Bertolotti, M., Catellani, P., Noor, M., & Dinnick, I. (2026). The effects of counterfactual thinking on unilateral forgiveness: Can victims do it on their own? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied.
When people reflect on past interpersonal conflicts (e.g., being attacked, criticized, or excluded), they often replay events in their minds, recalling what actually happened and imagining how things could have gone differently, thus engaging in counterfactual thinking.
We investigated the types of counterfactuals they generate and whether counterfactual thinking influences their willingness to forgive.
Results from Study 1 showed that, when recalling a past offense, victims generated more additive (“If only X had”) than subtractive (“If only X had not”) counterfactuals. Study 2 found that additive (vs. subtractive) counterfactuals focused on the perpetrator were associated with greater (vs. lesser) willingness to take the perpetrator’s perspective and to forgive. Study 3 provided further evidence supporting the effects of additive (vs. subtractive) counterfactuals when the counterfactuals were focused on the victim. No direct evidence of moderation by offense severity or temporal distance was found (Studies 2 and 3), while the effects of victim-focused counterfactuals were moderated by responsibility attribution to the perpetrator or the victim (Study 3).
We investigated whether forgiveness can be fostered among victims of interpersonal conflict by prompting them to reconsider the events that led to their victimization in counterfactual (“what if”) terms. Findings showed that engaging in additive, rather than subtractive, counterfactual thinking may promote perspective taking and forgiveness, enabling victims to move beyond their victim status and forgive perpetrators in situations wherein an apology from the perpetrator is unlikely or impossible.