A study published in the June 2007 issue of the Psychological Science Association's Journal of Psychological Science sheds new light on the mental processes involved in "counterfactual thinking," in which past decisions are revisited and alternatives are evaluated.
The authors explain that while this may be positive and affirmative, it is most often regretful and self-critical.
In most thinking studies, participants read scenarios in which bad decisions are made and asked them how they would react in the same situation. However, Vittorio Girotto of the IUAV University in Venice, Italy, and colleagues found significant differences in counterfactual thinking when the experience of failure is real rather than hypothetical.
In a series of experiments, participants were divided into "actors" (who actually encountered the problem) and "readers" (who read about it). The actors were invited to take part in a competition to solve a mathematical problem. They were given a choice between two sealed envelopes described as containing either a difficult or a mild problem.
In fact, both contained a problem that was almost impossible to solve in the allotted time. After the actors failed to complete the task, they were asked to write at least one way in which the experience could be improved.
Readers were asked to review the written version of the same script and similarly write at least one way things could have been better for the protagonist.
Contrary to previous findings, the researchers found significant differences in the thought processes of the two groups. Readers, as a rule, changed the choice made by the character (choose a different envelope). The participants decided to change the elements in the problem-solving process itself (for example, allowing the use of a calculator). Actors were also thought to have a strong tendency to avoid self-blame when identifying alternatives. The current study found differences even when participants' decisions could not be criticized.
The researchers conclude:
"Protagonists and readers create different counterfactuals because they rely on different information, not because they have different motives."
تعليقات
إرسال تعليق