The Efficacy of Downward Counterfactual Thinking for Regulating Emotional Memories in Anxious Individuals

Aversive autobiographical memories sometimes prompt maladaptive emotional responses and contribute to affective dysfunction in anxiety and depression. One way to regulate the impact of such memories is to create a downward counterfactual thought–a mental simulation of how the event could have been worse–to put what occurred in a more positive light. Despite its intuitive appeal, counterfactual thinking has not been systematically studied for its regulatory efficacy. In the current study, we compared the regulatory impact of downward counterfactual thinking, temporal distancing, and memory rehearsal in 54 adult participants representing a spectrum of trait anxiety. Participants recalled regretful experiences and rated them on valence, arousal, regret, and episodic detail. Two to six days later, they created a downward counterfactual of the remembered event, thought of how they might feel about it 10 years from now, or simply rehearsed it. A day later, participants re-rated the phenomenological characteristics of the events. Across all participants, downward counterfactual thinking, temporal distancing, and memory rehearsal were equally effective at reducing negative affect associated with a memory. However, in individuals with higher trait anxiety, downward counterfactual thinking was more effective than rehearsal for reducing regret, and it was as effective as distancing in reducing arousal. We discuss these results in light of the functional theory of counterfactual thinking and suggest that they motivate further investigation into downward counterfactual thinking as a means to intentionally regulate emotional memories in affective disorders.

Talking about what would happen versus what happened: Tracking Congressional speeches during COVID-19

In counterfactual thinking, an imagined alternative to the reality that comprises an antecedent and a consequent is widely adopted in political discourse to justify past behaviors (i.e., counterfactual explanation) or to depict a better future (i.e., prefactual). However, they have not been properly addressed in political communication literature. Our study examines how politicians used counterfactual expressions for explanation of the past or preparation of the future during COVID-19, one of the most severe public health crises. All Congressional speeches of the Senate and House in the 116th Congress (2019-2020) were retrieved, and counterfactual expressions were identified along with time-focusing in each speech, using recent advances in natural language processing (NLP) techniques. The results show that counterfactuals were more practiced among Democrats in the Senate and Republicans in the House. With the spread of the pandemic, the use of counterfactuals decreased, maintaining a partisan gap in the House. However, it was nearly stable, with no party differences in the Senate. Implications of our findings are discussed, regarding party polarization, institutional constraints, and the quality of Congressional deliberation. Limitations and suggestions for future research are also provided.

Framing Causal Questions in Life Course Epidemiology

We describe the principles of counterfactual thinking in providing more precise definitions of causal effects and some of the implications of this work for the way in which causal questions in life course research are framed and evidence evaluated. Terminology is explained and examples of common life course analyses are discussed that focus on the timing of exposures, the mediation of their effects, observed and unobserved confounders, and measurement error. The examples are illustrated by analyses using singleton and twin cohort data. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Statistics and Its Application, Volume 9 is March 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

A Review of Functions of Speculative Thinking

Speculative thinking refers to thinking about past or future possibilities; it includes counterfactual thinking, prefactual thinking, and other types. In this narrative review, we discuss the traditional function of speculative thinking in improving future performance (i.e., the preparatory function). We also explore several non-preparatory functions of speculative thinking that have not been widely covered, namely the functions of conveying information and of supporting lying. In addition, we address temporal asymmetry; one perspective focuses on psychological distance in speculative thinking about the past and future, while another focuses on temporal asymmetry and reality/hypothetical differences in the preparatory function of speculative thinking. Overall, this review suggests that a broader functional theory is needed to address non-preparatory functions and the traditional preparatory function. Such a theory should cover all speculative thinking about the past and future rather than simply counterfactual thinking.

“If only…”: customer counterfactual thinking in failed recovery

Purpose This paper aims to examine counterfactual thinking as a key mediator of the effects of failed recovery (vs. failed delivery) on negative electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM). The authors further investigate the effectiveness of using recovery co-creation in minimizing customers’ counterfactual thinking. Design/methodology/approach This research includes textual analysis of online reviews (Study 1) and three scenario-based experiments (Studies 2, 3a and 3b). In addition to using item-response scales, the authors analyze negative online reviews and participants’ open-ended responses to capture their counterfactual thinking. Findings Failed recovery (vs failed delivery) increases counterfactual thinking, which, in turn, increases negative eWOM. These mediating effects of counterfactual thinking are consistent across textual analyses and experimental studies, as well as across different measures of counterfactual thinking. Counterfactual thinking also impacts customer anger in experiments; however, anger alone does not explain the effects of failed recovery on negative eWOM. Counterfactual thinking can be minimized by co-created recovery, especially when it is used proactively. Practical implications The findings demonstrate the detrimental effects of counterfactual thinking and offer managerial insights into co-creation as a strategy to minimize customers’ counterfactual thinking. The authors also highlight the importance and ways of tracking counterfactual thinking in digital outlets. Originality/value The authors contribute to counterfactual thinking and service recovery research by demonstrating the effects of failed recovery on counterfactual thinking that, in turn, impacts negative eWOM and offering a novel way to measure its expression in online narratives. The authors provide guidance on how to use co-creation in the service recovery process to minimize counterfactual thinking.