Counterfactual Thinking and Its Effects on Well-Being, Satisfaction, and Self Efficacy
Essay Preview: Counterfactual Thinking and Its Effects on Well-Being, Satisfaction, and Self Efficacy
Report this essay
Abstract
Studies are examined in relation to counterfactual thinking and how it can ultimately have effects on various self-perceptions and emotions. Satisfaction among students and their grades have been linked with counterfactual thinking (consideration of “might-have-been” alternatives to reality). Movement of direction is also considered, specifically when considering rape victims and their thoughts of what they could have done to prevent the outcome, presumably leading to self-blame. Self-Efficacy is addressed in terms of how it has broken the basic rules of effect, and how participants can learn from their mistakes and improve upon the use of counterfactual thinking. The research is mostly conclusive only for this newly emerged branch among self-efficacy research, counterfactual thinking has shown significant affects how we can influence our thoughts on events after the fact that they have occurred, therefore affecting our emotions.
Counterfactual Thinking and its Effect on Well-Being, Satisfaction, and Self—Efficacy
The past can never be changed for any of us, yet we as humans have the cognitive ability to contemplate the “what if” questions of past events. All events seem to trigger after-the-fact thinking, some may be positive and some may be negative. For example, someone who has just gone through a very traumatic event might ask “What would have happened ifвЂ¦Ð²Ð‚Ñœ or “I could have beenвЂ¦Ð²Ð‚Ñœ, these questions can end in many different ways, but the fact that we ask ourselves these questions implies that cognitive thinking can influence how we perceive the possible outcomes of a situation after the fact. Counterfactual thinking is a process by which we evaluate how we would do things differently, and while it can have a positive spin, more often than not it is a psychological mechanism that causes us to harbor feelings of disappointment and regret. Why is this important to study? This is an important aspect of human cognitive ability that should be studied and also how it can be applied in the world. Studies have shown that imagining alternate outcomes of past events can result in negative emotions (Roese, 1997). Conversely, other research has demonstrated that “separate beneficial effects” (Roese, 133) may also emerge from counterfactual thinking. Specifically, thoughts of what might have been may suggest paths to what may yet be. Most research denotes that there are emotional effects from counterfactual thinking, varying from positive to negative. Since there is much controversy of whether there are benefits or negative consequences when engaging in counterfactual thinking, this paper will be reviewing some of the key effects of counterfactual thinking concerning: well-being of rape victims, satisfaction among students and their grades, impacts on self-efficacy and individualistic self esteem differences.
Let us begin our review of the literature by defining some key terms. According to Roese (1997), counterfactual is defined as “alternative versions of the past” more specifically the defining feature of a counterfactual is the “falsity” of its precursor, meaning that both the antecedent and the consequent are false (p. 134). More so, counterfactuals can move in two directions (McMullen, 1997; Roese, 1994; Medvec & Savistsky, 1997; Branscombe, et al., 2003): upwards counterfactuals, in which alternative circumstances are evaluated better than reality (thinking that your wedding could have been held at a more expensive reception hall or that you could have done better on a test) and downward counterfactuals, in which alternate circumstances are evaluated worse than reality (thinking that your wedding could have been ruined if it had rained or that you could have failed the exam). The debate in the midst of this research is whether or not counterfactual thinking is beneficial or harmful. So far data has shown that upward counterfactuals (thinking it could have been better) is exercised more so than downward counterfactuals (thinking it could have been worse), which ultimately can lead to unpleasant feeling of remorse, shame, or guilt. On the other hand, Roese (1994) also explains that upward counterfactuals may offer direction for effective useful behavior, for example, learning from your past; if you had not engaged in upward counterfactual thinking you would not have been able to assess what could have been done to better the situation or event, but now you do-in case it happens again! This very simplistic thinking could have played a role in survival; cave men must have had to learn that although they did get food hunting that they could have tried to hunt for more (upward counterfactual), maybe inflicting emotions of shame or dissatisfaction which would later encourage them to hunt for bigger game (effective useful behavior) -for the survival of themselves and their families. To be more specific, let us turn to research done with rape victims, and how counterfactual thinking may promote positive behavior (such as avoiding future victimization). But if this were true then would upward counterfactual thinking not have negative (depressive or fear emotions) effect on the victims’ well- being? Let us explore a study that takes on this question and seeks to answer it.
Counterfactual Thinking and Rape Victims
Research conducted by Branscombe, Wohl, Owen, Allison an N’gbala (2003) sought out to test whether rape-victims counterfactuals has affects on self blame thus, affecting their well-being. Participants consisted of 85 undergraduate women who had answered “have you ever been forced to have sex?” (Branscombe, et al., 2003) with a definite yes. The initial measure was to asses counterfactual thinking and the alternate actions generated by each participant. Data collected by a blind coder showed that all of the counterfactuals generated by the participants were in fact linked to the victim’s behavior. This was accurate with their initial predictions that the more the participants generated counterfactuals, the more they (the victims) would blame themselves because it implies that they could have changed the outcome. Furthermore, this self-blame can perpetuate poor psychological well-being.
This was an interesting study due to its content. Since it has already been demonstrated that upwards counterfactual thinking can arise negative behaviors, this clearly demonstrates how it can be applied to the real world. How victims decide to cognitively think about a traumatic event,