The relationship between counterfactual thinking and emotional reactions to event outcomes: does one account fit all?

Consistency among social groups in judging emotions across time

We measured judgments about emotions across time. In Study 1 (N = 254) and Study 2 (N = 162), LGBTQ-Latinx, straight-Latinx, LGBTQ-White, and straight-White emerging adults rated how they would feel if a perpetrator acted positively (P) or negatively (N) toward them in single, isolated events. In Study 2, participants also responded to a new emotions across time task where they judged how they would feel interacting with a hypothetical perpetrator across three timepoints: (1) an initial past event, (2) a recent past event, and (3) an uncertain future-oriented event (e.g., seeing the perpetrator again). Participants further predicted their thoughts and decisions in the uncertain future-oriented event. The past emotional events appeared in various sequences (PP, NN, NP, PN). Results indicated that participants judged events as emotionally unambiguous when occurring first in a sequence or in isolation (positive events feel better than negative events). In contrast, initial events shaped emotional reactions to subsequent events: Participants responded more intensely to episodes that were preceded by events of the same valence. In addition to this augmenting effect, initial negative events were especially sticky: Participants rated a positive event following a negative event as feeling less good than when a positive event appeared first or in isolation, but they judged negative events to feel equivalently bad regardless of order. When evaluating future-oriented affective states, participants drew from the prior experiences and prioritized the recent past (more positive emotions, thoughts, and decisions for PP > NP > PN > NN). Effects replicated across all social groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).