Joop van der Pligt

On bad decisions and disconfirmed expectancies: the psychology of regret and disappointment

Decision outcomes sometimes result in negative emotions. This can occur when a decision appears to be wrong in retrospect, and/or when the obtained decision outcome does not live up to expectations. Regret and disappointment are the two emotions that are of central interest in the present article. Although these emotions have a lot in common, they also differ in ways that are relevant to decision making. In this article we review theories and empirical findings concerning regret and disappointment. We first discuss how regret and disappointment differ with respect to their antecedent conditions, appraisals, and phenomenology. We also discuss possible behavioural consequences of experiencing these emotions. Next, we consider how the anticipation of regret and disappointment may influence decision making. We use regret and disappointment theory, developed by the economists Bell (1982, 1985), and Loomes and Sugden (1982, 1986, 1987), as a framework for our discussion. Finally, we argue that combining the theoretical approaches and research paradigms of behavioural decision theory with emotion theories will significantly increase our knowledge of antecedents and consequences of emotions.

Anticipated regret and time perspective: changing sexual risk-taking behavior

In two studies we test the effects of anticipated affective reactions such as regret on behavioral expectations and behavior. These effects were examined in the context of sexual risk-taking behavior. More specifically, we tested the impact of the anticipated feelings associated with unsafe sex on sexual risk-taking behavior. We assumed a difference between the feelings ahout unsafe sex and the feelings people anticipate to have after this behavior. Two studies tested the hypothesis that respondents who are induced to focus on their anticipated, post-behavioral feelings are more likely to report negative feelings such as regret and to adopt safer sexual practices than respondents who are asked to focus on their feelings about the behavior itself. Study 1 shows that anticipated feelings after unsafe sex were more negative than feelings about the behavioral act itself, and that respondents who were asked to consider these anticipated feelings expressed stronger expectations to reduce their risk in future interactions. Thus, asking respondents to take a wider time perspective, and to consider the feelings they would have after having had unsafe sex, resulted in ‘safer’ behavioral expectations. Study 2 replicates the findings of Study 1, and also yielded a reliable effect of the time perspective manipulation on actual, self-reported behavior. Respondents who were asked to report on their anticipated feelings after unsafe sex showed less risky behavior in the five months following the experiment than the remaining respondents. Thus, the induced focus on post-behavioral emotions increased the likelihood of preventive behavior. Implications of these findings for behavioral intervention programs are discussed.

The Experience of Regret and Disappointment

Regret and disappointment have in common the fact that they are experienced when the outcome of a decision is unfavourable: They both concern “what might have been”, had things been different. However, some regret and disappointment theorists regard the differences between these emotions as important, arguing that they differ with respect to the conditions under which they are felt, and how they affect decision making. The goal of the present research was to examine whether and how these emotions also differ with respect to the way in which they are experienced. Participants were asked torecall aninstance of intense regret or disappointment andto indicate what they felt, thought, felt like doing, did, and were motivated to do during this experience (cf. Roseman, Wiest, & Swartz, 1994). Significant differences between regret and disappointment were found in every category. These differences were most pronounced for “action tendencies” (what participants felt like doing) and “emotivations” (what they were motivated to do). These results suggest that the two emotions have differential implications for future behaviour.

The agony of ambivalence and ways to resolve it: introducing the MAID model

People are generally averse toward conflict between beliefs and/or feelings underlying their attitudes-that is, attitudinal ambivalence. This review integrates literature on attitudinal ambivalence with theories on decision making and coping strategies to gain a better understanding of when and how people deal with feelings of ambivalence. First it shows that ambivalence is experienced as being particularly unpleasant when the ambivalent attitude holder is confronted with the necessity to make a choice concerning the ambivalent attitude object; then, incongruent evaluative components of the attitude become accessible, and feelings of uncertainty about the potential outcomes arise, which may involve the anticipation of aversive emotions. Several coping strategies are employed when ambivalence is experienced as unpleasant. Emotion- and problem-focused coping strategies are discussed. The article concludes with a discussion of the MAID (model of ambivalence-induced discomfort), which aims to describe the consequences of ambivalence.People are generally averse toward conflict between beliefs and/or feelings underlying their attitudes—that is, attitudinal ambivalence. This review integrates literature on attitudinal ambivalence with theories on decision making and coping strategies to gain a better understanding of when and how people deal with feelings of ambivalence. First it shows that ambivalence is experienced as being particularly unpleasant when the ambivalent attitude holder is confronted with the necessity to make a choice concerning the ambivalent attitude object; then, incongruent evaluative components of the attitude become accessible, and feelings of uncertainty about the potential outcomes arise, which may involve the anticipation of aversive emotions. Several coping strategies are employed when ambivalence is experienced as unpleasant. Emotion- and problem-focused coping strategies are discussed. The article concludes with a discussion of the MAID (model of ambivalence-induced discomfort), which aims to describe the consequences of ambivalence.

Risk Perception and Self-Protective Behavior

Most models of health-related behaviors are based on the assumption that people estimate the seriousness of a risk, evaluate the costs and benefits of action, and then select a course of action that will maximize their expected outcome. Risk refers to the possibility of loss and is generally conceived as consisting of two components: the probability and the severity of negative outcomes. This article focuses on the probability component. First the role of perceived risk in models of health-behavior will be discussed. Possible biases in risk-perception and the role of perceived risk as a determinant of protective behavior are the next issue. This is followed by some methodological considerations about how to measure perceived risk and investigate its role as a behavioral determinant. Next we turn to optimistic biases in comparative risk appraisal and briefly discuss both antecedents and consequences of optimism. Finally we discuss some implications of these findings for programs aiming to change health-rel...

Blessed are those who expect nothing: Lowering expectations as a way of avoiding disappointment

The present paper addresses a way in which people can try to avoid disappointment: namely, by lowering their expectations about obtaining a desired but uncertain outcome. It was hypothesized that people endorse this strategy when two specific (contextual) conditions are met. First, self-relevant feedback should be anticipated, and second this feedback should be anticipated in the near future. An experiment in which self-relevance and timing of the feedback about the outcome were manipulated supported this hypothesis. Results showed that participants only lowered their estimates about a test score, when feedback about their test score was self-relevant and anticipated close in time. Implications and functionality of the use of this strategy are briefly discussed.

Expectancy-Value models of health behaviour: the role of salience and anticipated affect

Abstract Expectancy-value models of health behaviour are based upon the assumption that this behaviour is determined by a subjective cost-benefit analysis. Generally, these models emphasize cognitive appraisal processes focusing on the likelihood and evaluation of the consequences of health-related behavioural practices. A first potential shortcoming of applications of these models concerns their neglect of the cognitive limitations of the human decision maker. This is reflected in the tendency to incorporate many possible costs and benefits when assessing individual attitudes. We propose that the concept “dimensional salience” could help to assess the individuals he of reference within which behavioural alternatives are judged, and help to provide a more realistic description of the individual decision making process that takes account of the limitations of our information processing capacity. A second shortcoming of expectancy-value approaches concerns the limited attention paid to the anticipation of ...

Ambivalence towards meat.

The purpose of the present study was to examine whether differences in ambivalence between meat eaters affect their attitude towards eating meat, the belief structure underlying these attitudes, meat consumption, and intentions to reduce consumption in the future. Not surprisingly, more ambivalent meat eaters held a less positive attitude towards meat as compared to less ambivalent meat eaters. Moreover, the belief structure of the two groups also differed: More ambivalent persons associated the consumption of meat with slightly negative feelings, morally unacceptable issues, and risks for both their health and the environment. In contrast, less ambivalent meat eaters reported positive affective beliefs, did not emphasize moral issues, and perceived less risk. Results highlight the role of affective beliefs as a predictor of both attitude and ambivalence. Ambivalence, in turn, was a predictor of actual meat consumption; i.e. increased ambivalence was related to reduced meat consumption. Moreover, more ambivalent meat eaters intended to further reduce their meat consumption in the future. Practical and theoretical implications of these results are discussed.

The Referents of Trait Inferences: The Impact of Trait Concepts Versus Actor-Trait Links on Subsequent Judgments

The authors investigated the hypothesis that when trait inferences refer to abstract behavior labels they act as a general interpretation frame and lead to assimilation in subsequent judgments of an ambiguous target, whereas when they refer to a specific actor-trait link they will be used as a scale anchor and lead to contrast. Similar to G.B. Moskowitz and R.J. Romans ( 1992 ) study, participants who were instructed to memorize trait-implying sentences showed assimilation, and participants who were instructed to form an impression of the actors in these sentences showed contrast. However, exposure to trait-implying sentences that described actors with real names and were accompanied with photos of the actors resulted in contrast under both memorization and impression instructions (Experiment 1 ). Furthermore, contrast ensued when trait-implying sentences were accompanied with information that suggested a person attribution, whereas assimilation ensued when that information suggested a situation attribution, independent of processing goals (Experiment 2). These findings are interpreted as support for referent-based explanations of the consequences of trait inferences.

The Restraint Bias: How the Illusion of Self-Restraint Promotes Impulsive Behavior

Four studies examined how impulse-control beliefs—beliefs regarding ones ability to regulate visceral impulses, such as hunger, drug craving, and sexual arousal—influence the self-control process. The findings provide evidence for a restraint bias: a tendency for people to overestimate their capacity for impulse control. This biased perception of restraint had important consequences for peoples self-control strategies. Inflated impulse-control beliefs led people to overexpose themselves to temptation, thereby promoting impulsive behavior. In Study 4, for example, the impulse-control beliefs of recovering smokers predicted their exposure to situations in which they would be tempted to smoke. Recovering smokers with more inflated impulse-control beliefs exposed themselves to more temptation, which led to higher rates of relapse 4 months later. The restraint bias offers unique insight into how erroneous beliefs about self-restraint promote impulsive behavior.