The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The use of crying over spilled milk: A note on the rationality and functionality of regret
Open accessAbstract
This article deals with the rationality and functionality of the existence of regret and its influence on decision making. First, regret is defined as a negative, cognitively based emotion that we experience when realizing or imagining that our present situation would have been better had we acted differently. Next, it is discussed whether this experience can be considered rational and it is argued that rationality only applies to what we do with our regrets, not to the experience itself. Then, research is reviewed showing that both the anticipation of future regret and the experience of retrospective regret influence behavior. The influence of anticipated regret can be considered rational as long as the decision maker can accurately predict the regret that may result from the decision. The influence of experienced regret cannot be considered rational, since decisions should be based on future outcomes, not historical ones. However, influence of experienced regret can be called functional since it may result in increased learning from our mistakes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.4.341 · Cited by 6,544
Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice Under Uncertainty
Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232669 · Cited by 4,042
Arkes, H. R., & Blumer, C. (1985) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4 · Cited by 2,573
Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. (1988) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209174 · Cited by 1,172
Mellers, B., Schwartz, A., & Ritov, I. (1999) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.128.3.332 · Cited by 839
Decision Affect Theory: Emotional Reactions to the Outcomes of Risky Options
Mellers, B. A., Schwartz, A., Ho, K., & Ritov, I. (1997) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00455.x · Cited by 736
Cited by
The push, pull and mooring effects in virtual migration for social networking sites
Chang, I., Liu, C., & Chen, K. (2014) · Information Systems Journal · doi:10.1111/isj.12030 · Cited by 271
A New Model of Random Regret Minimization
Chorus, C. G. (2010) · European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research · doi:10.18757/ejtir.2010.10.2.2881 · Cited by 261
See you, see me: teenagers’ self-disclosure and regret of posting on social network site.
Xie, W., & Kang, C. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.05.059 · Cited by 104
Sexual Regret: Evidence for Evolved Sex Differences
Galperin, A., Haselton, M. G., Frederick, D. A., Poore, J., von Hippel, W., Buss, D. M., & Gonzaga, G. C. (2013) · Archives of Sexual Behavior · doi:10.1007/s10508-012-0019-3 · Cited by 101
Zhao, H., Wang, X., & Jiang, L. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.067 · Cited by 52
Spatial Choice: A Matter of Utility or Regret?
Chorus, C. G., Arentze, T. A., & Timmermans, H. J. P. (2009) · Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design · doi:10.1068/b34092 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Zeelenberg, M.
- Venue
- Philosophical Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1999-09
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 325-340
- ISSN
- 0951-5089 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-394X
- OpenAlex
- W2114181763
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 0.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
