Loading...
Publication
Pensamento contrafactual : ator e leitor em cenários negativos e positivos
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
O Pensamento Contrafactual é um tipo de pensamento espontâneo que nos permite procurar alternativas à nossa realidade, muitas vezes evidenciado através da expressão “e se…”, que ocorre frequentemente no dia-a-dia de qualquer sujeito (Byrne, 2016). Já em muitos estudos foi sugerido o impacto que certas variáveis como a posição do sujeito (ator vs. leitor) (Girotto e. al., 2007; Pighin et. al., 2011), ou o cenário/valência do resultado (sucesso/positivo vs. insucesso/negativo) (Roese & Olson, 1993a, 1993b) têm em diversas dimensões do PCF. Neste estudo acrescenta-se uma pergunta sobre este assunto: será que os sujeitos na posição de atores ou leitores têm pensamentos contrafactuais, perante um resultado positivo, idênticos aos que já se conhece perante um resultado negativo (Girotto e. al., 2007; Pighin et. al., 2011)?
Assim, hipotetizou-se que, por um lado, deixaria de haver diferenças entre atores e leitores em cenário de sucesso, e, por outro, que o tipo de cenário teria apenas impacto em atores e não em leitores.
Os resultados foram no sentido de ambas as hipóteses. Adicionalmente, foram propostas outras duas hipóteses: uma diz respeito à relação entre a valência de resultado e à estrutura do PCF (quanto aos atores, seria esperado que em cenário positivo fossem elaborados contrafactuais de estrutura subtrativa e em cenário negativo fossem elaborados contrafactuais de estrutura aditiva, não sendo esperadas diferenças entre os leitores); e outra diz respeito à relação entre a valência de resultado e o tipo de atribuição causal (interna vs, externa) (era esperado que, em grupos de atores, se atribuísse o sucesso a fatores internos e o insucesso a fatores externos, não se esperando diferenças entre os leitores). Os resultados relativos a estas últimas hipóteses não foram no sentido do esperado.
Counterfactual thought is a type of thought which allows us to search for mental alternatives to our present reality. It’s spontaneous and frequent in our everyday lives, and it is frequently expressed through a “what if…” conjunction (Byrne, 2016). There have been many studies in which it was suggested that variables such as role (actor vs reader) (Girotto e. al., 2007; Pighin et. al., 2011) or scenario/outcome valence (positive vs. negative) (Roese & Olson, 1993a, 1993b) have impact on certain dimensions of counterfactual though. In this study, we add up yet another question about this issue: do both actors and readers have the same counterfactual thoughts for both negative and positive scenarios? Thereby, we hypothesised that there would be no differences between roles on a positive scenario, and that the difference in scenario would only impact on actors but not on readers. The results went accordingly to the proposed hypotheses. Additionally, we proposed yet another two hypotheses regarding outcome valence and the structure of counterfactual thought (additive vs. subtractive) (within the actor groups, it was expected that on a positive scenario, subjects would elaborate more subtractive counterfactual thoughts and on a negative scenario, subjects would elaborate more additive counterfactual thoughts, not expecting any differences between the two groups of readers), and outcome valence and causal attribution (it was expected, within the actor groups, that success were attributed to internal elements and unsuccess attributed to external elements; within readers, there were no differences to be expected, no matter the outcome valence). The results concerning these last hypotheses didn’t go accordingly to that which we proposed.
Counterfactual thought is a type of thought which allows us to search for mental alternatives to our present reality. It’s spontaneous and frequent in our everyday lives, and it is frequently expressed through a “what if…” conjunction (Byrne, 2016). There have been many studies in which it was suggested that variables such as role (actor vs reader) (Girotto e. al., 2007; Pighin et. al., 2011) or scenario/outcome valence (positive vs. negative) (Roese & Olson, 1993a, 1993b) have impact on certain dimensions of counterfactual though. In this study, we add up yet another question about this issue: do both actors and readers have the same counterfactual thoughts for both negative and positive scenarios? Thereby, we hypothesised that there would be no differences between roles on a positive scenario, and that the difference in scenario would only impact on actors but not on readers. The results went accordingly to the proposed hypotheses. Additionally, we proposed yet another two hypotheses regarding outcome valence and the structure of counterfactual thought (additive vs. subtractive) (within the actor groups, it was expected that on a positive scenario, subjects would elaborate more subtractive counterfactual thoughts and on a negative scenario, subjects would elaborate more additive counterfactual thoughts, not expecting any differences between the two groups of readers), and outcome valence and causal attribution (it was expected, within the actor groups, that success were attributed to internal elements and unsuccess attributed to external elements; within readers, there were no differences to be expected, no matter the outcome valence). The results concerning these last hypotheses didn’t go accordingly to that which we proposed.
Description
Dissertação de Mestrado apresentada no ISPA – Instituto Universitário de Ciências Psicológicas, Sociais e da Vida, para obtenção do grau de Mestre na especialidade de Psicologia Clínica
Keywords
Pensamento contrafactual Posição Cenário Valência de resultado Atribuição causal Counterfactual Thought Role Scenario Outcome Valence Causal Attribution