Motivational consequences of counterfactual mindsets: Does counterfactual structure influence the use of conservative or risky tactics?

Kevin Winter*, Kai Epstude

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
76 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Motivational states are important determinants of human behavior. Regulatory focus theory suggests that a promotion focus stimulates risky behavior, whereas a prevention focus fosters conservative tactics. Previous research linked counterfactual structure with regulatory focus. Extending this work, we predicted that additive counterfactual mindsets (“If only I had…”) instigate risky tactics in subsequent situations, whereas subtractive counterfactual mindsets (“If only I had NOT…”) lead to conservative tactics. We tested this prediction and the underlying assumptions in four preregistered studies (total N =803) and obtained consistent null results. Additive and subtractive counterfactual mindsets did not elicit different tactics – neither on behavioral nor on self-report measures – and they did not influence participants’ motivation compared to a neutral control condition. Likewise, our results put doubts on previous findings on counterfactuals and regulatory focus as well as regulatory focus and conservative or risky behavior. More general implications for research on counterfactuals and motivation are discussed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)100-114
Number of pages15
JournalMotivation and Emotion
Volume47
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb-2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Motivational consequences of counterfactual mindsets: Does counterfactual structure influence the use of conservative or risky tactics?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this