Abstract

The present research explored whether and how regulatory focus influences the activation of counterfactuals (thought of what might have been). Previous research proposed that upward counterfactuals (thoughts of better alternatives), as opposed to downward counterfactuals (thoughts of worse alternatives), serve a preparative function. However, Higgins (1997) proposed a theory of regulatory focus that states that preparative goals can be promotion-related (i.e., to attain desired end-states) or prevention-related (i.e., to prevent undesired end-states). Experiments 1 and 2 examined the proposition that regulatory focus moderates the preparative function of upward and downward counterfactuals. Downward counterfactuals were more frequently generated under a prevention focus than under a promotion focus (Experiment 1). Regulatory focus moderated the effects of outcome valence on upward counterfactual generation: upward counterfactuals were more frequently generated in response to negative, as opposed to positive, outcomes only under a promotion rather than prevention focus (Experiment 2). These findings provide initial support for the proposition that counterfactual thinking is goal-driven: upward counterfactuals are more likely to be associated with promotion than prevention, whereas downward counterfactuals are more likely to be associated with prevention than promotion.