Regulatory mode effects on counterfactual thinking and regret

Dipartimento di Psicologia dei Processi di Sviluppo e Socializzazione, Sapienza Università di Roma, Via dei Marsi 78, Roma, Italy; Department of Psychology, Columbia University, New York, USA; Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA; Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università di Cagliari, Via Is Mirrionis 1, Italy
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (Impact Factor: 2.22). 03/2008; DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.06.002
Source: OAI

ABSTRACT The present studies examined the influence of two regulatory mode concerns—a locomotion concern with movement from state to state and an assessment concern with making comparisons [see Higgins, E. T., Kruglanski, A. W., & Pierro, A. (2003). Regulatory mode: Locomotion and assessment as distinct orientations. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 293–344). New York: Academic Press]—on engaging in counterfactual thinking and experiencing post-decisional regret. When contemplating a decision with a negative outcome, it was predicted that high (vs. low) locomotion would induce less counterfactual thinking and less regret, whereas the opposite would be true for high (vs. low) assessment. Locomotion and assessment orientations were measured as chronic individual differences in Study 1 and 2, and were induced experimentally in Study 3. In Study 1 and 3 a purchase scenario with a negative outcome was used to elicit counterfactuals and regret, while in Study 2 participants were asked to recall one of their own personal purchases that had a negative outcome. The results supported our predictions. We discuss the implications of these findings for the nature of counterfactual thinking and regret from the perspective of their relation to regulatory mode.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Beyond motivations to achieve particular outcomes, people also have motivations to use particular strategies while pursuing these outcomes. This article integrates research on the latter strategic preferences and discusses the place of such research in the broader investigation of motivated thinking. A review of studies examining the strategic preferences stemming from both motivations for promotion versus prevention (Higgins, 1997) and motivations for locomotion versus assessment (Higgins, Kruglanski, & Pierro, 2003) illustrates that these preferences have unique effects on basic processes of judgment, including the evaluation of alternative hypotheses or counterfactuals, the prioritization of fast versus accurate information processing, and the recall and activation of knowledge from memory. Moreover, this review also demonstrates important interactions between strategic preferences and outcome preferences. Strategic preferences thus appear to make distinct and important contributions to understanding how motivation influences judgment and should feature prominently in general analyses of motivated thinking.
    Social and Personality Psychology Compass 02/2012; 6(2).
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The paper goal is to identify the predictors of the sales team that determine business performance and cross-selling in the relationship marketing. In the theoretical model, we suggested hypotheses that are associated with sales performance and cross-selling. In terms of results, cross-selling and sales training had significant association with business performance in the B2B channel. The boss pressure also had significant relation. The leadership pressure means that there is much pressure and demand for better results. However, this high pressure decreases cross-selling performance. The results supported this assumption. Also, understanding the consumer' s need affected cross-selling. Finally, directing sales, which had a negative relationship with performance in the retail segment B2B, was positive in the pharmaceutical segment, B2C.
    Revista de Administração de Empresas 12/2013; 53(6):565-579. · 0.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study looked into the scarcity effect based on the consumers' self-regulatory modes and determined the effect that such a regulatory mode and that quantity-scarcity messages would have on evaluations of fashion products. To that end, the study used a 2 (regulatory mode: assessment mode/locomotion mode) (message type: quantity-scarcity message/non-scarcity message) between-subjects factorial design in which buying impulsiveness was presented as a mediator variable that showed differences in product evaluations depending on the message type and on the presence of a self-regulatory mode. The results of this study showed that locomotion-oriented consumers evaluated products more positively compared to assessment-oriented consumers when the quantity-scarcity message was presented. When a non-scarcity message was presented, no significant difference was observed in product evaluations based on the consumers' self-regulatory modes. In addition, buying impulsiveness in consumers served a mediator role in the evaluations of fashion products. The results of this study imply that a clear understanding of consumers is a prerequisite for maximizing the scarcity effect and that companies need to differentiate in terms of the way they use scarcity messages based on consumers' self-regulatory modes.
    The Research Journal of the Costume Culture. 02/2014; 22(1).

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 31, 2014