a Department of Psychology , Harvard University , Cambridge , MA , USA.
Memory. 2014;22(1):145-62. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2013.779381. Epub 2013 Apr 8.
People frequently engage in counterfactual thinking: mental simulations of alternative outcomes to past events. Like simulations of future events, counterfactual simulations serve adaptive functions. However, future simulation can also result in various kinds of distortions and has thus been characterised as an adaptive constructive process. Here we approach counterfactual thinking as such and examine whether it can distort memory for actual events. In Experiments 1a/b young and older adults imagined themselves experiencing different scenarios. Participants then imagined the same scenario again, engaged in no further simulation of a scenario, or imagined a counterfactual outcome. On a subsequent recognition test participants were more likely to make false alarms to counterfactual lures than novel scenarios. Older adults were more prone to these memory errors than younger adults. In Experiment 2 younger and older participants selected and performed different actions, then recalled performing some of those actions, imagined performing alternative actions to some of the selected actions, and did not imagine others. Participants, especially older adults, were more likely to falsely remember counterfactual actions than novel actions as previously performed. The findings suggest that counterfactual thinking can cause source confusion based on internally generated misinformation, consistent with its characterisation as an adaptive constructive process.
对过去事件的替代结果进行心理模拟。与未来事件的模拟一样,反事实模拟也具有适应性功能。然而,未来的模拟也可能导致各种扭曲,因此被描述为一种适应性的建设性过程。在这里,我们将反事实思维视为这种情况,并研究它是否会扭曲对实际事件的记忆。在实验 1a/b 中,年轻和年长的成年人想象自己经历了不同的场景。然后,参与者再次想象同一个场景,不再对场景进行任何模拟,或者想象一个反事实的结果。在随后的识别测试中,参与者更容易对反事实诱饵做出错误警报,而不是新场景。与年轻人相比,老年人更容易犯这些记忆错误。在实验 2 中,年轻和年长的参与者选择并执行不同的动作,然后回忆执行其中一些动作,想象对一些选定的动作执行替代动作,而不想象其他动作。与之前执行的新动作相比,参与者,尤其是老年人,更有可能错误地记住反事实动作。这些发现表明,反事实思维可能会导致基于内部产生的错误信息的来源混淆,这与将其描述为适应性的建设性过程一致。