Counterfactual thinking is thinking that runs counter to the facts. It consists of imagining outcomes other than the ones that occurred: the way things could have been—or should have been—different from the way they turned out. Being able to imagine different outcomes is an enormous evolutionary and practical advantage. It’s critical in regard to being creative or inventive and in not continuing to make the same mistakes over and over again. But there are different ways of using counterfactual thinking, some of which are effective and some of which are not.
Nonfunctional or Functional?
Nonfunctional counterfactual thinking frequently leads to blame (of self or others), and if carried on long enough, to rumination, stress, anxiety, and depression, as well as to conspiracy theories and alternate versions of reality.
Functional counterfactual thinking is an honest attempt to examine a situation to determine what, if anything, could have been done differently to create a different outcome. It doesn’t involve blame, rumination, or the twisting of facts.
Upward or Downward?
Upward counterfactual thinking focuses on how things could have turned out better, while downward counterfactual thinking focuses on how things could have turned out worse. Focusing on how things could have gone worse tends to make people feel better. You might think this is a good strategy, but it’s a short-term solution that can contribute to long-term difficulties because it decreases the impetus to change.
That’s because focusing on how things could have gone worse prevents people from identifying actual problems that need to be solved or behaviors that need to be modified. Sometimes it’s only a matter of dumb luck that things didn’t turn out worse than they did.
Evidence vs. Information
Perhaps the biggest difference between nonfunctional and functional counterfactual thinking is that in the former case, the events or actions leading to an outcome are perceived as evidence to support a particular agenda, while in the latter case, the events or actions leading to an outcome are perceived as information to be examined without regard to an agenda. (You can read about feedback loops for a more in-depth treatment of evidence vs. information.)
If you are dissatisfied with a particular outcome, the most useful thing you can do is use counterfactual thinking functionally by attempting to determine what led to the outcome and what, if any, changes you could make to be more effective in similar situations in the future.
Analyzing a situation and identifying what you want to change and why you want to change it uses System 2 (conscious) attention, which is why it isn’t always the go-to response. But if you want to use your brain instead of letting your brain use you, and if you want to be a creative rather than a reactive force in your own life, you will sometimes need to do what doesn’t come naturally.
Leave a Reply