The Impact of Experienced Regret on Subsequent Choice - Essay Example

? Psychology: Review of Current Research Talk Regret Once, Think Twice: The Impact of Experienced Regret on Subsequent Choice Date Psychology: Review of Current Research Talk Regret Once, Think Twice: The Impact of Experienced Regret on Subsequent Choice Summary of the Talk This was a talk the impact of experienced regret on subsequent choice by Daniela Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011) from the Lord Ashcroft International Business School. The speaker started by mentioning one of the TV programs, Deal or No deal. According to Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011), decision situation differs with the number of choices or outcome. For instance, if the outcomes are two then the probability is 0.5 for each. On the other hand, when the outcome is only one then the probability is 1 meaning that the decision maker wins in making the choice. In making decisions, there are risks involved. The presentation identifies different theories explain risk involved in making a choice. Two theories explained by Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011)are expected utility theory and regret theory. In regards to expected utility theory, decision maker is willing to receive less that the expected payoff in order to avoid playing risky game. Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011) term this phenomenon risk averse. Regret theory on the other hand is a situation where a decision maker is willing to reduce feeling the pain of regret despite the fact that it may involve taking of more risks. According to Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011), this is regret averse. Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011) go ahead to identify the relationship between risk averse and risk regret. In order to accomplish this objective, participants were involved in two phases. Phase one involved asking of participants to write down the value of x for which they found the gambles equally attractive. The second phase involved asking of participants to choose between them. However, this was after learning about possible feedbacks that include risky, choice only, and safe feedbacks. From Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011) literature review, it was clear that there are more people who are regret averse than those who are risk averse. Defining regret, Raeva, Dijk and Zeelenberg (2011) identified anticipated and experienced regrets as the main forms of regrets. The researcher then established the relationship between experienced regret and post-choice utility. Experiments and comparative mindset assisted the researcher in identifying correlation between decision 1 and 2 of which the results showed different correlation depending on the method used in making the decision. Other than the experiments and mindsets, the researcher applied the cognitive mechanism in a bid to identify the correlation between the first and second decision of the decision makers. With hypotheses being attached to both regret feedback and no regret feedback as the comparative mindset, the researcher concluded that in cases where no regret feedback equaled to regret feedback then that should be accepted while rejected when the two are not equal. Regret feedback and no regret feedback represented the two decisions. The researcher concluded that regret experience might affect future decisions. Critique of the Methods and Science In order to come up with such an amazing talk regarding making of decisions, the researcher employed the use of experiments and comparative mindset. Experiments are effective research design that attempts to find reasons or answers to particular questions through actual study of the participants. Scientifically, experiments are the best form of engaging participants to a given study meant to achieve certain objectives. The reason behind this is the fact that scientific experiment is free from human inconsistencies. Other than providing data that is inconsistence with human thoughts and perception, experiments are difficult to manipulate hence less vulnerable to exaggerations and misinterpretation. Nevertheless, use of experiments is limited to finding the participants as well as all the variables both dependent and independent. Applying experiment as research design method was a good method of giving the best results for the research. Comparative mindset is effective when evaluated through experiments since subjecting an individual to a set of conditions regarding a particular product is likely to affect the purchase and consumption of the other products. Therefore, from the researcher’s point of view it was very effective and efficient to apply experiments in testing comparative mindset of individuals when it comes to making certain decisions. The scientific method applied in finding answers to research question in this study was very effective and efficient. Strengths and Limitations Methods The scientific method of experiment provides results that are not vulnerable to exaggerations by human participants or researchers. Using different sets of decisions was an important aspect within the method as it gave the researcher an opportunity to reduce biasness towards a given concept. Hypothesis testing is usually one of the best methods in testing correlation between independent and dependent variables. In this scenario, the research find it perfect to come up with independent and dependent variables after which hypothesis testing assisted in making the best choice. On a different perspective, the applied method was very effective since comparative mindset requires the idea of experimenting effects of various factors in influencing decisions. Nevertheless, experiments are limited to participants and variables without which it becomes difficult for an individual to find specific answers whilst meeting particular objectives as outlined by the study subject or topic. Discussion The detailed discussion provided by the researchers gave insight into the subject of the topic. Researchers derived their discussion arguments from the results of the study. According to the researchers, the experience of regret may influence future decisions made by individuals given that the results indicated the same especially regarding hypothesis testing. In addition, the discussion outlined the fact that presence of an equal alternative decisions could interfere with the outcome. In this regards, the discussion is lucrative and cuts across the subject of the study aimed at establishing how regrets affect future decision-making. Nevertheless, such discussions were in adequate regarding results obtained as they tended to dwell more on related works than on the results obtained. Results Results were adequate given the analysis done in terms of ANOVA with an aim of testing the hypothesis. Comparison of mean and standard deviation for different data sets was important aspects in enabling researchers make the best decision and conclusion on the subject matter of the study. Using significance level, the results tested the hypothesis by virtue of mean hence making an informed decision and conclusion with respect to understanding subject of discussion. The only limitation with results is that they were based on limited data despite the fact that they provided adequate information. Ethics Ethics in research deems it fit that researchers should seek consent of the participants and promises to uphold privacy and confidentiality in the same. In this study, though it may be assumed that researchers sought for consent before engaging the participants into the study, it was never clear. Ethics within researches or studies should be within the frame that indicates how various aspects of the research ethics were fulfilled. There is need for researchers to openly and indicate consent sought from the participants. Therefore, this study probably forced the participants into the study and if they did not then it would have been wise indicating the same. Comparison with other Studies Like many other research works, this study considerably adds to the previously done studies. There is so much relationship between this study and others previously performed. For instance, Xu and Wyer (2008) explain that regret experience is the immediate cause of influencing decision making as well as the idea of enhancing comparison mindset. On the other hand, this study strengthen concepts identified by Galinsky and Moskowitz (2000) who discovered that exposure to better alternative outcome are essential in triggering mindset of individuals hence altering decision-making process. In any case, the study employed the same television program applied by other researchers in making decision on the topic such as Anderson, Harrison, Lau, and Rutstrom, (2008) and De Roos who teamed up with Sarafidis (2010). There are very few differences between this study and the others. The main difference could be the participants used in carrying out the study hence obtaining the results. In conclusion, this research adds an array of useful information on the decision-making process amongst individuals. The study in a significant extent attempts to explain the methodology used hence giving an insight to upcoming researchers to perform more studies hence creating a room for further and extensive research to prove the point like the previous studies by Raeva, Mittone and Schwarzbach (2010). Since the contemporary environment is dynamic, the above research provides room for more elaborate and extensive research in a bid to discover other aspects of decision-making process. References Anderson, S., Harrison, G., Lau, M., & Rutstrom. E. (2008). Risk aversion in game shows. In C. J. Harrison (Ed.), Research in Experimental Economics, Vol. 12: Risk Aversion in Experiments (pp. 359–404). Bingley: Emerald. De Roos, N., & Sarafidis (2010). Decision making under risk in Deal or no Deal. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 25, 987–1027. Galinsky, A. D., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2000). Counterfactuals as behavioral primes: Priming the simulation heuristic and consideration of alternatives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 384–409. Raeva, D., Dijk, E., & Zeelenberg, M. (2011). How comparing decision outcomes affects subsequent decisions: The carry-over of a comparative mind-set. Judgment and Decision Making, 6(4) 343-350. Raeva, D., Mittone, L., & Schwarzbach, J. (2010). Regret now, take it now: On the role of experienced regret on intertemporal choice. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 634–642. Xu, A. J., & Wyer, R. S. (2008). The comparative mindset: From animal comparisons to increased purchase intentions. Psychological Science, 19, 859–864. Read More