Oh, What Might've Been: The Psychology Behind "If Only" Thinking

Jaime R. DeLisio, M.A.

You're running very late for a big date that you’ve been anticipating for months. As you rush out of your apartment, you decide to take the stairs instead of waiting for the elevator. Mid-way down the stairs, you are stopped by a long-winded neighbor who traps you into a tedious conversation. By the time you arrive at the restaurant, your date has already left. As you stand there alone, you think to yourself, "If only I had taken the elevator, I would have made the date."

This is called counterfactual thinking.

It involves considering different actions that might have lead to an alternate outcome. Counterfactual thinking often happens in "if only" situations, where you wish something had or had not happened. Even if you've never heard the term "counterfactual," you’ve certainly experienced it.

So why and how does it happen? And how can you avoid its pitfalls? Read on.

What Makes You Wonder

Counterfactual thinking happens any time you compare reality to its alternatives. The effect is increased if:

You can easily reconstruct events as they happened
You narrowly missed a desired outcome (like just losing the lottery by one number)
You did something outside of your routine
You could’ve done something ahead of time to avoid the event

While counterfactual thinking is often associated with thinking about good things that could’ve been, it’s also in effect when you think about bad things that almost happened –- like narrowly avoiding an accident.

You Are to Blame

Within recent years, research on counterfactual thinking has mushroomed, establishing itself as one of the signature domains within social psychology. Recent studies have found that the impact of counterfactual thinking is most potent when you, rather than another person, are the focus of the blame. In other words, you’re more likely to experience counterfactual thinking if you actively did something to affect a situation.
In the short term, you regret actions that you did to cause problems rather than inaction that might’ve had the same effect. In the long term, you regret inaction more. In other words, if something bad happens, you experience some measure of regret no matter what.

So What? How Can You Use This to Help You?

Counterfactual thinking is a powerful influence tool. Look for it being used against you in your everyday life ... and work to use it to your advantage!

One place it's easy to see counterfactual thinking is in advertising. Advertisers often use it to help persuade people to buy a product (if you're in sales, you can try this, too!). Buyers are set up to generate a counterfactual thought, which could be "fixed" by the product. For example, to sell an anti-aging cream to people with sun damage, the persuasion process might work like this:

Cause tension by highlighting something about the target that will cause counterfactual thinking: "If you had used sunscreen, you might not have the sun damage that you do now."
Offer a new thought that can replace the uncomfortable thought: "Now, there’s a new cream that can erase your sun damage -– no more fine lines or wrinkles."
Encourage the target to accept the new thought: "If you buy this cream, you’ll be able to reverse the sun damage on your face. Your skin will be restored -- like you never caused any damage at all!"

Have you ever been persuaded in this way? If so, you’re not alone. Maybe the next time you begin to "fall" for this technique, you’ll stop and think before you buy.

A Final Warning

Counterfactual thinking is powerful, which means it can also be dangerous. It can make you adjust the facts in your mind to create new memories. It can be used to cover up trauma or to make excuses that allow you to avoid uncomfortable truths. A persistent denial of the truth may eventually lead to emotional damage.

So, be careful out there! And the next time you choose to take the stairs instead of the elevator or go outside without sunscreen, think twice about the possible outcomes. Counterfactual thinking could come back to bite you!

References and Recommended Readings

Fraser, C. (2003). Accepting the Blame for Bad Decisions. Australian Journal of Psychology, 55, 43. Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1982). Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (p. 201-208). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Kahneman, D. and Miller, D. (1986). Norm Theory: Comparing Reality to its Alternatives. Psychological Review, 80, 136-153.

Krishnamurthy, R. et al. (2002). Counterfactual Thinking and Advertising Responses. Journal of Consumer Research, 28.

Nurit, T. et al (2004). Counterfactual Thinking as a Mechanism in Narrative Persuasion. Human Communication Research, 30, 301-328.

About the Author:

Jaime R. DeLisio, M.A. has a Master’s degree in Communication with a focus on the practical applications of theory. She’s put her knowledge to work in careers as a broadcast news writer and senior advertising copywriter. Jaime is obsessed with the “hows” and “whys” of life and loves getting people interested in what’s behind the psychological curtain.