Consequences of Counterfactual Thinking
30071077
PSYC 4007, Fall 2016
University of Louisiana at Monroe
November 8, 2016
Consequences of Counterfactual Thinking
30071077
Sachin Shrestha
PSYC 4007, Fall 2016
University of Louisiana at Monroe
November 8, 2016 Abstract
Counterfactual thinking is the human tendency to create possible alternatives to life events that have already occurred; something that is contrary to what actually happened. These type of thinking about the past can result in both positive and negative consequences to the individual. The author of this paper is trying to find support for three main arguments that (a) counterfactual thinking is activated mainly by negative affect, (b) content of the counterfactual …show more content…
It literally means something that isn’t true. So, counterfactual thinking means thinking about things that aren’t true. It is a very common human tendency, and almost everyone is guilty of it. Especially when things don’t go the way they want, humans tend to create possible alternatives to that event, and ponder excessively on it. Some people believe that it is beneficial to think like that, whereas some people believe that it’s useless, or sometimes even harmful, to do counterfactual thinking. The researcher of this paper is trying to argue that it’s both, that some parts of counterfactual thinking have positive consequences, whereas some have negative, and that despite it having both positive and negative effects, the net effect however is …show more content…
133). By this he means that this counterfactual thinking could be not just of the past but also the future. That is, when one thinks about his past decision, he could not only think about the past and how it should have happened, but also how it would have affected his future. The researcher is also quick to point out that not all counterfactuals are about how things could have been better in the past, as one could as easily think about how things could have been worse, and dwell on that scenario. Once the counterfactual thinking has been defined, the researcher then focuses on what generates these thoughts. According to the researcher, there are two determinants of counterfactual thinking: Activation and Content. Activation is defined by the researcher as “whether the process of counterfactual generation is initially switched on or off”, and content is defined as “specific makeup of the resulting counterfactual thought” (p. 135). Activation is whether or not a person decides to think about the past and content is what the person thinks about which, the author agrees, may take many
30071077
PSYC 4007, Fall 2016
University of Louisiana at Monroe
November 8, 2016
Consequences of Counterfactual Thinking
30071077
Sachin Shrestha
PSYC 4007, Fall 2016
University of Louisiana at Monroe
November 8, 2016 Abstract
Counterfactual thinking is the human tendency to create possible alternatives to life events that have already occurred; something that is contrary to what actually happened. These type of thinking about the past can result in both positive and negative consequences to the individual. The author of this paper is trying to find support for three main arguments that (a) counterfactual thinking is activated mainly by negative affect, (b) content of the counterfactual …show more content…
It literally means something that isn’t true. So, counterfactual thinking means thinking about things that aren’t true. It is a very common human tendency, and almost everyone is guilty of it. Especially when things don’t go the way they want, humans tend to create possible alternatives to that event, and ponder excessively on it. Some people believe that it is beneficial to think like that, whereas some people believe that it’s useless, or sometimes even harmful, to do counterfactual thinking. The researcher of this paper is trying to argue that it’s both, that some parts of counterfactual thinking have positive consequences, whereas some have negative, and that despite it having both positive and negative effects, the net effect however is …show more content…
133). By this he means that this counterfactual thinking could be not just of the past but also the future. That is, when one thinks about his past decision, he could not only think about the past and how it should have happened, but also how it would have affected his future. The researcher is also quick to point out that not all counterfactuals are about how things could have been better in the past, as one could as easily think about how things could have been worse, and dwell on that scenario. Once the counterfactual thinking has been defined, the researcher then focuses on what generates these thoughts. According to the researcher, there are two determinants of counterfactual thinking: Activation and Content. Activation is defined by the researcher as “whether the process of counterfactual generation is initially switched on or off”, and content is defined as “specific makeup of the resulting counterfactual thought” (p. 135). Activation is whether or not a person decides to think about the past and content is what the person thinks about which, the author agrees, may take many