• DOI:10.1177/0146167295212008
• Corpus ID: 146500989

Commission, Omission, and Dissonance Reduction: Coping with Regret in the "Monty Hall" Problem

@article{Gilovich1995CommissionOA,
  title={Commission, Omission, and Dissonance Reduction: Coping with Regret in the "Monty Hall" Problem},
  author={Thomas Gilovich and Victoria Husted Medvec and Serena Chen},
  journal={Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin},
  year={1995},
  volume={21},
  pages={182 - 190}
}

• T. Gilovich, V. Medvec, Serena Chen
• Published 1 February 1995
• Psychology
• Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Do people reduce dissonance more for their errors of commission than their errors of omission? More specifically, do people come to value a disappointing outcome obtained through a direct action more than an identical outcome obtained through a failure to act? To answer this question, the authors created a laboratory analogue of the "three doors" or "Monty Hall" problem. Subjects initially selected one box from a group of three, only one of which contained a "grand" prize. After the experimenter opened one of the two unchosen boxes and revealed a modest prize, subjects were asked to decide whether to stay with their initial selection or trade it in for the other unopened box. Regardless of the subject's choice, a modest prize was received. Results indicated that subjects who switched boxes assigned a higher monetary value to the modest prize they received than those who stayed with their initial choice. Implications for the psychology of regret are discussed.