How to use “what would have happened if” to control impulsive behavior?

To a certain extent, impulsiveness in children is normal because the structures in their brains that keep emotions under control and encourage them to reflect on the consequences of their actions have not yet developed. It is assumed that as we mature, impulsive behavior diminishes because we are able to calmly weigh the pros and cons in order to make smarter and more sensible decisions.

But it is not always like that.

Sometimes we make impulsive decisions, regardless of the negative consequences they bring. And many times we also regret them when the step is taken or the damage is done. The good news is that science has a solution to control this impulsive behavior. And it is very simple: apply counterfactual thinking or, in other words, think about: “what would have happened if…”.

What exactly is impulsive behavior?

Impulsive behavior is a quick action, without prior planning or consideration of the possible negative consequences. It is a behavior that occurs when we experience very intense emotions or when we want to immediately satisfy a need, leaving aside logical reasoning or risk assessment.

From a neuropsychological perspective, impulsivity is related to the inability to inhibit our automatic responses or control internal impulses, which leads us to act spontaneously, even in situations where it would be better to stop and reflect.

Obviously, although a certain degree of impulsiveness can be normal or even beneficial in those circumstances that require quick responses, when it is excessive or frequent, it can have negative consequences on our relationships, health and daily life. Impulsive behaviors can become a source of risks for us and a source of chaos for those around us.

The role of counterfactuals in impulsive behavior

Psychologists at the University of Texas evaluated the relationship between counterfactual thinking and impulsive behavior because they believed that people learn better from past risky behavior when they adopt this type of reasoning; that is, when they are able to imagine alternative outcomes to what happened in the past.

In the experiment, participants were asked to choose between a larger sum of money after a certain period of time or a smaller amount that would be available immediately. The immediate monetary reward increased by 0.50 cents on each trial while the larger sum remained constant at $10.

Each participant’s “impulsivity score” was measured in terms of the money they lost each time by choosing the immediate reward over the larger, longer-term reward.

The psychologists also assessed their counterfactual thinking and found that those who thought less about alternative outcomes displayed more impulsive behavior. In contrast, people with more active counterfactual thinking were less impulsive.

What if I had…?

As a general rule, we all have a tendency to hyperbolic discounting – that is, to choose immediate results without much consideration for long-term consequences. This is because we perceive long-term rewards as less valuable and uncertain. In other words, we prefer a bird in the hand to a hundred in the bush. Curiously, the most impulsive people take this tendency to the extreme: they practically only see the value of the “here and now.”

The real puzzle is how it is possible for them to stumble over the same stone several times and, despite repeated negative consequences – many of which inevitably lead to disastrous results – to continue to manifest such impulsiveness. Why do some people learn quickly from their past mistakes and others do not?

Counterfactual thinking comes into play to explain this conundrum, something we have all resorted to when faced with a negative outcome. Only in these cases, thinking “what would have happened if…” or “if only there was…” becomes a kind of “emotional patch.”

In fact, imagining other outcomes in the past helps us to relieve the mental anguish of the present, but it also has another effect: it teaches us the lesson so as not to make the same mistakes again. However, not all people are able to take advantage of their potential, so they limit themselves to using it as an emotional catharsis.

How to use counterfactual thinking to reduce impulsivity?

Counterfactual thinking is not a monolithic process, but comes in different “flavors” and each person has the tendency to use one or the other in their day-to-day life:

1. Subtractive. In this case, we focus on what we should have subtracted from the past situation. This is what happens when we think: “If I hadn’t drunk so much wine last night, I wouldn’t have a hangover now.” Basically, we are simply removing an element of what happened from our mind.
2. Additive. In this case, we add an element to the situation that could lead to a better outcome. An example is when we think, “If I had drank juice last night, I wouldn’t have a hangover now.” This type of thinking helps us improve our behavior going forward because it is often more specific and creative. It goes beyond the premise of the original scenario to explore new options that might have gone unnoticed. At the same time, it gives us an alternative behavior when we are in a similar situation again, beyond simple abstention, as occurs in subtractive thinking.

Therefore, in order to control impulsive behaviour in adults and children, it is often enough to activate counterfactual thinking. It should not be used to cry over spilt milk, but rather in a more creative way to analyse past decisions and look for alternative paths.

When you ask yourself “what would have happened if…” think about:

• What additional things could you have done to achieve a better result?
• If you had done those things, how much would the situation have improved?
• What would be the ideal outcome?

Turning the tendency to imagine “what could have been” into a resource for better planning our emotional and behavioral responses can make the difference between impulsivity and self-regulation.

Counterfactuals offer a mental map of possibilities that can help us recognize impulsive patterns and their outcomes. However, their true value lies in transforming those hypothetical scenarios into concrete plans for the future. Moving from “what would have happened if ” to “what can I do now? ” is a key step in managing impulsivity and turning it into strategic action.

Source:

Smallman, R. et. Al. (2018) If only I wasn’t so impulsive: Counterfactual thinking and delay-discounting. Personality and Individual Differences; 135: 212-215.