↓ Skip to main content

Regulation of Experienced and Anticipated Regret in Daily Decision Making

Overview of attention for article published in Emotion, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Regulation of Experienced and Anticipated Regret in Daily Decision Making
Published in
Emotion, January 2016
DOI 10.1037/a0039861
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pär Bjälkebring, Daniel Västfjäll, Ola Svenson, Paul Slovic

Abstract

Decisions were sampled from 108 participants during 8 days using a web-based diary method. Each day participants rated experienced regret for a decision made, as well as forecasted regret for a decision to be made. Participants also indicated to what extent they used different strategies to prevent or regulate regret. Participants regretted 30% of decisions and forecasted regret in 70% of future decisions, indicating both that regret is relatively prevalent in daily decisions but also that experienced regret was less frequent than forecasted regret. In addition, a number of decision-specific regulation and prevention strategies were successfully used by the participants to minimize regret and negative emotions in daily decision making. Overall, these results suggest that regulation and prevention of regret are important strategies in many of our daily decisions. (PsycINFO Database Record

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 1%
Unknown 81 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Student > Bachelor 16 19%
Student > Master 15 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 13 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 47%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 16 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 November 2022.
All research outputs
#2,983,402
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Emotion
#562
of 2,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,016
of 399,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Emotion
#21
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,106 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 399,677 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.