The present research investigated the effects of counterfactual thinking on subjects' accident-related judgments. It was predicted that the availability of counterfactual alternatives for an accident would result in differential evaluation of incident-related victims and perpetrators. The results of two studies strongly supported this prediction. Specifically, subjects awarded more financial compensation to the victim of an accident when it was preceded by exceptional rather than routine circumstances. Similarly, under these conditions the accident perpetrators were deemed to be more negligent in their behavior and a harsher fine was leveled against them.
|Number of pages||4|
|Journal||Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin|
|Publication status||Published - Feb 1992|
- NORM THEORY