A theory of regret regulation 1.0¶
Zeelenberg, M., & Pieters, R. (2007). A theory of regret regulation 1.0. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(1), 3-18.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Regret
- The structural insight is robust across substrates within the agentic cluster: a gambler weighing the path not taken, a bandit algorithm bounding its lifetime reward gap, a clinician second-guessing a treatment window, and a bidder shading against the winner's curse all instantiate the same comparison — not outcome-versus-expectation but outcome-versus-best-alternative.
This sourceComprehensive theory distinguishing regret from related emotions across psychology, economics, and marketing; grounds the cross-substrate outcome-versus-best-alternative comparison and the transfer of anticipated-regret findings into market/consumer design.
- The structural insight is robust across substrates within the agentic cluster: a gambler weighing the path not taken, a bandit algorithm bounding its lifetime reward gap, a clinician second-guessing a treatment window, and a bidder shading against the winner's curse all instantiate the same comparison — not outcome-versus-expectation but outcome-versus-best-alternative.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. The single citation of this work carries no recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:22112babe6c0 · see in the full table