Regret and Responsibility: A Reply to Zeelenberg et al. (1998)

Binge-watching Uncovered: Examining the interplay of perceived usefulness, habit, and regret in continuous viewing

Binge-watching has become one of the most popular ways for people to spend their free time. Binge-watching refers to watching more than two episodes of a television show in a single sitting. This pattern of behavior can be seen in people of a wide range of ages, but it is particularly widespread among people of millennial age and younger. In this study, we propose a model that explains binge-watching engagement by theorizing and testing the association of social influence on perceived usefulness, regret on the continuous intention of binge-watching, and habit on continuous intention and binge-watching engagement. The authors evaluated the model using data collected from 225 respondents. The results supported the proposed hypotheses and confirmed that regret does not neutralize the positive - and strong - effect of perceived usefulness and habit on binge-watching.

Decision avoidance and post-decision regret: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Decision Avoidance (DA) strategies allow people to forego or abandon effortful deliberation by postponing, bypassing, or delegating a decision. DA is thought to reduce regret, primarily by allowing decision makers to evade personal responsibility for potential negative outcomes. We tested this relation between DA and post-decision regret in a multilevel meta-analysis of 59 effect estimates coming from 13 papers. Five DA strategies were considered: status quo preservation, action omission, inaction inertia, choice delegation and choice deferral. Across all effects and DA strategies, there was a non-significant trend toward DA reducing regret (Hedges' g = -0.23, p = 0.063). When assessing individual strategies, we found that only status quo preservation reduced regret reliably (Hedges' g = -0.45, p = 0.006). The relationship between DA and regret was unclear for the other DA strategies. We tested a number of moderators for the effect. Only 'previous experience' (i.e., the outcome of a previous decision) influenced the relation between DA and regret reliably. That is, if participants choose the DA option when the same choice previously led to a negative outcome, regret is actually enhanced. Overall, there is clear evidence that status quo preservation can reduce regret, but it is currently unclear whether the same holds for other DA strategies.

The use of the Decision Regret Scale in non-clinical contexts

The Decision Regret Scale (DRS) was assessed for its psychometric qualities in measuring decision regret in ordinary life scenarios. Although the scale has typically been used with patients and in the context of medical decision-making in earlier studies, this contribution shows that the instrument may have a variety of uses, retaining excellent metric properties even in non-medical contexts. The tool showed good fits with both the CFA and the gender Measurement Invariance. A non-probabilistic selection of 2,534 Italian university students was conducted. The internal consistency measures were found to be completely appropriate. Correlations with the General Decision-Making Style (GDMS) and Scale of Regulatory Modes were used to check for convergent validity (SRM). Convergence analysis showed that participants with higher regret scores were those who favored a rational decision-making style, while lower regret scores correlated with avoidant and spontaneous styles. With regard to the regulatory modes, the relationship between regret and locomotion was positive. Overall, the directions of association point to an interesting predictive measure of a person's decision-making and self-regulatory orientation through the evaluation of regret using the DRS. The excellent psychometric properties found foreshadow a reliable use in various contexts where knowledge of post-decisional attitude becomes important: school, university, professional orientation, marketing studies, relationship choices, as well as for use in research.

Regret and Other Emotions Related to Decision-Making: Antecedents, Appraisals, and Phenomenological Aspects

Objectives: The mainstream position on regret in psychological literature is that its necessary conditions are agency and responsibility, that is, to choose freely but badly. Without free choice, other emotions, such as disappointment, are deemed to be elicited when the outcome is worse than expected. In two experiments, we tested the opposite hypothesis that being forced by external circumstances to choose an option inconsistent with one's own intentions is an important source of regret and a core component of its phenomenology, regardless of the positivity/negativity of the post-decision outcome. Along with regret, four post-decision emotions - anger toward oneself, disappointment, anger toward circumstances, and satisfaction - were investigated to examine their analogies and differences to regret with regard to antecedents, appraisals, and phenomenological aspects. Methods: Through the scenario methodology, we manipulated three variables: choice (free/forced), outcome (positive/negative), and time (short/long time after decision-making). Moreover, we investigated whether responsibility, decision justifiability, and some phenomenological aspects (self-attribution, other attribution, and contentment) mediated the effect exerted by choice, singularly or in interaction with outcome and time, on the five emotions. Each study was conducted with 336 participants, aged 18-60. Results: The results of both studies were similar and supported our hypothesis. In particular, regret elicited by forced choice was always high, regardless of the valence of outcome, whereas free choice elicited regret was high only with a negative outcome. Moreover, regret was unaffected by responsibility and decision justifiability, whereas it was affected by the three phenomenological dimensions. Conclusion: Our results suggest that (1) the prevailing theory of regret is too binding, since it posits as necessary some requirements which are not; (2) the antecedents and phenomenology of regret are broader than it is generally believed; (3) decision-making produces a complex emotional constellation, where the different emotions, singularly and/or in combination, constitute the affective responses to the different aspects of decision-making.

Internalizing Symptoms, Alcohol Use, and Protective Behavioral Strategies: Associations with Regretted Sexual Experiences of College Students

One of the most pervasive forms of regret, often connected to alcohol use, is sexual regret. Lifetime rates of regretted sexual experiences (RSE) for college students is between 29%-71.9%, with 31.8% endorsing past year RSE and 31.7% stating alcohol negatively influenced decision making. While past research has focused on psychological symptoms following sexual assault, psychological effects and subsequent outcomes of RSE remains under-studied. Whether a history of sexual regret is associated with mental health symptoms, alcohol use, and protective behavioral strategy (PBS) use in the past month was analyzed. Participants (n = 1,394; 57.68% females, 26.96% racial/ethnic minority) reported on internalizing symptoms (anxiety, depression, trauma symptoms, and suicidal ideation) and externalizing and protective behaviors (problematic alcohol use and PBS). It was hypothesized that those with a history of RSE would report heightened current psychological symptoms compared to those without a history of RSE, regardless of when the RSE occurred. Of the n = 1,394 participants, 39.96% reported sexual regret and 26.11% endorsed a history of sexual victimization. Results indicate that among participants with an RSE, past month symptoms of anxiety, depression, trauma, and suicidal ideation were heightened. A similar pattern emerged for problematic alcohol use, as those with a history of RSE engaged in more problematic alcohol use in the past month. For PBS, those with a history of RSE engaged in fewer PBS than those without. Understanding these factors may provide novel insight for mental health prevention efforts and intervention targets for individuals who experience sexual regret.

Shared responsibility in collective decisions

Research investigating collective decision-making has focused primarily on the improvement of accuracy in collective decisions and less on the motives that drive individuals to make these decisions. We argue that a strong but neglected motive for making collective decisions is minimizing the material and psychological burden of an individual's responsibility. Making difficult decisions with others shields individuals from the consequences of negative outcomes by reducing regret, punishment and stress. Considering shared responsibility as a another key motivation to join groups helps understand behaviours with societal implications such as political voting, committing norm violations, predicting natural disasters and making health-related decisions.

Parsing cultural impacts on regret and risk in Iran, China and the United Kingdom

Value-based choices are influenced both by powerful counterfactuals, such as regret, and also by risk in potential outcomes. Culture can profoundly affect how humans perceive and act in the world, but it remains unknown how regret in value-based choice and key aspects of risk-taking may differ between cultures. Here our computational approach provides precise and independent metrics, grounded in extensive neurobiological evidence, for the influences of risk and regret on choice. We test for commonalities and differences across three diverse cultures: Iran, China and the UK. Including Iran matters because cross-cultural work on value-based choice is lacking for this key 21^st Century culture, and also because patterns across the three cultures arbitrates between explanations for differences. We find commonalities, with regret influencing choice across cultures and no consistent cultural difference seen. However, for risk, unlike in both Chinese and Westerners’ choices, Iranians are risk-seeking – findings consistent across two task variants and further explained by Iranians showing less subjective impact of negative, but not positive, outcomes of risky choices. Our computational approach dissects cultural impacts on two key neurobiologically-grounded quantities in value-based choice, showing that neuroscientific accounts cannot a priori isolate such quantities from culture in the cognitive processes underlying choice.

“Supersize me!” The effects of cognitive effort and goal frame on the persuasiveness of upsell offers

Purpose

In many industries, customers are offered the opportunity to revise their initial decision in return for a superior but more expensive service option, a selling technique that is typically referred to as upselling. Drawing on the research on customers’ service experience, cognitive effort, decision justification, and goal framing, the purpose of this paper is to conceptualize upselling as a two-stage decision process where the process of making the first decision (i.e. deciding on an initial service option) affects the final decision (i.e. the decision for or against the upsell offer).

Design/methodology/approach

First, qualitative interviews were conducted both with customers as well as managers. Moreover, in two experimental studies, different scenarios depicted an upsell situation that is common in many service encounters. After choosing a hotel room or rental car for reservation, participants were confronted with differently framed arguments to induce a shift toward an enhanced but more costly version of the initially chosen service option.

Findings

The qualitative interviews reveal that upselling is a common practice in many companies and that the manner in which the upsell is communicated has a considerable influence on its effectiveness. The first experimental study finds that the cognitive effort that customers expend in the initial choice moderates the effect of upsell messages using different goal frames. The second experimental study shows that customers are only affected by different goal frames when they feel responsible for the outcome of the final decision.

Practical implications

The findings provide a number of useful guidelines for designing upselling strategies and may also be used to segment a firm’s customer base. On a more general level, this research also raises managers’ awareness of the sequential nature of upselling decisions and the customer’s intrinsic need to justify an upsell choice.

Originality/value

The studies contribute to the literature on customers’ service experience and upselling strategies. Upselling is conceptualized as a two-stage process in which customers’ experience in one phase influences their behavior in later stages. The underlying psychological mechanisms of this effect are also highlighted by referring to customers’ need to justify service choices to themselves.

At Least I Tried: The Relationship between Regulatory Focus and Regret Following Action vs. Inaction

Regret is an unpleasant feeling that may arise following decisions that ended poorly, and may affect the decision-maker's well-being and future decision making. Some studies show that a decision to act leads to greater regret than a decision not to act when both resulted in failure, because the latter is usually the norm. In some cases, when the norm is to act, this pattern is reversed. We suggest that the decision maker's regulatory focus, affects regret after action or inaction. Specifically, promotion-focused individuals, who tend to be more proactive, view action as more normal than prevention-focused individuals, and therefore experience regulatory fit when an action decision is made. Hence, we hypothesized that promotion-focused individuals will feel less regret than prevention-focused individuals when a decision to act ended poorly. In addition, we hypothesized that a trigger for change implied in the situation, decreases the level of regret following action. We tested our hypotheses on a sample of 330 participants enrolled in an online survey. The participants received six decision scenarios, in which they were asked to evaluate the level of regret following action and inaction. Individual regulatory focus was measured by two different scales. Promotion-focused individuals attributed less regret than prevention-focused individuals to action decisions. Regret following inaction was not affected by regulatory focus. In addition, a trigger for change decreases regret following action. Orthodox people tend to attribute more regret than non-orthodox to a person who made an action decision. The results contribute to the literature by showing that not only the situation but also the decision maker's orientation affects the regret after action vs. inaction.

Self-Regulation and Wellbeing When Facing a Blocked Parenthood Goal: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Developmental regulation theories claim that continuing to pursue a goal when it becomes blocked contributes to poorer wellbeing. This consequence is expected to lead to the use of self-regulation strategies in the form of higher disengagement from the goal and higher reengagement in other meaningful goals. The use of these strategies is expected to lead to better wellbeing. A systematic-review and meta-analyses were conducted to test the major predictions of developmental regulation theories for blocked parenthood goal and to investigate possible moderator variables, particularly type and degree of blockage. A total of eight meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. Moderation was tested with subgroup analysis. After searching eight databases, 4977 potential relevant manuscripts were identified but only six met inclusion criteria. From the eight meta-analyses conducted, only two were significant. In line with prediction, higher goal blockage was related to higher negative mood and reengagement in other life goals was associated to higher positive mood (p < .001). From a total of eight subgroup analyses performed, results showed that disengaging had a positive impact on wellbeing for people experiencing an unanticipated type of blockage (i.e., infertility) but not for those with an anticipated one (i.e., postponing parenthood; X2 = 4.867, p = .03). From the total of twelve sensitivity analyses performed only one suggested that results might differ. The association between disengagement and mood varied according to study quality. When only average studies were included this association was negative, although non-significant. The evidence obtained did not fully support developmental regulation theories for the pursuit of parenthood goal, but primary research had too many methodological limitations to reach firm conclusions. Future studies aimed at investigating blocked parenthood goal are required to evaluate the value of developmental regulation theories.

Self-Regulation and Wellbeing When Facing a Blocked Parenthood Goal: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Developmental regulation theories claim that continuing to pursue a goal when it becomes blocked contributes to poorer wellbeing. This consequence is expected to lead to the use of self-regulation strategies in the form of higher disengagement from the goal and higher reengagement in other meaningful goals. The use of these strategies is expected to lead to better wellbeing. A systematic-review and meta-analyses were conducted to test the major predictions of developmental regulation theories for blocked parenthood goal and to investigate possible moderator variables, particularly type and degree of blockage. A total of eight meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. Moderation was tested with subgroup analysis. After searching eight databases, 4977 potential relevant manuscripts were identified but only six met inclusion criteria. From the eight meta-analyses conducted, only two were significant. In line with prediction, higher goal blockage was related to higher negative mood and reengagement in other life goals was associated to higher positive mood (p < .001). From a total of eight subgroup analyses performed, results showed that disengaging had a positive impact on wellbeing for people experiencing an unanticipated type of blockage (i.e., infertility) but not for those with an anticipated one (i.e., postponing parenthood; X2 = 4.867, p = .03). From the total of twelve sensitivity analyses performed only one suggested that results might differ. The association between disengagement and mood varied according to study quality. When only average studies were included this association was negative, although non-significant. The evidence obtained did not fully support developmental regulation theories for the pursuit of parenthood goal, but primary research had too many methodological limitations to reach firm conclusions. Future studies aimed at investigating blocked parenthood goal are required to evaluate the value of developmental regulation theories.

Decision-Making Dysfunctions of Counterfactuals in Depression: Who Might I have Been?

Cognitive neuroscience enables us now to decompose major depressive disorder into dysfunctional component processes and relate these processes to specific neural substrates. This approach can be used to illuminate the biological basis of altered psychological processes in depression, including abnormal decision-making. One important decision-related process is counterfactual thinking, or the comparison of reality to hypothetical alternatives. Evidence suggests that individuals with depression experience exaggerated emotional responses due to focusing on counterfactual decision outcomes in general and regret, i.e., the emotion associated with focus on an alternative superior outcome, in particular. Regret is linked to self-esteem in that it involves the evaluation of an individual's own decisions. Alterations of self-esteem, in turn, are a hallmark of depression. The literature on the behavioral and neural processes underlying counterfactual thinking, self-esteem, and depression is selectively reviewed. A model is proposed in which unstable self-representation in depression is more strongly perturbed when a different choice would have produced a better outcome, leading to increased feelings of regret. This approach may help unify diverse aspects of depression, can generate testable predictions, and may suggest new treatment avenues targeting distorted counterfactual cognitions, attentional biases toward superior counterfactual outcomes, or increased affective response to regretted outcomes.

Waves of regret: a meg study of emotion and decision-making

Recent fMRI studies have investigated brain activity involved in the feeling of regret and disappointment by manipulating the feedback participants saw after making a decision to play certain gambles: full-feedback (regret: participant sees the outcomes from both the chosen and unchosen gamble) vs. partial-feedback (disappointment: participant only sees the outcome from chosen gamble). However, regret and disappointment are also characterized by differential agency attribution: personal agency for regret, external agency for disappointment. In this study, we investigate the neural correlates of these two characterizations of regret and disappointment using magnetoencephalography (MEG). To do this, we experimentally induced each emotion by manipulating feedback (chosen gamble vs. unchosen gamble), agency (human vs. computer choice) and outcomes (win vs. loss) in a fully randomized design. At the behavioral level the emotional experience of regret and disappointment were indeed affected by both feedback and agency manipulations. These emotions also differentially affect subsequent choices, with regret leading to riskier behavior. At the neural level both feedback and agency affected the brain responses associated with regret and disappointment, demonstrating differential localization in the brain for each. Notably, feedback regret showed greater brain activity in the right anterior and posterior regions, with agency regret producing greater activity in the left anterior region. These findings extend the evidence for neural activity in processing both regret and disappointment by highlighting for the first time the respective importance of feedback and agency, as well as outlining the temporal dynamics of these emotions.

Life Regrets and the Need to Belong

The present research documents a link between regret and the need to belong. Across five studies, using diverse methods and samples, the authors established that regrets involving primarily social relationships (e.g., romance and family) are felt more intensely than less socially based regrets (e.g., work and education). The authors ruled out alternative explanations for this pattern and found that it is best explained by the extent to which regrets are judged to constitute threats to belonging. Threats to belonging at the regret level and the need to belong at the individual level were strong predictors of regret intensity across multiple regret domains. These findings highlight the central role social connectedness plays in what people regret most.

Post-treatment regret among young breast cancer survivors

OBJECTIVE

The study addresses: (1) what women regret about their breast cancer treatment 5 years later, and (2) what characteristics of disease and treatment predict post-treatment regret.

METHOD

Interviews were conducted with breast cancer survivors in the San Francisco Bay Area. Participants were interviewed following diagnosis. Five years later, women were asked whether they had any regrets about their cancer treatment (N=449). Qualitative analysis was used to identify regret content, and logistic regression was used to determine what characteristics of treatment predicted regret.

RESULTS

Forty two point five percent women in the sample regretted some aspect of the treatment. The most common regrets were primary surgery (24.1%), chemotherapy and/or radiation (21.5%), reconstruction (17.8%), and problems with providers (13.1%). In addition, women regretted inactions (59.2%) (actions that they did not take) more than actions that they did take (30.4%). This represents a novel finding in the study of post-treatment regret, which has largely focused on regrets over actions. Quantitative analysis revealed that women who were anxious about the future (OR=1.32; p=0.03) or had problems communicating with physicians (OR=1.26; p=0.02) during treatment were more likely to express regret 5 years later. In addition, women with new or recurrent cancers 5 years later were significantly more likely to regret some aspect of their primary treatment (OR=5.81; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

This research supports addressing the psychosocial aspects of cancer care and improving physician-patient communication. Evidence is also provided for addressing the unique emotional needs of women with recurrent cancers, who may experience an undue burden of regret.

A role for the striatum in regret-related choice repetition

"Regret aversion" is proposed to explain a tendency to avoid future choices that have induced past regret. However, regret might also motivate us to repeat previous regret-related choices to make up for their previous selection, a behavior resembling "chasing" in the context of gambling. In the current experiment, we acquired fMRI brain data while participants placed monetary bets on repeated gambles. Behaviorally, participants showed a tendency to repeat previously regret-related choices (operationalized as those leading to an outcome worse than what might have been), an effect restricted to early runs of the task. At gamble outcome, we show a reduction in ventral striatal activity for regret-related relative to relief-related outcomes. Critically, this modulation was only seen when subjects were responsible for the bet choice. Activity in dorsal striatum was associated with an influence of previous regret on participants' subsequent choices, which is evident in increased activity when regret-related choices were repeated, relative to avoided, on the next trial. Our findings indicate that regret can lead to choice repetition as if seeking to make up for our mistakes and in so doing may lead to subsequent chasing behavior.

Amygdala involvement in self-blame regret

Regret-related brain activity is dependent on free choice, but it is unclear whether this activity is a function of more subtle differences in the degree of responsibility a decision-maker exerts over a regrettable outcome. In this experiment, we show that trial-by-trial subjective ratings of regret depend on a higher subjective sense of responsibility, as well as being dependent on objective responsibility. Using fMRI we show an enhanced amygdala response to regret-related outcomes when these outcomes are associated with high, as compared to low, responsibility. This enhanced response was maximal in participants who showed a greater level of enhancement in their subjective ratings of regret engendered by an objective increase in responsibility. Orbitofrontal and cingulate cortex showed opposite effects, with an enhanced response for regret-related outcomes when participants were not objectively responsible. The findings indicate that the way the brain processes regret-related outcomes depends on both objective and subjective aspects of responsibility, highlighting the critical importance of the amygdala.

Regret in Later Life: Exploring Relationships between Regret Frequency, Secondary Interpretive Control Beliefs, and Health in Older Individuals

The present study examined what older people regret, and the relationships between regret, health and life satisfaction. The study also explored the role of secondary interpretive control beliefs in relation to regret. Participants ( N = 228; 79–98 years old) were asked to report on the content and frequency of their regret, secondary interpretive control beliefs (e.g., beliefs in finding the “silver lining” in a dark cloud), health, and life satisfaction. A content analysis revealed that participants most commonly reported feeling regret due to things they had not done, the death of a loved one, and their own or others' health problems. Regression analyses indicated that experiencing regret more frequently was associated with poorer health and life satisfaction. Moreover, evidence for an emotion-modifying role of secondary interpretive control beliefs was shown through its negative association with regret. Results suggest that older adults may be experiencing age-related regrets that differ in content from those experienced at younger ages and that certain control beliefs may serve to lessen regret.

The Regret and Disappointment Scale: An instrument for assessing regret and disappointment in decision making

The present article investigates the effectiveness of methods traditionally used to distinguish between the emotions of regret and disappointment and presents a new method — the Regret and Disappointment Scale (RDS) — for assessing the two emotions in decision making research. The validity of the RDS was tested in three studies. Study 1 used two scenarios, one prototypical of regret and the other of disappointment, to test and compare traditional methods (“How much regret do you feel” and “How much disappointment do you feel”) with the RDS. Results showed that only the RDS clearly differentiated between the constructs of regret and disappointment. Study 2 confirmed the validity of the RDS in a real-life scenario, in which both feelings of regret and disappointment could be experienced. Study 2 also demonstrated that the RDS can discriminate between regret and disappointment with results similar to those obtained by using a context-specific scale. Study 3 showed the advantages of the RDS over the traditional methods in gambling situations commonly used in decision making research, and provided evidence for the convergent validity of the RDS.

Avoidance of anticipated regret: the ordering of prostate-specific antigen tests

OBJECTIVE

When making decisions, people are known to try to minimize the regret that would be provoked by unwanted consequences of these decisions. The authors explored the strength and determinants of such anticipated regret in a study of physicians' decisions to order prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests.

METHODS

32 US and 33 French primary care physicians indicated the likelihood they would order a PSA for 32 hypothetical men presenting for routine physical exams. They then indicated how much regret they would feel if they found advanced prostate cancer in 12 other patients for whom they had chosen not to order PSAs several years before. The latter patients differed according to age (55, 65, or 75 years), a prior request or not for PSA testing, and no or some irregularity of the prostate on the earlier rectal exam.

RESULTS

ANOVA found that regret was higher when the patient had requested a PSA, the prostate was irregular, and the patient was younger. Shape had less effect when the patient had requested a PSA. US physicians had more regret than the French, patient request had a greater impact on the Americans, and increasing patient age reduced regret more among the French. In a 1-way correlation, the regret score was associated with the likelihood of ordering PSAs for both the French (r = 0.64, P < 0.005) and the Americans (r = 0.42, P< 0.02). In a regression analysis too, the regret score was the most important predictor of the likelihood of ordering a PSA (beta = 0.37, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Regret over failing to diagnose aggressive prostate cancer is associated with a policy of ordering PSAs. This regret appears to be culturally sensitive.

The psychology of doing nothing: forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion

Several independent lines of research bear on the question of why individuals avoid decisions by postponing them, failing to act, or accepting the status quo. This review relates findings across several different disciplines and uncovers 4 decision avoidance effects that offer insight into this common but troubling behavior: choice deferral, status quo bias, omission bias, and inaction inertia. These findings are related by common antecedents and consequences in a rational-emotional model of the factors that predispose humans to do nothing. Prominent components of the model include cost-benefit calculations, anticipated regret, and selection difficulty. Other factors affecting decision avoidance through these key components, such as anticipatory negative emotions, decision strategies, counterfactual thinking, and preference uncertainty, are also discussed.

The inaction effect in the psychology of regret

Previous research showed that decisions to act (i.e., actions) produce more regret than decisions not to act (i.e., inactions). This previous research focused on decisions made in isolation and ignored that decisions are often made in response to earlier outcomes. The authors show in 4 experiments that these prior outcomes may promote action and hence make inaction more abnormal. They manipulated information about a prior outcome. As hypothesized, when prior outcomes were positive or absent, people attributed more regret to action than to inaction. However, as predicted and counter to previous research, following negative prior outcomes, more regret was attributed to inaction, a finding that the authors label the inaction effect. Experiment 4, showing differential effects for regret and disappointment, demonstrates the need for emotion-specific predictions.

Attributions of responsibility and affective reactions to decision outcomes

Immediate affective reactions to outcomes are more intense following decisions to act than following decisions not to act. This finding holds for both positive and negative outcomes. We relate this "actor-effect" to attribution theory and argue that decision makers are seen as more responsible for outcomes when these are the result of a decision to act as compared to a decision not to act. Experiment 1 (N = 80) tests the main assumption underlying our reasoning and shows that affective reactions to decision outcomes are indeed more intense when the decision maker is seen as more responsible. Experiment 2 (N = 40) tests whether the actor effect can be predicted on the basis of differential attributions following action and inaction. Participants read vignettes in which active and passive actors obtained a positive or negative outcome. Action resulted in more intense affect than inaction, and positive outcomes resulted in more intense affect than negative outcomes. Experiment 2 further shows that responsibility attributions and affective reactions to outcomes are highly correlated; that is, more extreme affective reactions are associated with more internal attributions. We discuss the implications for research on post-decisional reactions.

Regret and Responsibility Resolved? Evaluating Ordóñez and Connolly's (2000) Conclusions

T. Connolly, L. D. Ordo;aan;atez, and R. Coughlan (1997, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 73-85) argued, on the basis of 5 experiments, that regret need not be related to a sense of responsibility for the regretted outcome. We (M. Zeelenberg, W. W. van Dijk, & A. S. R. Manstead, 1998, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74, 254-272) showed in 2 experiments that this conclusion was premature, because it was based on an indirect measure of regret (i.e., overall happiness with the decision outcome). When regret was directly measured, the predicted effects of responsibility were found. L. D. Ordo;aan;atez and T. Connolly (2000, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 81, 132-142) replicated our findings in 2 experiments. Based on their findings they arrived at 4 conclusions. In this rejoinder we first discuss Ordóñez and Connolly's new studies and we then discuss the validity of their 4 conclusions. Copyright 2000 Academic Press.