been subjected to empirical test.”
Counterfactual Thinking, Blame Assignment, and Well-Being in Rape Victims (2003, background): “Our results are consistent with the assumption that upward counterfactuals produce negative affect by increasing self-blame (Roese, 1997).”
Repetitive regret, depression, and anxiety: findings from a nationally representative survey (2009, background): “…pathway (i could have been a contender) suggests some degree of fault: one should have known better and acted to have achieved a better outcome (Roese, 1997). although this definition of regret emphasizes its negative side, recent research has demonstrated that its psychological consequences…”
When Employees Are Out of Step with Coworkers: How Job Satisfaction Trajectory and Dispersion Influence Individual- and Unit-Level Voluntary Turnover (2012, background): “When the work environment generates social cues contradictory to a person’s experience, he or she may be prompted to engage in counterfactual thinking and imagine alternative realities (Roese, 1997).”
Rising from the Ashes: Cognitive Determinants of Venture Growth after Entrepreneurial Failure (2015, background): “" This is highly relevant because such thinking can have a profound effect on entrepreneurs' understanding of cause-and-effect relationships, decision making, and task performance (Markman, Balkin, & Baron, 2002; Roese, 1997).”
Opportunity Evaluation as Rule‐Based Decision Making (2014, background): “As one considers possible outcomes, emotions such as fear can creep in (Roese, 1997), and negative emotions such as fear, impact entrepreneurs’ evaluations of opportunities negatively (cf. Grichnik et al., 2010; Welpe et al., 2012).”
Judgment dissociation theory: an analysis of differences in causal, counterfactual, and covariational reasoning. (2003, background): “Over the past two decades, a great deal of psychological research has examined the determinants, consequences, and functions of counterfactual thinking (for a review, see Roese, 1997).”
Counterfactual thinking, persistence, and performance: A test of the Reflection and Evaluation Model (2008, methodology): “One is the affective function (e.g., McMullen, 1997; Roese, 1997; Taylor & Schneider, 1989), whereby a given outcome will be judged more favorably to the extent that a less desirable alternative is salient.”
Resistance and Persuasion (2004, background): “Brehm’s (1966; Brehm & Brehm, 1981) wonderful concept of “reactance” emphasizes a different source for resistance, an external source. Reactance, as used by Brehm (1966), is caused by external threats to one’s freedom of choice.”
Cognitive Behavioural Processes Across Psychological Disorders: A Transdiagnostic Approach To Research And Treatment (2004, background): “Counterfactuals are often generated in response to negative events, and can influence subsequent behaviour, judgement (Galinsky and Moskowitz 2000) and emotion (Niedenthal et al. 1994; Roese 1997).”
Effect of Counterfactual and Factual Thinking on Causal Judgments (2003, background): “…and factual thinking have similar effects on causal judgment, contrary to contemporary accounts of the causal judgment process that have emphasized the special role of counterfactual thinking (e.g., Branscombe et al., 1996; Lipe, 1991; Roese & Olson, 1995a; Roese, 1997; Wells & Gavanski, 1989).”
Seeing Red or Feeling Blue: Differentiated Intergroup Emotions and Ingroup Identification in Soccer Fans (2007, background): “Silver et al. (2001) found that participants appraised themselves as weak in the situation, more so when they were the sole ingroup member encountering multiple outgroup members.”
Postdecisional Counterfactual Thinking by Actors and Readers (2007, background): “Previous investigations of counterfactual thinking have found that individuals tend to alter exceptional rather than normal events, actions rather than inactions, and controllable rather than uncontrollable events (Roese, 1997), and also prefer to make minimal alterations (Byrne, 2005).”