People often consider counterfactual events that did not happen, and some counterfactuals seem so close to actual events that they are described as aspects of reality. In five pre-registered experiments (N = 1195), we show there are two kinds of counterfactual closeness. These two kinds of closeness are inferred from different causes, elicit different emotions, and are described using different linguistic expressions. Distance-based closeness is inferred from the distance between the counterfactual and reality, is expressed by saying the counterfactual almost happened, and is more strongly linked with disappointment than surprise. Meanwhile, odds-based closeness is inferred from prior odds, is expressed by saying the counterfactual easily could have happened, and is more strongly linked with surprise. Even without information about the distance between outcomes and prior odds, people more strongly link expressions of whether something almost happened with disappointment and link expressions of whether something easily could have happened with surprise. In sum, counterfactual closeness is not perceived on a single dimension. Instead, there are at least two forms of closeness.
|
|
Professor at George Washington University
I am a Professor with Human-Technology Collaboration and Educational Technology programs at George Washington University in Washington DC. I have written 12 books and more than 100 articles, and I co-host of the Parsing Science podcast where scientists tell the stories behind their research. I am also the developer of the WeShareScience.com online platform for sharing research videos, and SciencePods.com where researchers can create free podcasts about their science. My research interests include human interactions with intelligent machines, needs, needs assessments, and instructional design.
Latest posts by Ryan Watkins (see all)