Counterfactual thinking

Counterfactual thinking ( Latin “contrary to the facts”) is a cognitive process that relates to reflections on events that did not occur .

Counterfactual thinking and the resulting counterfactual assumptions relate to events that might have happened in the past, or could have happened if certain other events had (not) occurred. Distinguishing between what really happened and what could have happened or almost happened is very important in keeping control of reality . In our everyday life we not only think about events that have actually occurred, but we also often consider alternatives to these states and why or how they did not occur.

Judgments

Counterfactual assumptions can be explained very clearly in connection with subjective well-being, a well-researched area of social psychology . It is assumed that evaluative (i.e. evaluative) judgments are always made in relation to a comparison standard , the so-called salient (that means something like conspicuous) standard . In the case of counterfactual assessments, this benchmark is the event that almost or under certain circumstances would have occurred. The assessment of the current situation and satisfaction with it can be measured against it. Does a person consider z. For example, if she only narrowly escaped a traffic accident, she will rate her current basic situation more positively. The fact that one narrowly escaped an unpleasant event (by chance ) can have a positive effect (at least in the short term) on general satisfaction.

If an event did not occur as one would have wished, then the dissatisfaction with it is measured primarily by how easy it is to conceptually construct an alternative, better outcome of the situation. If a person misses e.g. For example, if you miss a bus by just a few seconds, she will be more annoyed than if she missed it by 20 minutes. Because the person who narrowly missed the bus should find it easy to mentally construct a different exit ("if I had gone a little faster, I would have got the bus"), while an alternative construction is more difficult with a 20-minute delay .

Paradoxical evaluations can also arise from the ease with which alternative outcomes can be constructed. So have z. B. Medvec, Madey and Gilovich in 1995, through surveys, produced the now classic finding that the winner of a silver medal (for example at the Olympic Games ) is less satisfied than the winner of a bronze medal. If you win a silver medal, the comparison is turned upwards to the extent that you almost won the gold medal. This comparison makes the situation that has occurred (silver medal) appear less desirable than the counterfactual alternative event (gold medal). The bronze winner, on the other hand, aligns his comparison downwards, he almost won no medal at all. For him, the event that has occurred (bronze medal) is more desirable than the counterfactual alternative event (no medal).

Classification in human cognition

The example of counterfactual thinking makes it clear how fickle human judgment can be. One and the same event can be assessed very differently depending on the context or comparison standard. A person who missed a plane by a few minutes will be very angry at first, because the construction of alternative exits will come to the conclusion that probably very little would have had to be different to reach the plane. If that person then learns that the plane that they narrowly missed has crashed, they will feel uncanny relief, precisely because of the few things that should have been different for they to have been on the plane.

Counterfactual thinking and remorse

Psychological research has shown that in retrospect and in the short term, people especially regret things that have been done in the past but which have turned out badly. In the long run, on the other hand, you mainly regret things that you haven't done in the past and the outcome of which you therefore don't know. The possibilities of the effects that a counterfactual act could have had are complex. Therefore, in retrospect, one regrets in the long run for not having at least tried. If you have tried something and failed, at this moment only the unsuccessful outcome is briefly obvious.

Developmental psychology

In developmental psychology , an implicit, i.e. non-articulable but definitely present, understanding of counterfactual assumptions is already found in two-year-old children. Verbal counterfactual utterances are made in preschool children for the first time.

Differentiation from related terms

Counterfactual thinking can be distinguished from the concept of hypothetical thinking . The main difference is that hypothetical alternatives are in fact still possible, while counterfactual alternatives relate to the past and can therefore no longer be implemented.

literature

E. Aronson, T. Wilson, R. Akert: Social Psychology. Prentice Hall 2009.
T. Gilovich, H. Medvec: The Temporal Pattern to the Experience of Regret. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 67, No. 3, 1994, pp. 357-365.
V. Medvec, S. Madey, T. Gilovich: When Less Is More: Counterfactual Thinking and Satisfaction among Olympic Medalists. In: T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, D. Kahneman (Eds.): Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge University Press, New York 2002, pp. 625-635.
NJ. Roese: What Might Have Been: The Social Psychology of Counterfactual Thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey 1995.

Individual evidence

↑ Neal-J. Roese: What might have been: The social psychology of counterfactual thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey 1995.
^ D. Kahneman, D. Miller: Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. In: Psychological Review. Volume 93, No. 2, 1986, pp. 136-153.
^ V. Medvec, S. Madey, T. Gilovich: When less is more: Counterfactual Thinking and satisfaction among Olympic medalists. In: T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, D. Kahneman (Eds.): Heuristics and biases: The Psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge University Press, New York 2002, pp. 625-635.
^ T. Gilovich, H. Medvec: The temporal pattern to the experience of regret. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 67, No. 3, 1994, pp. 357-365.
^ PL Harris, T. German, P. Mills: Childrens' use of counterfactual reasoning thinking in causal reasoning. In: Cognition. Volume 61, 1996, pp. 233-259.

[1] Neal-J. Roese: What might have been: The social psychology of counterfactual thinking. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey 1995.

[2] D. Kahneman, D. Miller: Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. In: Psychological Review. Volume 93, No. 2, 1986, pp. 136-153.

[3] V. Medvec, S. Madey, T. Gilovich: When less is more: Counterfactual Thinking and satisfaction among Olympic medalists. In: T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, D. Kahneman (Eds.): Heuristics and biases: The Psychology of intuitive judgment. Cambridge University Press, New York 2002, pp. 625-635.

[4] T. Gilovich, H. Medvec: The temporal pattern to the experience of regret. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Volume 67, No. 3, 1994, pp. 357-365.

[5] PL Harris, T. German, P. Mills: Childrens' use of counterfactual reasoning thinking in causal reasoning. In: Cognition. Volume 61, 1996, pp. 233-259.