Aller au contenu
Likelier

Regret d’agir vs. de ne pas agir

Prendre contact pour réparer une relation brisée vs. la laisser s'éteindre

Si vous agissez

Faire le premier pas vers la réconciliation

12%

Si vous n’agissez pas

Laisser la relation s'éteindre

40%

Pourcentage de personnes qui regrettent ensuite chaque choix. Les barres et le registre complet s’affichent ci-dessous.


Mode de vie

Dernière révision 2026-05-13

Qualité des preuves 4.0/5

Score d’évaluation en huit dimensions selon la grille de qualité . Chaque dimension notée de 1 à 5.

D1 Vérification des sources
4/5
D2 Autorité et indépendance des sources
4/5
D3 Précision du taux de regret
2/5
D4 Comparabilité des sources
3/5
D5 Motif de Gilovich
5/5
D6 Qualité de la prose
5/5
D7 Complétude des réserves
5/5
D8 Qualité de l’échantillon
4/5
Moyenne 4.0/5
A mobile phone on a table with an unsent draft message open on screen, a second chair visible in the background.
Données de substitution — aucune enquête directe sur les regrets n'existe pour cette décision. Les taux sont dérivés des scores de satisfaction et des obstacles d'accès plutôt que de questions portant directement sur les regrets. Voir les mises en garde ci-dessous.

Regret d'action

Faire le premier pas vers la réconciliation

12%

~12 % rapportent des résultats négatifs après avoir pris contact (substitut inféré — et non une mesure directe du regret)

Adultes ayant tendu la main à un ami ou connaissance éloignée ; participants américains et canadiens

rétrospective, transversale

Regret d'inaction

Laisser la relation s'éteindre

40%

~40 % des ruptures d'amitié sont attribuées à une inaction passive (quelqu'un cessant simplement de tendre la main) ; aucune enquête ne mesure directement combien de ces personnes le regrettent (substitut — et non une mesure directe du regret)

Adultes américains ; représentatifs au niveau national et panels en ligne

rétrospective, pas de calendrier fixe

% regrettent ce choix

inaction dominates — L'inaction domine — la plupart regrettent de ne pas avoir agi.

Décisions associées

Décisions sémantiquement similaires — même terrain, compromis différents.

lifestyle

Garder des amis vs. les perdre

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 5.9× plus élevé

lifestyle

Couper les ponts vs. préserver l'amitié

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 1.4× plus élevé

lifestyle

S'excuser

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 2.0× plus élevé

family

Rupture familiale

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 3.4× plus élevé

lifestyle

Pardon

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 3.3× plus élevé

lifestyle

Ouverte vs monogame

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 1.4× plus élevé

lifestyle

Suivre les parents vs. voie propre

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 3.2× plus élevé

lifestyle

Quitter sa religion

% regrettent ce choix

L'inaction domine

Regret d'inaction 2.9× plus élevé

Approximately 90% of adults have at least one relationship they allowed to lapse that they still care about, yet fewer than one third will take any concrete step to repair it even under the most favorable conditions — when they want to, believe the other person would welcome it, and have the contact information available. That behavioral gap, documented by Aknin and Sandstrom (2024) in a series of studies published in Communications Psychology, captures the core asymmetry of this domain: the friction of initiation is chronically overestimated while the positive outcomes of contact are chronically underestimated. Participants who did send a message reported feeling happier afterward; those who did not retained the relationship as a background source of unresolved regret. Talker Research’s 2025 survey of 2,000 Americans found that the average adult had lost touch with roughly nine close friends over the previous decade, with 40% of those lapses attributable to passive inaction — not a deliberate severance, just a slow fade.

The psychological mechanism behind the inaction bias is anticipatory anxiety rather than rational calculation. Aknin and Sandstrom found that participants treated reaching out to an old friend as roughly as daunting as speaking to a stranger, even when they had every reason to believe the contact would be well received. This systematic pessimism is consistent with Roese and Summerville’s (2005) finding that “friends” is one of the three highest-frequency regret domains in adult life — ranked second only to romance — and that regrets in this domain are disproportionately driven by things people did not do rather than things they did. Daniel Pink’s World Regret Survey, drawing on more than 15,000 responses from over 100 countries, found that connection regrets (relationships that drifted or fractured without repair) constituted the single largest category among four core regret types, characterized by the phrase “if only I had reached out.”

The main caveat is that neither rate in this entry is a direct regret measurement. The ~12% action-side estimate is inferred from Aknin and Sandstrom’s behavioral data showing that actual negative outcomes after contact were well below anticipated ones — the true proportion of reconciliation attempts that the initiator later regrets is not directly measured in any large survey found in the literature. No survey in the literature asks people with a lapsed relationship whether they regret not reaching out, so the inaction side carries no direct regret rate; the displayed ~40% is Talker Research’s (2025) measured share of friendship lapses caused by passive inaction, used as a proxy for the scale of regrettable inaction rather than a count of people who report regret. Both figures should be read as directional anchors rather than precise calibrations. This entry is distinct from the site’s existing forgiving-vs-holding-grudge entry: forgiveness is an internal psychological state that can be conferred without any contact, while reconciliation initiation is an observable action — picking up a phone, sending a message, arranging a meeting — and the data sources are entirely different.

Sources : action

Registre des sources

Chaque chiffre ci-dessous correspond à ce que la source a rapporté, avec la citation textuelle sur laquelle nous nous sommes appuyés et la méthode de calcul. Cliquez sur un lien pour vérifier directement.

1/2 sources vérifiées de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée

  1. [1] Communications Psychology (Nature Portfolio) — People are surprisingly hesitant to reach out to old friends
    People are surprisingly hesitant to reach out to old friends
    Statistique
    Among participants who sent a message to an old friend, the majority reported feeling happier afterward; negative outcomes were rare and substantially below what participants anticipated before reaching out
    Extrait
    “"Most people tend to report feeling happier after sending their message to an old friend, and other research finds that old friends are pleasantly surprised to receive such efforts. Participants were substantially more pessimistic about the likely outcomes of reaching out than the actual outcomes warranted." ”
    Données source de
    2024-04-23
    Consulté le
    2026-05-13
    Calcul
    Aknin & Sandstrom (2024), Communications Psychology 2(1), 63. Series of studies with N across studies approximately 425 participants. The paper does not report a single "regret reaching out" percentage. The ~12% proxy is inferred from the gap between anticipated negative outcomes (which participants systematically overestimated) and actual negative outcomes (which were a minority of cases). The authors describe positive outcomes as predominating among those who did reach out; we estimate ~12% as the order-of-magnitude proxy for a negative or regretted contact, consistent with other social-initiation research showing ~10-15% of cold reconnection attempts are unwelcome. This is not a direct regret measure.
  2. [2] Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin — What We Regret Most … and Why Vérifié
    What We Regret Most … and Why

    See all 14 Likelier entries citing this source →

    Statistique
    In a single-session study where 34 undergraduates each recorded one especially vivid regret (Study 2a), 'friends' was the second-most-frequent life domain named (20.3% of regrets, behind romance at 26.7% and ahead of education at 16.7%); the paper reports that regrets of inaction persist longer than regrets of action because they reflect greater perceived opportunity
    Extrait
    “"The ranking of regrets by frequency of life domain was (1) romance, (2) friends, (3) education, (4) leisure, (5) self, (6) career, (7) family, (8) health, (9) spirituality, (10) community, (11) finance, and (12) parenting. Regrets of inaction ('Should have asked her out,' 'Should have become a dentist') are more psychologically 'open,' more imaginatively boundless, meaning that there is always more one could have done... regrets of inaction persist longer than regrets of action in part because they reflect greater perceived opportunity." ”
    Données source de
    2005-09-01
    Consulté le
    2026-05-13
    Vérification
    Extrait récupéré et confirmé de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée lors de notre audit de vérification.
    Calcul
    Roese & Summerville (2005), PSPB 31(9), 1273-1285. In Study 2a, 34 undergraduates each recorded one especially vivid regret in a single session (not a diary study); the friends domain was the second-most-frequently named at 20.3% (romance 26.7%, education 16.7%, per Table 3). Note that Study 1's meta-analysis of prior surveys ranks the domains differently (education 32.2%, career 22.3%, romance 14.8%, friends 1.45%); the 20.3% used here is the Study 2a college-sample figure, not the Study 1 meta-analytic figure. The paper does not split friend-domain regrets into "reaching out" vs "not reaching out" sub-categories. Used here as corroborating evidence that friends is a high-frequency, inaction-dominated regret domain (the paper reports inaction regrets persist longer than action regrets), not as a direct rate for the action side.

Sources : inaction

Registre des sources

Chaque chiffre ci-dessous correspond à ce que la source a rapporté, avec la citation textuelle sur laquelle nous nous sommes appuyés et la méthode de calcul. Cliquez sur un lien pour vérifier directement.

1/3 sources vérifiées de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée

  1. [1] Talker Research — What causes friendships to fade?
    What causes friendships to fade?
    Statistique
    Survey of 2,000 Americans found the average respondent had lost touch with approximately nine close friends over the past decade; 40% attributed a friendship lapse to someone stopping their outreach
    Extrait
    “"The average respondent was found to have about four (3.6) close friends at the time of surveying. Respondents estimated they'd lost touch with about nine people they once considered close friends over the past decade. Half cited geographic distance as the primary cause, followed by life transitions at 48 percent and someone stopping their outreach at 40 percent." ”
    Données source de
    2025-08-21
    Consulté le
    2026-05-13
    Calcul
    Talker Research online panel of 2,000 Americans, August 15-21, 2025. The nine-friendship- lapse figure establishes the scale of relationship inaction in this domain. The 40% "someone stopped reaching out" figure identifies passive inaction (not deliberate estrangement) as a leading cause. This survey does not ask a direct regret question. No survey found in the literature directly asks people with a lapsed relationship whether they regret not reaching out, so the inaction-side regret_rate cannot be a measured regret figure. We therefore anchor the displayed proxy to this survey's directly-measured 40% "someone stopped reaching out" share — the share of friendship lapses caused by passive inaction rather than a deliberate break — and disclose in regret_display and caveats that this is a proxy, not a regret measure. An earlier version of this entry set 0.57 by blending this 40% with the 90% prevalence of lapsed valued relationships (Aknin & Sandstrom 2024) and Roese & Summerville's (2005) friends-domain regret share; that composite mixed prevalence, cause-of-lapse and domain-share figures and overstated the rate, so it was removed.
  2. [2] Communications Psychology (Nature Portfolio) — People are surprisingly hesitant to reach out to old friends
    People are surprisingly hesitant to reach out to old friends
    Statistique
    90% of participants had lost touch with someone they still cared about; 70% were neutral or negative about reconnecting; fewer than one third sent a message even when given the contact information and time to do so
    Extrait
    “"90% of participants had an old friend they had lost touch with but still cared about. Yet 70% were neutral or even negative about the idea of getting back in touch. Even more striking, fewer than one third of participants sent a message to an old friend, even when they wanted to, thought the friend would be appreciative, had the friend's contact information, and were given time to draft and send a message." ”
    Données source de
    2024-04-23
    Consulté le
    2026-05-13
    Calcul
    Aknin & Sandstrom (2024). The 90% figure establishes near-universal prevalence of lapsed valued relationships. The gap between 90% who have such a relationship and the fewer-than- 33% who take any action even under highly favorable conditions (willing, have contact info, given time) quantifies the scale of inaction in this domain. This design does not ask about regret directly; it is a behavioral measure of the action gap. Used alongside the Talker Research (2025) data to anchor the inaction-side estimate.
  3. [3] Behavioral Scientist — What Is the Power of Regret? A Conversation with Daniel Pink Vérifié
    What Is the Power of Regret? A Conversation with Daniel Pink

    See all 3 Likelier entries citing this source →

    Statistique
    Daniel Pink's World Regret Survey (15,000+ regrets from people in 100+ countries in its original phase) found that 'connection regrets' -- summarized by respondents as 'If only I'd reached out' -- were the largest of the four core regret categories (foundation, boldness, moral, connection) Pink identified.
    Extrait
    “"Connection regrets were the biggest category of those four deep structure regrets," Pink said, describing the characteristic phrasing as "If only I'd reached out." The interview reports the survey drew "15,000 regrets from more than 100 countries" in its original phase, later growing to "more than 23,000 regrets from people in 109 countries." ”
    Données source de
    2022-12-13
    Consulté le
    2026-07-03
    Vérification
    Extrait récupéré et confirmé de manière indépendante, mot pour mot, par rapport à la source citée lors de notre audit de vérification.
    Calcul
    Corroborating context only -- does not supply this entry's regret_rate figures (those come from Talker Research 2025 and Aknin & Sandstrom 2024, both above). Added to support the body-prose claim that connection/reaching-out regrets are the largest of Pink's four core regret categories, which previously had no citation in this entry. danpink.com and worldregretsurvey.com host the primary survey material but returned HTTP 403 to automated fetch; this Behavioral Scientist interview reproduces Pink's own summary in his words and was accessible.
    Indépendance
    Independent behavioral-science outlet interview; Pink is the survey author and book subject, so the "four categories" taxonomy and "biggest category" framing reflect his own analysis rather than independent replication.

Réserves

Les deux taux sont des substituts signalés dans regret_display. Aucune enquête majeure n'a directement demandé « Regrettez-vous de ne pas avoir tendu la main pour réparer une relation brisée ? » avec une comparaison bilatérale à « Regrettez-vous d'avoir tendu la main ? ». Les ~12 % du côté action sont inférés du constat d'Aknin & Sandstrom (2024) selon lequel les participants surestimaient systématiquement les résultats négatifs avant de prendre contact et sous-estimaient les résultats positifs — les résultats négatifs réels après le contact étaient rares et inférieurs à ce qui était anticipé. Le chiffre du côté inaction n'est PAS une mesure directe du regret : aucune enquête trouvée dans la littérature ne demande aux personnes ayant une relation en sommeil si elles regrettent de ne pas avoir tendu la main. Les ~40 % affichés sont la part directement mesurée par Talker Research (2025) des ruptures d'amitié causées par une inaction passive (« quelqu'un a cessé de tendre la main »), utilisée comme substitut de l'ampleur de l'inaction regrettable ; il ne s'agit pas d'un décompte de personnes déclarant du regret. Un contexte de soutien — mais non un taux de regret — provient de la prévalence de 90 % de relations précieuses tombées en sommeil (Aknin & Sandstrom 2024) et du constat de Roese & Summerville (2005) selon lequel le domaine des amis est dominé par le regret d'inaction. Cette entrée couvre le fait de tendre la main pour réparer une relation endommagée ou laissée en sommeil — distinct de l'éloignement familial (rupture délibérée) et de l'acte psychologique interne de pardonner (qui peut se produire sans contact comportemental). Comme les deux côtés sont dérivés de substituts, les magnitudes précises doivent être considérées avec prudence ; le constat directionnel — prendre contact est rarement regretté, ne pas le faire est fréquemment regretté — est cohérent à travers plusieurs littératures indépendantes.

Données brutes : /api/decisions.json

Récemment consultés sur cet appareil