Abstract
Norm theory (Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93, 136-153) described a tendency for people to associate stronger regret with a negative outcome when it is a result of an exception (abnormal behaviour) compared to when it is a result of routine (normal behaviour). In two pre-registered studies, we conducted a replication and extension of three classic experiments on past behaviour exception/routine contrasts (N = 684). We successfully replicated Kahneman and Miller's (1986) experiments with the classic hitchhiker-scenario (Part 1) and car accident-scenario (Part 2). In both cases, participants examined negative outcomes and tended to indicate a protagonist who deviated from own past behaviour as more regretful than another who followed routine. Pre-registered extensions also showed effects for ratings of social norms, negative affect, and perceived luck. We did not find support for the Miller, D. T., and McFarland, C. [(1986). Counterfactual thinking and victim compensation: A test of norm theory. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 12, 513-519] experiment robbery scenario (Part 3) using a compensation measure, in that compensation to a victim of a robbery was not significantly different comparing exceptional and routine circumstances. However, a pre-registered extension showed that robbery under exceptional circumstances was perceived as more regretful than robbery under routine circumstances. We discuss implications for current and future research.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 901-914 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Cognition & Emotion |
Volume | 33 |
Issue number | 5 |
Early online date | 10 Aug 2018 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2019 |
Keywords
- Normality
- norm theory
- regret
- exception routine
- exceptionality effect
- replication
- COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING
- FUNCTIONAL THEORY
- PERCEPTION
- THOUGHTS
- INACTION
- REALITY
- BIAS