Author(s)

Thomas Gilovich

Victoria Medvec

Serena Chen

Do people reduce dissonance more for their errors of commission than their errors of omission? More specifically, do people come to value a disappointing outcome obtained through a direct action more than an identical outcome obtained through a failure to act? To answer this question, the authors created a laboratory analogue of the "three doors" or "Monty Hall" problem. Subjects initially selected one box from a group of three, only one of which contained a "grand" prize. After the experimenter opened one of the two unchosen boxes and revealed a modest prize, subjects were asked to decide whether to stay with their initial selection or trade it in for the other unopened box. Regardless of the subject's choice, a modest prize was received. Results indicated that subjects who switched boxes assigned a higher monetary value to the modest prize they received than those who stayed with their initial choice. Implications for the psychology of regret are discussed.
Date Published: 1995
Citations: Gilovich, Thomas, Victoria Medvec, Serena Chen. 1995. Commission, Omission and Dissonance Reduction: Coping with Regret in the. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. (2)182-190.