反事实思维与行为意向的关系
|
摘要
在遭遇负性事件之后,人们常常思考事情原本可能会变得不一样,在心理上对过去事实进行否定,进而构建一种可能性假设的思维活动,这种思维方式称为反事实思维(counterfactual thinking)。反事实思维是人类意识的一个重要特性,这种思考方式经常出现在我们的日常思维中,特别是出现于不幸的遭遇或负性的结果之后,有助于人们从过失或失败经验中学习,并形成有效的计划而避免过失的重复发生。负性事件、反事实思维、行为意向与行为在一个反馈环中相互联系。这个反馈环包括3个连结:负性事件容易引起反事实思维,反事实思维引起行为意向,而行为意向引起相应行为。以前的研究已经表明第一次连结,即负性事件引起反事实思维。不少研究已经支持了第三个连结,认为行为意向是影响行为最直接的因素。也有少量研究支持中间连结,即反事实思维的行为意向效应,但是对此问题还模棱两可。根据以往研究,上行反事实思维比下行反事实思维更有助于人们从过失或失败中学习,因为它具有更强的准备功能,那么,是不是上行反事实思维具有更强的行为意向功能呢?目前尚未出现相关的实证研究。
本研究以大学生日常高频负性事件为材料,运用顺序启动范式(sequential priming paradigm)的语义启动(semantic priming)来激活实验,通过E-prime运行程序,考查负性事件发生后产生的反事实思维在随后的行为意向判断中的反应时,以此作为促进作用的指标,探索反事实思维方向与行为意向的关系。
本研究主要包括一个问卷调查和两个实验:在问卷调查中,首先,通过自编开放性问卷对大学生的日常负性生活事件以及相应的反事实思维进行调查;其次,整理所有收集的日常生活负性事件,让大学生对事件出现的频率进行判断;最后,筛选日常生活高频负性事件作为研究二实验的启动事件。研究二实验运用被试内设计,安排全部进行三种实验条件,这三种条件是:控制条件、反事实思维条件、无判断条件(基线条件)。其中,随后的行为意向报告的反应时作为因变量。研究三运用被试内设计,安排全部被试进行两种实验条件,这两种条件是:上行反事实思维条件、下行反事实思维条件。每种实验条件包括若干负性事件和一个实验任务:行为意向判断。其中,随后的行为意向判断的反应时作为因变量。
结果表明:
(1)大学生日常高频负性事件以及相应的反事实思维集中于主要涉及大学生的个性特征、人际交往、学业状况、时间管理、躯体状况、经济状况、生活环境、工作能力方面。
(2)反事实思维对目标导向行为具有调节作用,采用不同思维的大学生在行为意向判断上存在显著差异,相比常规思维和被干扰的思维,反事实思维条件促进正确的行为意向判断,延误否定的行为意向判断。
(3)采用不同反事实思维方向的大学生在行为意向判断上存在显著差异,上行反事实思维条件相对下行反事实思维条件促进正确的行为意向判断,下行反事实思维条件相对上行反事实思维条件延误做否定的行为意向判断反应时。
Counterfactual thinking is a thinking activity of denying past events and meanwhile generating a possible hypothesis. The thinking are pervasive in everyday life, especially after misfortune or negative event, they help people learn from experience, effective planning and avoid the repeated fault occurs.
Negative events, counterfactuals,behavioral intentions,and behavior are tied together in a feed-back loop that governs ongoing behavior and involves continuing connections in memory. This process consists of three steps: a problem activates counterfactual thinking, counterfactual thinking activates a behavioral intention, and the behavioral intention evokes the corresponding behavior. Prior research has documented the first link, such that negative outcomes activate counterfactual thinking. Much research has also supported the third link, that of the effect of behavioral intentions on behavior. Some research also supports the middle link, the effect of counterfactuals on behavior intentions, but there is an important ambiguity in prior research. According to the previous studies, upward counterfactual thinking provide more prepare functioning than downward counterfactual thinking, which are more help people learn from negligence or failure. Whether upward counterfactual thinking has stronger behavioral intention function than downward counterfactual thinking? Currently there has not relevant empirical research appeared.
In this research, using students’daily high-frequency negative events, based on sequential priming paradigm and semantic priming, through E-prime procedure run experiment, exams how counterfactual thinking occurred after negative event effect subsequent behavioral intention judgment on the reaction time, as the promoting effect to explore the relationship of behavioral intentions and thinking direction.
This research mainly consists of a questionnaire survey and two experiments: in questionnaires, first of all, through investigations of open-ended questionnaire on college students' daily negative life events and corresponding counterfactual thinking, Secondly, we ordered all collected daily life events, let the students judge on the frequency of the negative events. Finally, we screened high-frequency negative event in daily life as the priming event of the experiment 1. Experiment 1 used within—subjects design with three experimental conditions: control, counterfactual thinking, and no-judgment(baseline), with reaction time(RT)to a subsequent behavioral intention statement serving as the dependent variable. Experiment 2 used within—subjects design, using two conditions were: upward counterfactual thinking, and downward counterfactual thinking. Each experimental conditions including some negative events and an experimental task: behavioral intention judgment with reaction time (RT) to a subsequent behavioral intention statement serving as the dependent variable.
The results show:
(1) Students’daily high negative events and the corresponding counterfactual thinking focus on personality traits, interpersonal relationships, academic performance, time management, physical condition, economic status, living environment, and the ability to work.
(2) Counterfactual thinking adjust goal-directed behavior. Individuals used different thinking on behavioral intentions judgment. On correct behavioral intention judgment, students used counterfactual thinking showed faster than control and no-judgment conditions. On wrong behavioral intention judgment, compared with control and no-judgment conditions, counterfactual thinking condition show delayed behavioral intention judgment.
(3) The college students used upward counterfactuals and downward counterfactuals showed significant difference on behavioral intentions judgment. On correct behavioral intention judgment, students used upward counterfactual thinking showed faster than downward counterfactual thinking, on wrong behavioral intentions judgment, compared with upward counterfactual thinking, downward counterfactual thinking condition delayed behavioral intention judgment.
本研究以大学生日常高频负性事件为材料,运用顺序启动范式(sequential priming paradigm)的语义启动(semantic priming)来激活实验,通过E-prime运行程序,考查负性事件发生后产生的反事实思维在随后的行为意向判断中的反应时,以此作为促进作用的指标,探索反事实思维方向与行为意向的关系。
本研究主要包括一个问卷调查和两个实验:在问卷调查中,首先,通过自编开放性问卷对大学生的日常负性生活事件以及相应的反事实思维进行调查;其次,整理所有收集的日常生活负性事件,让大学生对事件出现的频率进行判断;最后,筛选日常生活高频负性事件作为研究二实验的启动事件。研究二实验运用被试内设计,安排全部进行三种实验条件,这三种条件是:控制条件、反事实思维条件、无判断条件(基线条件)。其中,随后的行为意向报告的反应时作为因变量。研究三运用被试内设计,安排全部被试进行两种实验条件,这两种条件是:上行反事实思维条件、下行反事实思维条件。每种实验条件包括若干负性事件和一个实验任务:行为意向判断。其中,随后的行为意向判断的反应时作为因变量。
结果表明:
(1)大学生日常高频负性事件以及相应的反事实思维集中于主要涉及大学生的个性特征、人际交往、学业状况、时间管理、躯体状况、经济状况、生活环境、工作能力方面。
(2)反事实思维对目标导向行为具有调节作用,采用不同思维的大学生在行为意向判断上存在显著差异,相比常规思维和被干扰的思维,反事实思维条件促进正确的行为意向判断,延误否定的行为意向判断。
(3)采用不同反事实思维方向的大学生在行为意向判断上存在显著差异,上行反事实思维条件相对下行反事实思维条件促进正确的行为意向判断,下行反事实思维条件相对上行反事实思维条件延误做否定的行为意向判断反应时。
Counterfactual thinking is a thinking activity of denying past events and meanwhile generating a possible hypothesis. The thinking are pervasive in everyday life, especially after misfortune or negative event, they help people learn from experience, effective planning and avoid the repeated fault occurs.
Negative events, counterfactuals,behavioral intentions,and behavior are tied together in a feed-back loop that governs ongoing behavior and involves continuing connections in memory. This process consists of three steps: a problem activates counterfactual thinking, counterfactual thinking activates a behavioral intention, and the behavioral intention evokes the corresponding behavior. Prior research has documented the first link, such that negative outcomes activate counterfactual thinking. Much research has also supported the third link, that of the effect of behavioral intentions on behavior. Some research also supports the middle link, the effect of counterfactuals on behavior intentions, but there is an important ambiguity in prior research. According to the previous studies, upward counterfactual thinking provide more prepare functioning than downward counterfactual thinking, which are more help people learn from negligence or failure. Whether upward counterfactual thinking has stronger behavioral intention function than downward counterfactual thinking? Currently there has not relevant empirical research appeared.
In this research, using students’daily high-frequency negative events, based on sequential priming paradigm and semantic priming, through E-prime procedure run experiment, exams how counterfactual thinking occurred after negative event effect subsequent behavioral intention judgment on the reaction time, as the promoting effect to explore the relationship of behavioral intentions and thinking direction.
This research mainly consists of a questionnaire survey and two experiments: in questionnaires, first of all, through investigations of open-ended questionnaire on college students' daily negative life events and corresponding counterfactual thinking, Secondly, we ordered all collected daily life events, let the students judge on the frequency of the negative events. Finally, we screened high-frequency negative event in daily life as the priming event of the experiment 1. Experiment 1 used within—subjects design with three experimental conditions: control, counterfactual thinking, and no-judgment(baseline), with reaction time(RT)to a subsequent behavioral intention statement serving as the dependent variable. Experiment 2 used within—subjects design, using two conditions were: upward counterfactual thinking, and downward counterfactual thinking. Each experimental conditions including some negative events and an experimental task: behavioral intention judgment with reaction time (RT) to a subsequent behavioral intention statement serving as the dependent variable.
The results show:
(1) Students’daily high negative events and the corresponding counterfactual thinking focus on personality traits, interpersonal relationships, academic performance, time management, physical condition, economic status, living environment, and the ability to work.
(2) Counterfactual thinking adjust goal-directed behavior. Individuals used different thinking on behavioral intentions judgment. On correct behavioral intention judgment, students used counterfactual thinking showed faster than control and no-judgment conditions. On wrong behavioral intention judgment, compared with control and no-judgment conditions, counterfactual thinking condition show delayed behavioral intention judgment.
(3) The college students used upward counterfactuals and downward counterfactuals showed significant difference on behavioral intentions judgment. On correct behavioral intention judgment, students used upward counterfactual thinking showed faster than downward counterfactual thinking, on wrong behavioral intentions judgment, compared with upward counterfactual thinking, downward counterfactual thinking condition delayed behavioral intention judgment.
引文
[1]杨红升,黄希庭.关于反事实思维的研究[J].心理学动态,2000,8(3):12-18.
[2]张结海.后悔的一致性模型:理论和证据[J].心理学报,1999,131(4):451-459.
[3]Abraham,C.,& Sheeran,P. (2003). Acting on intentions:The role of anticipated regret . British Journal of Social Psychology,42,495-511.
[4]Ajzen,I. (1985). From Intention to Actions:A Theory of Planned Behabior. New York:Springer-Verlag,11-39.
[5]Ajzen,I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,50,179-211.
[6]Armitage,C. J.,& Conner,M. (2001). Eficacy ofthe theory of planed behavior:A meta-analytic review.British Journa1of Socia1 Psychology,40,471-499.
[7]Atkinson,J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation.Princeton,N. J.:Van Nostrand.
[8]Baker,D. A.,& Crompton,J. L. (2000). Quality,satisfaction and behavioral intention. Annals of Tourism Research,27 (3),785-804.
[9]Bargh,J. A.,Gollwitzer,P. M.,Lee-Chai,A.,Barndollar,K.,& Trotschel,R. (2001). The automated will:Nonconscious activation and pursuit of behavioral goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,81,1014–1027.
[10]Boninger,D. S.,Gleicher,F.,& Strathman,A. J. (1994). Counterfactual thinking:From what might have been to what may be.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67,297-307.
[11]Byrne,R. M. J. (1997). Cognitive processes in counterfactual thinking about what might have been. In The Psychology of Learning and Motivation,Advances in Research and Theory,37,105-154.
[12]Carver,C. S.,& Scheier,M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York:Cambridge University Press.
[13]Costello,F. J. & Keane,M. T. (2000). EffScient creativity:constraint guided conceptual combination. cognition. Science,24,299-349.
[14] Davis,C. G.,Lehman,D.R.,Wortman,C.B.,Silver,R.C.,& Thompson,S.C. (1995). The undoing of traumatic life events. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin,21:109-124.
[15] Davis,F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-userinformation systems: theory and results. Doctoral Dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[16]Davis,F. D.,Bagozzi R. P.,& Warshaw P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology:A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,Management Science,35 (8),982-1003.
[17]Epstude,K.,& Roese,N. J. (2008). The functional theory of counterfactual thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Review,12,168-192.
[18]Fishbein,M.,and I. Ajzen. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior:An Introduction to Theory and Research:Reading,Massactusetts:Addison-Wesley.
[19]Gavansk,I,Wells,G. L.,(1989). Counterfactual Processing of normal and exceptional events.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,25:314-325.
[20]Gilovich,T. (1983). Biased evaluation and persistence in gambling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,44,1110–1126.
[21]Gilovich T,Medvec,V. H. (1994). The temporal pattern to the experienceof regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67:357-365.
[22]Girotto V,Legrenzi P,Rizzo A. (1991). Event controllability in counterfactual thinking. Acta Psychologica,78,111-133.
[23]Gleicher,F.,Kost,K. A.,Baker,S. M.,Strathman,A. J.,Richman,S. A.,& Sherman,S. J. (1990). The role of counterfactual thinking in judgments of affect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,16,284–295.
[24]Gollwitzer,P. M.,& Sheeran,P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement:A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,38,69-119.
[25]Harrison,David A.,Peter P. Mykytyn,J.,& Cynthia K. R. (1997). Executive Decisions About Adoption of Information Technology in Small Business. Theory and Empirical Tests,Information Systems Research,8 (2),171-195.
[26]Johnson,E. J.,& Tversky,A. (1983). Affect,generalization,and the perception of risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,45,20-31.
[27]Johnson,M. K., & Sherman,S. J.(1990).Constructing and reconstructing the past and future in the present.In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentinom(Eds.). Handbook of motivation and cognition. Foundations of social behavior,New York:Guilford. 2,482-526.
[28] Kahneman,D. & Tversky,A. (1982). The simulation heuristic. In Judgment Under Uncertainty:Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press,201-208.
[29] Kahneman,D.,& Miller,D. T. (1986). Norm theory:Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review,93,136-153.
[30]Knight,R. T.,& Gtabowecky, M.(1995). Escape from linear time:Prefrontal cortex and conscious experience. In:M S Gazzaniga ed. Thecognitive neurosciences. Cambridge,MA:MIT Press,1357-1371.
[31]Krishnamurthy,P. & Sivaraman,A. (2002). Counterfactual thinking and advertising responses. Journal of Consumer Research,28,650-658.
[32]Markman,K. D.,Gavanski,I.,Sherman,S. J.,& McMullen,M. N. (1993). The mental simulation of better and worse possible worlds. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,29,87–109.
[33] Markman,K. D.,& Tetlock,P. E. (2000). Accountability and close call counterfactuals:the loser who nearly won and the winner who nearly lost. Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin. 26,1213–1224.
[34] Markman,K. D.,& McMullen,M. N. (2003). A reflection and evaluation model of comparative thinking . Personality and Social Psychology Review,7,244-267.
[35] Markman,K. D.,McMullen,M. N.,& Elizaga,R. A. (2008). Counterfactual thinking,persistence,and performance: A test of the reflection and evaluation model . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,44,421-428.
[36]Mathieson,& Kieran. (1991). Predicting User Intentions:Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior,Information Systems Research,2(3),173-191.
[37]Medvee,V. H.,Medey,S. F.,& Gilovieh T. (1995). When Less Is More:Counterfactual Thinking and Satisfaction Among Olympic Medalists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 69,(4),603-610.
[38]Meyers-Levy,J.,& Maheswaran,D. (1992). When timingmatters:The influenceof temporal distanceon consumers’affective andpersuasive responses. Journal of Consumer Research,19:424-433.
[39]McCrea,S. M. (2008). Self-handicapping,excuse-making,and counterfactual thinking:Consequences for mood and future motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,95,274-292.
[40]McFarland,C.,Buehler,R. & MacKay,L. (2001). Affective responses to social comparisons with extremely close others. Social cognition,19(5).
[41]McMullen,M. N. (1997). Affective contrast and assimilation in counterfactual thinking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,33,77–100.
[42]McMullen,M. N.,& Markman,K. D. (2000). Downward counterfactuals and motivation: The wake-up call and the Pangloss effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,26,575–584.
[43]Morris,M.W.,& Moore,P. C. (2000). The lessons we(don’t)learn:Counterfactual thinking and organizational accountability after a close call. Administrative Science Quarterly,45,737-765.
[44]Myers,A. L.,& McCrea, S. M. (2008). The preparative function of counterfactual thinking:Providing useful strategies or enhancing motivation. Unpublished manuscript,University of Konstanz,Germany.
[45]Nasco,S. A.,& Marsh,K. L. (1999). Gaining control through counterfactual thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,25,556–568.
[46]Page,C. M.,& Colby,P. M. (2003). If only I hadn’t smoked:The impact of counterfactual thinking on a smoking-related behavior. Psychology and Marketing,20,955-976.
[47]Reb,J. (2008). Regret aversion and decision process quality:Effects of regret salience on decision process carefulness.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,105,169–182.
[48]Roese,N. J.,Olson,J. M. (1993). Self-esteem and counterfactual thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,65(1),199-206.
[49]Roese,N. J. (1994). The functional basis of counterfactual thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,66,805-818.
[50]Roese,N. J.,(1997). Counterfactual thinking. Psychological Bulletin,121,133–148.
[51]Roese,N. J.,& Maniar,S. D. (1997). Perceptions of purple:Counterfactual and hindsight judgments at northwestern wildcats football games. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,23,1245–1253.
[52]Roese,N. J.,& Olson,J. M. (1997). Counterfactual thinking:The intersection of affect and function. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,29,1–59.
[53] Roese,N. J.,Hur,T.,& Pennington,G. L. (1999). Counterfactual thinking and regulatory focus:Implications for action versus inaction and sufficiency versus necessity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,77,1109–1120.
[54]Saffrey,C.,Summerville,A.,& Roese,N. J. (2008). Praise for regret:People value regret above other negative emotions. Motivation and Emotion,32,46–54.
[55]Samuelson,W.,& Zeckhauser,R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,1,7–59.
[56]Sanna,L. J.,& Turley,K. J.,(1996). Antecedents to sponteneous counterfactual thinking:Effectsof expectancy violation andoutcome valence. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin,22,906-919.
[57]Sanna,L. J.,Stocker, S. L.,& Clarke, J. A. (2003). Rumination, imagination, and personality: specters of the past and future in the present. In E.C.Chang & L. J. Sanna(Eds.),Virtue,vice,and personality: The complexity of behavior. Washington,DC: American Psychological Association,105–124.
[58]Segura,S.,& Morris,M. W. (2005). Scenario simulations in learning:Forms and functions at the organizational level. In D. R. Mandel,D. J. Hilton,& P.Catellani (Eds.). The psychology of counterfactual thinking,New York: Routledge,94–109.
[59]Sheeran, P. (2002). Intention-behaviour relations:A conceptual and empirical review. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.). European review of social psychology. London:Wiley. Vol.12,1–36.
[60]Sheppard,B. H.,Hartwick,J.,& Warshaw,P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research,15,325–343.
[61]Sherman,S. J.,Skov,R. B.,Hervitz,E. F.and Stock,C. B. (1981). The effects of explaining hypothetical future events:From possibility to probability to actuality and beyond,Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,17,142–58.
[62]Sinna,L. J. (1998). Defensive Pessimism and Optimism:The Bitter-Sweet Influence of Mood on performance and Prefactual and Counterfactual Thinking.Cognition and Emotion,12(5),635-665.
[63]Smallman,R.,& Roese,N. J. (2009). Counterfactual Thinking Facilitates Behavioral Intentions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,1-33.
[64]Summerville , A. , & Roese , N. J. (2008). Dare to compare : Fact-based versus simulation-based comparison in daily life. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,44,664–671.
[65]Stalnaker, R. C. (1999). Context and Content, Oxford University Press.
[66]Thomas N. J. T. (1999). Are theories of imagery theories of imagination? An active perception approach to conscious mental content. Cognitive Science,23,207-245.
[67]Webb,T. L.,& Sheeran,P. (2006). Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin,132,249-268.
[2]张结海.后悔的一致性模型:理论和证据[J].心理学报,1999,131(4):451-459.
[3]Abraham,C.,& Sheeran,P. (2003). Acting on intentions:The role of anticipated regret . British Journal of Social Psychology,42,495-511.
[4]Ajzen,I. (1985). From Intention to Actions:A Theory of Planned Behabior. New York:Springer-Verlag,11-39.
[5]Ajzen,I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,50,179-211.
[6]Armitage,C. J.,& Conner,M. (2001). Eficacy ofthe theory of planed behavior:A meta-analytic review.British Journa1of Socia1 Psychology,40,471-499.
[7]Atkinson,J. W. (1964). An introduction to motivation.Princeton,N. J.:Van Nostrand.
[8]Baker,D. A.,& Crompton,J. L. (2000). Quality,satisfaction and behavioral intention. Annals of Tourism Research,27 (3),785-804.
[9]Bargh,J. A.,Gollwitzer,P. M.,Lee-Chai,A.,Barndollar,K.,& Trotschel,R. (2001). The automated will:Nonconscious activation and pursuit of behavioral goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,81,1014–1027.
[10]Boninger,D. S.,Gleicher,F.,& Strathman,A. J. (1994). Counterfactual thinking:From what might have been to what may be.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67,297-307.
[11]Byrne,R. M. J. (1997). Cognitive processes in counterfactual thinking about what might have been. In The Psychology of Learning and Motivation,Advances in Research and Theory,37,105-154.
[12]Carver,C. S.,& Scheier,M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. New York:Cambridge University Press.
[13]Costello,F. J. & Keane,M. T. (2000). EffScient creativity:constraint guided conceptual combination. cognition. Science,24,299-349.
[14] Davis,C. G.,Lehman,D.R.,Wortman,C.B.,Silver,R.C.,& Thompson,S.C. (1995). The undoing of traumatic life events. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin,21:109-124.
[15] Davis,F. D. (1986). A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-userinformation systems: theory and results. Doctoral Dissertation, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
[16]Davis,F. D.,Bagozzi R. P.,& Warshaw P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology:A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models,Management Science,35 (8),982-1003.
[17]Epstude,K.,& Roese,N. J. (2008). The functional theory of counterfactual thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Review,12,168-192.
[18]Fishbein,M.,and I. Ajzen. (1975). Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior:An Introduction to Theory and Research:Reading,Massactusetts:Addison-Wesley.
[19]Gavansk,I,Wells,G. L.,(1989). Counterfactual Processing of normal and exceptional events.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,25:314-325.
[20]Gilovich,T. (1983). Biased evaluation and persistence in gambling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,44,1110–1126.
[21]Gilovich T,Medvec,V. H. (1994). The temporal pattern to the experienceof regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67:357-365.
[22]Girotto V,Legrenzi P,Rizzo A. (1991). Event controllability in counterfactual thinking. Acta Psychologica,78,111-133.
[23]Gleicher,F.,Kost,K. A.,Baker,S. M.,Strathman,A. J.,Richman,S. A.,& Sherman,S. J. (1990). The role of counterfactual thinking in judgments of affect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,16,284–295.
[24]Gollwitzer,P. M.,& Sheeran,P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement:A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,38,69-119.
[25]Harrison,David A.,Peter P. Mykytyn,J.,& Cynthia K. R. (1997). Executive Decisions About Adoption of Information Technology in Small Business. Theory and Empirical Tests,Information Systems Research,8 (2),171-195.
[26]Johnson,E. J.,& Tversky,A. (1983). Affect,generalization,and the perception of risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,45,20-31.
[27]Johnson,M. K., & Sherman,S. J.(1990).Constructing and reconstructing the past and future in the present.In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentinom(Eds.). Handbook of motivation and cognition. Foundations of social behavior,New York:Guilford. 2,482-526.
[28] Kahneman,D. & Tversky,A. (1982). The simulation heuristic. In Judgment Under Uncertainty:Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press,201-208.
[29] Kahneman,D.,& Miller,D. T. (1986). Norm theory:Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review,93,136-153.
[30]Knight,R. T.,& Gtabowecky, M.(1995). Escape from linear time:Prefrontal cortex and conscious experience. In:M S Gazzaniga ed. Thecognitive neurosciences. Cambridge,MA:MIT Press,1357-1371.
[31]Krishnamurthy,P. & Sivaraman,A. (2002). Counterfactual thinking and advertising responses. Journal of Consumer Research,28,650-658.
[32]Markman,K. D.,Gavanski,I.,Sherman,S. J.,& McMullen,M. N. (1993). The mental simulation of better and worse possible worlds. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,29,87–109.
[33] Markman,K. D.,& Tetlock,P. E. (2000). Accountability and close call counterfactuals:the loser who nearly won and the winner who nearly lost. Personality and Social PsychologyBulletin. 26,1213–1224.
[34] Markman,K. D.,& McMullen,M. N. (2003). A reflection and evaluation model of comparative thinking . Personality and Social Psychology Review,7,244-267.
[35] Markman,K. D.,McMullen,M. N.,& Elizaga,R. A. (2008). Counterfactual thinking,persistence,and performance: A test of the reflection and evaluation model . Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,44,421-428.
[36]Mathieson,& Kieran. (1991). Predicting User Intentions:Comparing the Technology Acceptance Model with the Theory of Planned Behavior,Information Systems Research,2(3),173-191.
[37]Medvee,V. H.,Medey,S. F.,& Gilovieh T. (1995). When Less Is More:Counterfactual Thinking and Satisfaction Among Olympic Medalists. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 69,(4),603-610.
[38]Meyers-Levy,J.,& Maheswaran,D. (1992). When timingmatters:The influenceof temporal distanceon consumers’affective andpersuasive responses. Journal of Consumer Research,19:424-433.
[39]McCrea,S. M. (2008). Self-handicapping,excuse-making,and counterfactual thinking:Consequences for mood and future motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,95,274-292.
[40]McFarland,C.,Buehler,R. & MacKay,L. (2001). Affective responses to social comparisons with extremely close others. Social cognition,19(5).
[41]McMullen,M. N. (1997). Affective contrast and assimilation in counterfactual thinking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,33,77–100.
[42]McMullen,M. N.,& Markman,K. D. (2000). Downward counterfactuals and motivation: The wake-up call and the Pangloss effect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,26,575–584.
[43]Morris,M.W.,& Moore,P. C. (2000). The lessons we(don’t)learn:Counterfactual thinking and organizational accountability after a close call. Administrative Science Quarterly,45,737-765.
[44]Myers,A. L.,& McCrea, S. M. (2008). The preparative function of counterfactual thinking:Providing useful strategies or enhancing motivation. Unpublished manuscript,University of Konstanz,Germany.
[45]Nasco,S. A.,& Marsh,K. L. (1999). Gaining control through counterfactual thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,25,556–568.
[46]Page,C. M.,& Colby,P. M. (2003). If only I hadn’t smoked:The impact of counterfactual thinking on a smoking-related behavior. Psychology and Marketing,20,955-976.
[47]Reb,J. (2008). Regret aversion and decision process quality:Effects of regret salience on decision process carefulness.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,105,169–182.
[48]Roese,N. J.,Olson,J. M. (1993). Self-esteem and counterfactual thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,65(1),199-206.
[49]Roese,N. J. (1994). The functional basis of counterfactual thinking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,66,805-818.
[50]Roese,N. J.,(1997). Counterfactual thinking. Psychological Bulletin,121,133–148.
[51]Roese,N. J.,& Maniar,S. D. (1997). Perceptions of purple:Counterfactual and hindsight judgments at northwestern wildcats football games. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,23,1245–1253.
[52]Roese,N. J.,& Olson,J. M. (1997). Counterfactual thinking:The intersection of affect and function. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,29,1–59.
[53] Roese,N. J.,Hur,T.,& Pennington,G. L. (1999). Counterfactual thinking and regulatory focus:Implications for action versus inaction and sufficiency versus necessity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,77,1109–1120.
[54]Saffrey,C.,Summerville,A.,& Roese,N. J. (2008). Praise for regret:People value regret above other negative emotions. Motivation and Emotion,32,46–54.
[55]Samuelson,W.,& Zeckhauser,R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,1,7–59.
[56]Sanna,L. J.,& Turley,K. J.,(1996). Antecedents to sponteneous counterfactual thinking:Effectsof expectancy violation andoutcome valence. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin,22,906-919.
[57]Sanna,L. J.,Stocker, S. L.,& Clarke, J. A. (2003). Rumination, imagination, and personality: specters of the past and future in the present. In E.C.Chang & L. J. Sanna(Eds.),Virtue,vice,and personality: The complexity of behavior. Washington,DC: American Psychological Association,105–124.
[58]Segura,S.,& Morris,M. W. (2005). Scenario simulations in learning:Forms and functions at the organizational level. In D. R. Mandel,D. J. Hilton,& P.Catellani (Eds.). The psychology of counterfactual thinking,New York: Routledge,94–109.
[59]Sheeran, P. (2002). Intention-behaviour relations:A conceptual and empirical review. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.). European review of social psychology. London:Wiley. Vol.12,1–36.
[60]Sheppard,B. H.,Hartwick,J.,& Warshaw,P. R. (1988). The theory of reasoned action: A meta-analysis of past research with recommendations for modifications and future research. Journal of Consumer Research,15,325–343.
[61]Sherman,S. J.,Skov,R. B.,Hervitz,E. F.and Stock,C. B. (1981). The effects of explaining hypothetical future events:From possibility to probability to actuality and beyond,Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,17,142–58.
[62]Sinna,L. J. (1998). Defensive Pessimism and Optimism:The Bitter-Sweet Influence of Mood on performance and Prefactual and Counterfactual Thinking.Cognition and Emotion,12(5),635-665.
[63]Smallman,R.,& Roese,N. J. (2009). Counterfactual Thinking Facilitates Behavioral Intentions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,1-33.
[64]Summerville , A. , & Roese , N. J. (2008). Dare to compare : Fact-based versus simulation-based comparison in daily life. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,44,664–671.
[65]Stalnaker, R. C. (1999). Context and Content, Oxford University Press.
[66]Thomas N. J. T. (1999). Are theories of imagery theories of imagination? An active perception approach to conscious mental content. Cognitive Science,23,207-245.
[67]Webb,T. L.,& Sheeran,P. (2006). Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin,132,249-268.