Counterfactual processing and the correspondence between events and outcomes

Normality versus value

Bibliographic Data

ID10902467
AuthorsPatrick Bouts (University of Amsterdam), Russell Spears (0000-0001-5244-0575, University of Amsterdam, corresponding author), Joop Van Der Pligt
Year1992
Volume22
Issue4
Pages387-396
Publication date1992-07-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEuropean Journal of Social Psychology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0046-2772 • E-ISSN: 1099-0992
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1002/ejsp.2420220407
OpenAlexW2132408556
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited13

Kahneman and Tversky (1982) have proposed a simulation heuristic such that perceivers tend to substitute ‘normal’ antecedent events for exceptional ones in psychologically ‘undoing’ a given outcome. Recently Gavanski and Wells (1989) have demonstrated that exceptional outcomes tend to be perceived as caused by exceptional events and normal outcomes by normal events, a finding more in line with the representativeness heuristic than this ‘normalization’ principle. We argue that representativeness may be determined by the evaluative tone of events as well as by probability—namely that positive events are assumed to underlie positive outcomes and negative events, negative outcomes. Both normality and value were independently manipulated in order to test the relative effects of each of these factors. In contrast to Gavanski and Wells our data indicate that preference was given to the similarity of value between events and outcome for undoing both positive and negative and normal and exceptional outcomes. Some implications of these findings for counterfactual processing are discussed

Counterfactual thinking · Normality · Statistics · Value (mathematics) · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Mathematics · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access