Anteil derer, die jede Entscheidung später bereuen. Balken und vollständige Datengrundlage erscheinen unten.
Gesundheit
Zuletzt überprüft 2026-05-10
Evidenzqualität 3.5/5
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
2/5
D4 Vergleichbarkeit der Quellen
3/5
D5 Gilovich-Muster
4/5
D6 Prosaqualität
4/5
D7 Vollständigkeit der Einschränkungen
4/5
D8 Stichprobenqualität
3/5
Durchschnitt3.5/5
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
Ein Piercing stechen lassen
32%
32 % der Amerikaner mit Piercings berichten ein gewisses Bedauern
US-Erwachsene mit Körperpiercing, Online-Umfrage
retrospektiv, kein fester Zeitraum
Reue fürs Unterlassen
Kein Piercing stechen lassen
8,0%
~8 % (konstruierte Näherung — keine direkte Inaktivitäts-Bedauerns-Umfrage vorhanden)
US-Erwachsene ohne Körperpiercing, geschätzt
retrospektiv, kein fester Zeitraum
% bereuen diese Entscheidung
Ein Piercing stechen lassenKein Piercing stechen lassen
32%8,0%
action dominates — Handeln dominiert — die meisten bereuen ihr Handeln.
Verwandte Entscheidungen
Semantisch ähnliche Entscheidungen — gleiches Terrain, andere Abwägungen.
About 32% of Americans who have a body piercing report some regret,
according to a 2017 Statista survey — the complement of the 68% who said
they had no regrets. The regret rate is uneven by gender: only 22% of
pierced women reported regret versus a substantially higher share among
men — plausibly because men more often choose piercings that later close
or are removed (ear stretching, industrial, septum) rather than the simple
ear piercings that dominate among women. A 2011 BMC Public Health
peer-reviewed survey of European undergraduates found that 13% of body-art
recipients reported complications — infections, keloids, allergic
reactions — a common driver of removal and dissatisfaction across
populations. On the inaction side, no published survey directly
asks non-pierced adults whether they regret not having a piercing. The 8%
inaction proxy is a conservative estimate anchored below the tattoo inaction
proxy (15%) because the lower permanence of piercings reduces the barrier
to future action.
The psychology of piercing regret fits a modified version of the Gilovich
and Medvec action-dominates pattern. Piercings are far more reversible
than tattoos — most close within weeks if the jewelry is removed — yet
action regret still runs higher in the available data. The asymmetry most
likely reflects the social visibility of piercings during the period of
wear: an industrial piercing or nose ring that attracts negative reactions
at work or from family creates immediate, concrete negative feedback that
sustains regret even after the hole closes. Inaction regret for piercings
is structurally low because the option remains open — a non-pierced adult
can act at any time, which defuses the counterfactual. This “open option”
effect is a well-documented suppressor of inaction regret in Gilovich’s
research: regret is highest when the path is permanently closed.
The main caveat is the quality of the evidence. The 32% action figure is
from a Statista survey with opaque methodology — question wording,
sampling frame, and weighting are not publicly documented. The 8% inaction
figure is a constructed proxy, not a finding. Because the two sides rely on
different measurement approaches, the delta (0.24) should be read as
indicating that action regret is substantially higher than inaction regret,
not as a precise quantitative ratio. The peer-reviewed literature on
piercing focuses on complications and health outcomes rather than regret
per se; a large-scale, nationally representative survey with a direct regret
question on both sides would substantially improve the evidence base for
this entry.
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.
1/2 Quellen unabhängig wortwörtlich mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen
[1]Statista (Statista Survey) — United States -- regretting body piercings in 2017
Verifiziert
Referenzquelle
68% of Americans with piercings said they have no regrets; approximately 32% reported some regret
Auszug
“"68 percent of respondents said they have no regrets having a piercing. Among respondents aged 18 to 29, 67 percent said they have no regrets having one. Among female respondents, 78 percent said they have no regrets having one."
”
Quelldaten von
2017-06-22
Abgerufen
2026-05-10
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
Statista Survey conducted June 22, 2017. The 32% figure is the complement of the 68% who reported no regret (68% overall no-regret is stated on the source page; the 32% action-regret rate is derived as its complement). The exact sample size is not disclosed on the public (non-paywalled) Statista page, so no source-attributed n is claimed here. Used directly as action-regret rate. Note: the source's 78% no-regret rate among women implies a female regret rate of ~22%; the overall 32% is skewed by higher male regret. Men more commonly get piercings that later close or are removed (ear stretching, industrial, septum), which may drive the higher regret rate in this sample.
[2]BMC Public Health — Body piercing and tattoos: a survey on young adults' knowledge of the risks and practices in body art
Peer-Review
Among 1,598 Italian university freshmen, 29% had at least one piercing or tattoo, and 13.2% of those with body art reported complications after the procedure
Auszug
“"Of the 1.598 sample, 463 (29%) have at least one piercing or tattoo. [...] Sixty-one (13.2%) of the interviewees who underwent body art had had complications after it."
”
Quelldaten von
2011-10-14
Abgerufen
2026-07-01
Berechnung
BMC Public Health 2011 peer-reviewed survey of 1,598 freshmen at the University of Bari, Italy (academic year 2009-2010, 96.5% response rate). Not a US sample and does not directly report a US regret rate. Used as corroborating evidence that piercing complications (infection, keloids, allergic reactions) are a common driver of removal and dissatisfaction across populations -- 13.2% of body-art recipients reported complications -- consistent with the Statista US action-side finding.
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.
1/2 Quellen unabhängig wortwörtlich mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen
[1]Statista (Statista Survey) — United States -- regretting body piercings in 2017
Referenzquelle
Among US adults with piercings, 68% report no regret; data does not include inaction-side direct measurement
Auszug
“"68 percent of respondents said they have no regrets having a piercing. Among respondents aged 18 to 29, 67 percent said they have no regrets having one."
”
Quelldaten von
2017-06-22
Abgerufen
2026-05-10
Berechnung
No published survey directly asks non-pierced adults whether they regret not getting a piercing. The 8% inaction estimate is a conservative constructed proxy. Piercings are far more reversible than tattoos -- most close within weeks to months if removed -- which substantially lowers the inaction-regret burden compared to the tattoo entry. The proxy is anchored below the tattoo inaction proxy (15%) because the barrier to trying piercings is lower than for tattoos, meaning fewer non-pierced adults are likely to harbour strong lasting regret about not having acted.
[2]Journal of the American Osteopathic Association — Body art: attitudes and practices regarding body piercing among urban undergraduates
Verifiziert
Peer-Review
Among 100 urban undergraduates with usable surveys, 56% reported having a body piercing at one time; nonpierced participants estimated the probability of an adverse event at 43% versus 30% among pierced participants
Auszug
“"One hundred (97%) out of the 103 surveys distributed had sufficient data for analysis. Fifty-six percent of participants (age range, 17 to 25 years) reported having a body piercing at one time."
”
Quelldaten von
2007-10-01
Abgerufen
2026-07-01
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
JAOA 2007 peer-reviewed study of 103 urban undergraduates (100 usable surveys). Provides context on the non-pierced side: nonpierced participants estimated the probability of an adverse event higher (43%) than pierced participants did (30%), suggesting non-pierced individuals perceive piercing as riskier rather than harbouring unfulfilled desire. Used to keep the inaction-regret proxy low. This is a US convenience sample of undergraduates, not a nationally representative adult sample, and it does not measure regret about not getting a piercing directly.
Einschränkungen
The action-side 32% figure comes from a 2017 Statista survey, and the underlying methodology (sample composition, question wording, sampling frame) is not fully documented in Statista's public description. The 32% figure represents the complement of "no regrets" and may capture mild dissatisfaction as well as strong regret -- a broader interpretation than a direct "do you regret this?" question. The inaction-side 8% is a constructed placeholder proxy: no large-sample survey directly asks non-pierced adults whether they regret not having a piercing. The 8% figure should be read as an order-of-magnitude estimate, not a finding. The delta (0.24) reflects the asymmetry of the evidence rather than a precise comparison. Piercings differ from tattoos in one key way: reversibility. Most piercings close within weeks or months, meaning the action regret pathway (visible mark, social reaction, infection) is less permanent than for tattoos. Despite this, action regret still dominates in the available data, consistent with the pattern for visible body modifications that carry social signalling costs in professional or familial contexts. Survey data are from US and European samples; regret rates in cultures with different norms around body piercing -- including cultures where ear piercing is done in infancy -- may differ substantially.
