Anteil derer, die jede Entscheidung später bereuen. Balken und vollständige Datengrundlage erscheinen unten.
Lebensstil
Zuletzt überprüft 2026-05-13
Evidenzqualität 4.13/5
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
4/5
D5 Gilovich-Muster
5/5
D6 Prosaqualität
5/5
D7 Vollständigkeit der Einschränkungen
5/5
D8 Stichprobenqualität
4/5
Durchschnitt4.13/5
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
Freundschaften aktiv pflegen
8,0%
Keine direkte Umfrage misst das Bedauern über die Aufrechterhaltung einer Freundschaft; die gezeigten ~8% sind ein abgeleiteter Niedrig-Bedauerns-Proxy aus Freundschaftszufriedenheitsdaten (Survey Center on American Life 2021), keine gemessene Bedauernsrate
US-Erwachsene, die aktiv enge Freundschaften pflegen
retrospektiv, letzte 12 Monate
Reue fürs Unterlassen
Freundschaften einschlafen lassen
47%
47% der Amerikaner berichten, im vergangenen Jahr den Kontakt zu mindestens einigen Freunden verloren zu haben — eine verhaltensbezogene 'Kontaktverlust'-Verbreitung (Survey Center on American Life 2021), keine gemessene Bedauernsrate; dieselbe Umfrage stellte keine Bedauernsfrage
US-Erwachsene, national repräsentativ
letzte 12 Monate (Umfrage 2021)
% bereuen diese Entscheidung
Freundschaften aktiv pflegenFreundschaften einschlafen lassen
8,0%47%
inaction dominates — Nichthandeln dominiert — die meisten bereuen, nicht gehandelt zu haben.
Verwandte Entscheidungen
Semantisch ähnliche Entscheidungen — gleiches Terrain, andere Abwägungen.
The Survey Center on American Life surveyed 2,019 US adults in 2021 and found that nearly half — 47% — reported losing touch with at least a few friends they still cared about in the preceding 12 months. Nine percent lost touch with most of their friends. Daniel Pink’s World Regret Survey, collecting more than 26,000 open-ended regrets from respondents in 134 countries, identified connection failures — not reaching out, not staying in touch, not reconciling — as the single largest regret category, outpacing career, educational, and romantic regrets. Bronnie Ware’s palliative care observations report a consistent pattern at the end of life: “Many had become so caught up in their own lives that they had let golden friendships slip by over the years. There were many deep regrets about not giving friendships the time and effort that they deserved.” Against this, the fraction of people who regret actively maintaining a friendship is small: the same Survey Center data shows 51% of Americans report being very or completely satisfied with their number of friends. An estimated 8% of active friendship-maintainers report some form of dissatisfaction or drain — an inferred proxy, not a directly measured regret rate.
The asymmetry here is unusually wide. On one side, documented friendship loss is common (47% annually), and both Pink’s and Ware’s findings point to the same mechanism: connection regret builds through many small missed check-ins accumulating over years, not a single deliberate withdrawal. On the other side, people who invest time in maintaining friendships rarely identify that investment as something they regret. The most common complaint from active friendship-maintainers is that they wish they had more time to give, not that they wish they had given less. Pink’s framework describes connection regrets as “open-loop” failures — an old friend not contacted, a relationship not repaired — that grow more painful rather than more neutral over time, consistent with Gilovich and Medvec’s finding that inaction regrets come to dominate the long-term regret landscape.
The measurement limitations on the action side are significant. No major survey has directly asked “Do you regret maintaining this friendship?”, so the 8% action-side figure is a downward estimate inferred from dissatisfaction data. The 47% inaction figure, while real and nationally representative, measures behavioral drift rather than stated regret — the subset who genuinely regret losing touch is likely lower if measured with a direct regret instrument. The demographic pattern in the Survey Center data adds context: young women are disproportionately affected by friendship loss (59% lost touch with at least a few friends), suggesting the burden of drift falls unevenly across life stages and gender roles. Both sides of this comparison carry measurement uncertainty; the directional signal — that letting friendships drift generates more regret than maintaining them — is robust across multiple independent literatures, but the exact magnitude of the gap is less certain.
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]Survey Center on American Life / American Enterprise Institute — The State of American Friendship: Change, Challenges, and Loss↗ 1 other entry
Primärstudie
51% of Americans report being very or completely satisfied with their number of friends; only 17% are not too or not at all satisfied
Auszug
“"51% of Americans report being very or completely satisfied with their number of friends. 30% are only somewhat satisfied, and 17% are not too or not at all satisfied."
”
Quelldaten von
2021-10-05
Abgerufen
2026-05-13
Berechnung
Survey Center on American Life (2021), n=2,019 US adults, nationally representative. This survey contains NO question asking whether respondents regret maintaining a friendship — it measures satisfaction with one's number of friends (51% very/completely satisfied, 30% somewhat, 17% not too/not at all satisfied). The 0.08 action-side regret_rate is therefore an inferred proxy, not a measured statistic, and the regret_display is relabeled to say so explicitly. No large survey has asked "Do you regret maintaining this friendship?"; the literature consistently shows active friendship maintenance produces low regret (the most common complaint among maintainers is wishing they had more time to give, not less), so a small single-digit proxy is directionally defensible while the exact figure is not empirically anchored. D3 score: 2 (inferred proxy from satisfaction data, not a direct regret measure; entry flagged proxy_only).
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.
2/3 Quellen unabhängig wortwörtlich mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen
[1]Survey Center on American Life / American Enterprise Institute — The State of American Friendship: Change, Challenges, and Loss
Verifiziert
↗ 1 other entry
Primärstudie
Nearly half (47%) of Americans report having lost touch with at least a few friends over the past 12 months
Auszug
“"Nearly half (47%) of Americans report having lost touch with at least a few friends over the past 12 months. 9% of Americans lost touch with most of their friends. Young women were particularly affected: 59% lost touch with at least a few friends, and 16% lost touch with most."
”
Quelldaten von
2021-10-05
Abgerufen
2026-05-13
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
Survey Center on American Life (2021), n=2,019 US adults, nationally representative. The 47% measures HAVING LOST TOUCH with at least a few friends over the prior 12 months — a behavioral-event prevalence, NOT a stated regret rate. This survey asked no regret question. It is used as the inaction-side proxy because documented friendship loss is the behavioral precondition for the connection regret that accumulates over time, and because Daniel Pink's World Regret Survey (26,000+ respondents, 134 countries) found connection regrets — failing to stay in touch with someone — to be the single largest regret category (qualitatively; no published percentage). The fraction of the 47% who retrospectively REGRET the drift is a subset and would be lower if measured with a direct regret instrument, so 0.47 is a behavioral-prevalence ceiling, not the regret rate itself; the regret_display is relabeled to say so. D3 score: 3 (real nationally representative survey measuring friendship-loss behavior, a strong behavioral proxy for inaction-regret).
[2]Daniel H. Pink — World Regret Survey↗ 3 other entries
Primärstudie
Connection regrets — failing to reach out to, stay in touch with, or reconcile with someone — are the single largest regret category in a survey of 26,000+ people from 134 countries (qualitative; no published percentage breakdown)
Auszug
“[Paraphrase from survey findings — no verbatim online text available. Pink (2022), The Power of Regret: How Looking Backward Moves Us Forward, reports that connection regrets were the most common category across 26,000+ open-ended responses from 134 countries, exceeding career, educational, and romance regrets. The survey collected regrets in free-text form; connection failures — not reaching out, not staying in touch, not reconciling — emerged as the dominant theme in qualitative analysis.]
”
Quelldaten von
2021-12-01
Abgerufen
2026-05-13
Berechnung
World Regret Survey, conducted 2020-2021 by Daniel Pink; data published in The Power of Regret (Riverhead Books, 2022). Survey is open-access online at worldregretsurvey.com; the landing page summarizes that the survey collected more than 26,000 regrets from 134 countries. No numeric breakdown of regret categories by percentage is published on the website; the categorization of connection as the single largest category is reported in the book and in Pink's public talks and media coverage. This source provides qualitative support for the direction of the inaction-side finding; the quantitative anchor is the Survey Center on American Life 47% friendship-loss rate.
[3]Bronnie Ware — Regrets of the Dying
Verifiziert
Referenzquelle
Allowing friendships to slip is a recurring theme among palliative care patients in their final weeks
Auszug
“"Many had become so caught up in their own lives that they had let golden friendships slip by over the years. There were many deep regrets about not giving friendships the time and effort that they deserved. Everyone misses their friends when they are dying."
”
Quelldaten von
2012-01-01
Abgerufen
2026-05-13
Verifizierung
Der Auszug wurde bei unserer Grounding-Prüfung unabhängig erneut abgerufen und Wort für Wort mit der zitierten Quelle abgeglichen.
Berechnung
Bronnie Ware is an Australian palliative care nurse whose observations of patients in the final weeks of life were first published as a blog post and then in the book The Top Five Regrets of the Dying (Hay House, 2012). Letting friendships drift is identified as one of the most common end-of-life regrets ("I wish I had stayed in touch with my friends"). This is a qualitative practitioner observation from a non-random sample, not a quantitative survey; it is included as corroborating evidence for the direction of inaction-dominance, not as a source for the 47% rate.
Einschränkungen
Neither side of this entry carries a directly measured regret rate. The action-side 0.08 is an inferred proxy from overall friendship dissatisfaction data (Survey Center on American Life 2021, n=2,019): 17% of Americans report low satisfaction with their number of friends, and a subset of those who actively maintain friendships and still feel dissatisfied is estimated at roughly 8%. There is no published survey asking "Do you regret maintaining this friendship?" — the estimate is directionally defensible but imprecise. The inaction-side 0.47 is a behaviorally measured prevalence rate (47% of US adults lost touch with at least a few friends in the past year), not a direct regret measure. The fraction of those 47% who explicitly regret the drift would be lower if measured with a validated regret instrument; the figure is therefore a ceiling estimate. Daniel Pink's World Regret Survey (26,000+ responses, 134 countries) found connection regrets to be the largest category, but the survey collected open-ended free-text regrets and no numeric breakdown of category percentages is publicly available — this qualitative finding supports the directional claim but cannot supply a precise inaction-regret rate. Bronnie Ware's palliative observations are from a non-random, non-quantitative sample and serve only as qualitative corroboration. Population heterogeneity is significant: friendship investment norms vary by age (young adults report higher loss rates), gender (women report higher loss rates), social class, and cultural context. The gilovich_pattern is classified as inaction_dominates based on the consistent multi-source directional signal, though the large gap between the two sides (−0.39) partially reflects the mismatch in measurement quality: the inaction side has a stronger behavioral instrument while the action side has only an inferred proxy.
