Sich einer Schönheitsoperation unterziehen vs es nicht tun
Wenn du handelst
Schönheitsoperation vornehmen lassen
10%
Wenn du nicht handelst
Auf Schönheitsoperation verzichten
7,0%
Anteil derer, die jede Entscheidung später bereuen. Balken und vollständige Datengrundlage erscheinen unten.
Gesundheit
Zuletzt überprüft 2026-04-26
Evidenzqualität 3.75/5
Bewertungsergebnis nach acht Dimensionen gemäß der
Qualitätsrubrik
. Jede Dimension wird mit 1–5 bewertet.
D1 Quellenüberprüfung
4/5
D2 Quellenautorität & Unabhängigkeit
4/5
D3 Genauigkeit der Bedauernsrate
1/5
D4 Vergleichbarkeit der Quellen
2/5
D5 Gilovich-Muster
5/5
D6 Prosaqualität
5/5
D7 Vollständigkeit der Einschränkungen
5/5
D8 Stichprobenqualität
4/5
Durchschnitt3.75/5
Stellvertretende Daten — für diese Entscheidung gibt es keine direkte Bedauernsstudie. Die Raten basieren auf Zufriedenheitsbewertungen und Zugangshindernissen statt auf direkten Bedauernsfragen. Siehe Vorbehalte unten.
Reue fürs Handeln
Schönheitsoperation vornehmen lassen
10%
~10 % bedauern den Eingriff (Spanne 5–33 % je nach Art)
Patienten der Schönheitschirurgie, systematische Übersicht über mehrere Studien
retrospektiv, typischerweise 1–5 Jahre nach Eingriff
Reue fürs Unterlassen
Auf Schönheitsoperation verzichten
7,0%
~5 % (Platzhalter-Näherung — keine direkte Umfrage vorhanden)
A 2024 American Journal of Surgery
systematic review places cosmetic surgery regret at
roughly 5—33% depending on procedure type: breast augmentation sits at
the low end (5—9%), body contouring at the high end (11—33%). That
review does not compute a single cross-procedure average, so we estimate ~10%
as a conservative editorial estimate near the lower-middle of that range
for elective cosmetic procedures, not a computed midpoint. A companion
2023 PMC narrative summary of the decision-regret literature does not add
its own numeric range but corroborates which factors drive regret (see
below); the AJS review itself reports rates only. On the inaction side, no large-sample survey directly measures regret about not
having cosmetic surgery. General body-dissatisfaction data (37% of
Americans per Ipsos) and cosmetic-consideration rates (70% per ASDS)
suggest that a non-trivial minority of non-patients harbor lasting
appearance dissatisfaction, but the 7% inaction figure is a ceiling
proxy — the Ipsos-reported share who say they would be willing to
undergo cosmetic surgery to achieve their ideal body — not a measured
regret rate or a survey finding about regret.
The pattern runs counter to the classic Gilovich finding. For most life
decisions, inaction regret dominates over time: people regret the degree not
pursued, the trip not taken, the relationship not attempted. Cosmetic surgery
inverts this because the action is irreversible, physically invasive, and
financially costly. A rhinoplasty that narrows the bridge too aggressively
cannot be fully undone; a breast augmentation that causes capsular contracture
is a daily reminder. The 2023 PMC review of the decision-regret literature
(not the 2024 AJS review, which reports rates only) identifies inadequate
preoperative education, limited use of decisional tools, and postoperative
complications as the strongest predictors of regret — suggesting that the
action-regret rate is substantially reducible through better screening and
counseling.
The main caveat is the asymmetry of evidence. The action side has genuine
peer-reviewed systematic reviews with procedure-specific breakdowns. The
inaction side has essentially nothing: body dissatisfaction surveys measure a
different construct, and ASDS consideration rates conflate casual curiosity
with genuine surgical intent. The 7% inaction figure used here is a ceiling
proxy — willingness to undergo cosmetic surgery, not a measured regret rate.
If a rigorous survey ever asks a representative sample of non-patients “Do
you regret not having cosmetic surgery?”, the true figure could be higher or
lower — and the direction of the Gilovich pattern could flip. Until then,
the delta (0.03) should be read as roughly balanced with a slight tilt
toward action regret, not as a precise quantitative claim.
Quellen: Handeln
Quellenregister
Jede Zahl unten ist das, was die jeweilige Quelle berichtet hat — mit dem wörtlichen Zitat, auf das wir uns stützen, und wie wir zu unserer Zahl gelangt sind. Klicke auf einen Link, um direkt zu prüfen.
[1]The American Journal of Surgery — A systematic review of patient regret after surgery↗ 1 other entry
Peer-Review
Regret after elective plastic surgery ranges from 5–33%; breast augmentation 5.1–9.1%, body contouring 10.82–33.3%
Auszug
“"Regret after elective plastic surgery operations is significantly higher compared to gender-affirming surgery. The percentage of patients reporting regret ranged from 0 to 47.1% in breast reconstruction, 5.1–9.1% in breast augmentation, and 10.82–33.3% in body contouring."
”
Quelldaten von
2024-04-30
Abgerufen
2026-07-07
Berechnung
2024 AJS systematic review of patient regret across surgical subspecialties. Reported ranges for cosmetic procedures: breast augmentation 5.1–9.1%, body contouring 10.82–33.3%. The review provides the most comprehensive cross-specialty data but does not compute a weighted average across procedures. We use ~10% as a conservative editorial estimate sitting at the lower-middle of the cosmetic (non-reconstructive) range — not a computed midpoint — acknowledging the enormous variance by procedure type. This review reports regret rates only and does not analyze predictors or drivers of regret; the predictor finding below (preoperative education, decisional tools, postoperative complications) comes from the companion PMC 2023 source only, not from this review.
[2]Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery – Global Open — Decision Regret in Plastic Surgery: A Summary
Peer-Review
Qualitative summary of decision-regret literature; preoperative education, decisional tools, and postoperative complications are the strongest predictors
Auszug
“"After review of the literature, preoperative education, decisional tools, and postoperative complications were found to be the most important factors affecting decision regret after surgery."
”
Quelldaten von
2023-06-01
Abgerufen
2026-07-07
Berechnung
PMC 2023 narrative summary of the decision-regret literature in plastic surgery (Jones, Cruz, Stewart, Losken; PRS Global Open). It does not report a single aggregate cosmetic regret rate; instead it identifies preoperative education, decisional tools, and postoperative complications as the strongest predictors of regret. The formal literature it draws on concentrates on breast reconstruction and gender-reaffirming procedures rather than aesthetic surgery. Used as a corroborating source on regret drivers, not for the numeric rate.
Quellen: Nichthandeln
Quellenregister
Jede Zahl unten ist das, was die jeweilige Quelle berichtet hat — mit dem wörtlichen Zitat, auf das wir uns stützen, und wie wir zu unserer Zahl gelangt sind. Klicke auf einen Link, um direkt zu prüfen.
[1]Ipsos — Most Americans Experience Feeling Dissatisfied with How Their Body Looks from Time to Time↗ 2 other entries
Primärstudie
7% of Americans say they would be willing to undergo cosmetic surgery to achieve their ideal body; 37% feel dissatisfied with their body whenever they look in the mirror
Auszug
“"Americans are not as willing to undergo cosmetic surgery (7%), consume laxatives (4%), and/or purge/throw-up after eating (1%)."
”
Quelldaten von
2018-01-10
Abgerufen
2026-07-07
Berechnung
Ipsos survey of 1,004 US adults (Jan 3–5, 2018). No published survey directly asks non-patients whether they regret not having cosmetic surgery, so no true inaction-regret figure exists. Rather than invent a downward adjustment, this entry uses the survey's own directly-reported 7% figure: the share of respondents who said they would be willing to undergo cosmetic surgery to achieve their ideal body (grouped by Ipsos among the least-chosen extreme measures, alongside laxative use and purging), used as a ceiling/context proxy. It bounds the population plausibly dissatisfied enough with their appearance to entertain surgery, and so plausibly able to feel inaction regret, versus the much broader 37% general mirror-dissatisfaction figure, which includes many people who would never consider surgery specifically. This is explicitly a willingness proxy, not a measured regret rate, and should be read as an order-of-magnitude ceiling, not a finding.
70% of Americans are considering a cosmetic dermatologic procedure
Auszug
“"Seventy percent of Americans are considering a cosmetic dermatologic procedure."
”
Quelldaten von
2025-03-01
Abgerufen
2026-07-07
Berechnung
ASDS annual consumer survey. The 70% consideration rate is inflated by including minimally invasive treatments (Botox, fillers) alongside surgical procedures, and reflects loose interest rather than intent to act. No published survey directly measures inaction regret; this source is retained as corroborating context on the gap between broad "considering" figures and genuine willingness, not as the basis for the 7% proxy (see the Ipsos source above and caveats below).
Einschränkungen
The action and inaction figures are not symmetrical in methodology or rigor. The ~10% action-regret estimate is derived from two systematic reviews (PMC 2023, AJS 2024) that report procedure-specific ranges (breast augmentation 5–9%, body contouring 11–33%) but no single aggregate figure. Neither review computes a weighted average across cosmetic procedures, so the 10% is an editorial estimate sitting at the lower-middle of the observed range. Of the two reviews, only PMC 2023 analyzes predictors of regret (preoperative education, decisional tools, postoperative complications); the AJS 2024 review reports regret rates by procedure only and does not discuss predictors. The inaction-side 7% is NOT a measured regret rate: no large-sample survey directly asks non-patients whether they regret not having cosmetic surgery. It is a ceiling/context proxy: the Ipsos-reported share of Americans who say they would be willing to undergo cosmetic surgery to achieve their ideal body, used as an upper bound on the population plausibly dissatisfied enough to feel inaction regret. The broader Ipsos mirror-dissatisfaction rate (37%) is too diffuse to use for this purpose, and the ASDS consideration rate (70%) reflects loose interest, not regret or even willingness to act. The 7% should be treated as an order-of-magnitude ceiling proxy, not a finding. Because both sides carry substantial uncertainty, the delta (0.03) should be read as "roughly balanced with a slight tilt toward action regret" rather than a precise quantitative claim. Cosmetic surgery is a counterexample to Gilovich and Medvec's typical inaction-dominance finding: the irreversibility, physical scarring risk, and financial cost of the procedure sustain action regret in a way that forgone elective surgery does not.
