Sanna L J
Department of Psychology, Washington State University, Pullman 99164-4820, USA.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1996 Nov;71(5):1020-36. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.71.5.1020.
Four studies investigated the prefactual (alternative preoutcome predictions) and counterfactual (alternative postoutcome "what might have beens") mental simulations of defensive pessimists and optimists. In Study 1, defensive pessimists engaged in upward (better than expected) prefactual thinking, whereas optimists engaged in downward (worse than actuality) counterfactual thinking in reaction to a course exam. In Study 2, defensive pessimists preferred upward prefactual thinking and optimists preferred no prefactual thinking when prefactual thoughts were directly manipulated. In Studies 3 and 4, defensive pessimists and optimists differed in reactions to manipulated success and failure, and these reactions were further moderated by the opportunity to engage in prefactual thinking and the possibility of a second try. Individual differences in strategies of prefactual and counterfactual thinking are discussed.
四项研究调查了防御性悲观者和乐观者的事前事实(替代性结果前预测)和反事实(替代性结果后“本可能发生之事”)心理模拟。在研究1中,面对一门课程考试,防御性悲观者进行向上(好于预期)的事前事实思考,而乐观者则进行向下(比实际情况更糟)的反事实思考。在研究2中,当直接操纵事前事实思维时,防御性悲观者偏好向上的事前事实思考,而乐观者则不偏好事前事实思考。在研究3和研究4中,防御性悲观者和乐观者对操纵的成功和失败的反应有所不同,并且这些反应因进行事前事实思考的机会和二次尝试的可能性而进一步受到调节。文中讨论了事前事实和反事实思维策略的个体差异。