本文へスキップ
Likelier

行動 vs. 不行動の後悔

不正義に際して公的抗議に積極的に参加する vs. 沈黙を保つ

行動した場合

公の抗議に参加する

16%

行動しなかった場合

不正に対して沈黙する

53%

それぞれの選択を後で後悔した人の割合。バーと完全な記録は下に表示されます。


ライフスタイル

最終確認 2026-05-09

証拠の質 3.5/5

8次元のレビュー評価。基準は 品質ルーブリック 。各次元は1〜5で評価。

D1 出典の検証
4/5
D2 出典の権威性と独立性
3/5
D3 後悔率の正確性
1/5
D4 出典の比較可能性
2/5
D5 ギロヴィッチ・パターン
5/5
D6 文章の質
4/5
D7 注意事項の完全性
5/5
D8 サンプルの質
4/5
平均 3.5/5
A protest sign resting against a wall on one side, and a closed window with curtains drawn on the other side.
代替データ — この決断に関する直接的な後悔調査は存在しません。比率は後悔を直接尋ねる質問ではなく、満足度スコアとアクセス障壁のデータから導出されています。以下の注意事項を参照してください。

行動への後悔

公の抗議に参加する

16%

抗議参加に関する直接的な後悔調査は存在しない。示されているのは、一般的な長期の行動後悔率(約16%が行動を人生最大の後悔として挙げる、Gilovich & Medvec 1994)を代理基準値として用いたものである

大規模な市民抗議の参加者(2014年ユーロマイダン、道徳的勇気研究)

回顧的調査、抗議後

不作為への後悔

不正に対して沈黙する

53%

労働者の53%は、言うべきことがあったのに発言しなかったことを後悔している(職場の発言に関する文献に基づく代理指標――市民的沈黙に最も近い類推)

米国、英国、フランス、ドイツの労働者 — 市民の沈黙の類似として使用

回顧的、固定された期間なし

この選択を後悔した割合

inaction dominates — 不作為が優勢 — 多くは行動しなかったことを後悔しています。

関連する決断

意味的に類似する決断 — 同じ領域、異なるトレードオフ。

lifestyle

市民参加 vs 不参加

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が3.3倍高い

career直接

声を上げる

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が1.4倍高い

lifestyle

謝罪

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が2.0倍高い

lifestyle

先延ばし

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が4.7倍高い

lifestyle

高統制グループから離れる vs. 留まる

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が3.3倍高い

lifestyle

親の助言 vs. 自分の道

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が3.2倍高い

lifestyle

繊細な話を公開 vs. プライベートに保つ

この選択を後悔した割合

行動が優勢

行動の後悔が2.4倍高い

lifestyle

重大なミスを認める vs. 隠蔽する

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が2.9倍高い

Gilovich and Medvec’s 1994 study, the foundational research underlying the gilovich_pattern classification used across this dataset, found that in long-term retrospection only 16% of people identify an action as their biggest regret, while 84% identify an inaction. The mechanism is well-established: action regrets shrink over time as people rationalize, repair, or reframe what they did, while inaction regrets persist and compound as the unchosen path is idealized and the reasons for hesitating become harder to reconstruct. For civic protest, this temporal dynamic is particularly pronounced: participation is often a bounded, historical-moment decision that cannot be repeated once the window closes. The EuroMaidan Protest Participant Survey (n = 1,225) documents strong civic identity formation and moral purpose among those who participated in Ukraine’s 2014 protests, consistent with low retrospective regret. The moral courage literature finds a similar pattern: people who act on their values, even at personal cost, tend to look back favorably on those actions.

The closest available direct measurement of staying-silent regret comes from the Resume Now International Career Regrets Survey of 1,000 workers across the US, UK, France, and Germany, which found that 53% regretted not speaking up in a meeting, compared with 38% who regretted having spoken up. Workplace voice suppression and civic protest silence are structurally similar choices: both involve deciding not to speak when one has something to say, against a background of social cost. Civic protest silence is likely to generate even higher inaction regret in retrospect, because the stakes (collective political outcomes, moral legacy) are higher and the opportunity to act is more temporally constrained. Roese and Summerville’s 2005 meta-analysis of 11 regret-ranking datasets found that regret is most durable in domains where people see the largest missed opportunities for growth and self-actualization; civic participation falls precisely in this category.

The limitations of this entry are significant. No published survey directly asks people “do you regret participating in” or “do you regret not protesting during [specific event]?” The action-side figure falls back to the general long-term action-regret rate (~16% of people name an action as their biggest life regret, Gilovich & Medvec 1994), used as a generic baseline rather than a protest-specific measurement, and the 53% inaction-regret rate is taken from a workplace-voice survey; both are proxy constructions from adjacent literatures, not measurements of the same population facing the same decision. The costs of protest vary enormously by political context: staying silent in a stable democracy carries different stakes than staying silent under a regime that jails dissidents. The Chatham House 2020 survey of Belarusian citizens found that one in five urban adults participated in at least one protest during the 2020 crisis despite the risk of arrest, with 83.9% of participants stating they intended to continue, suggesting that even in high-repression contexts participation was not driven by underestimating costs. No retrospective regret survey for those participants was identified, so the entry cannot confirm the long-term regret pattern directly in an authoritarian context. The direction of the finding is supported by three independent bodies of evidence: the Gilovich-Medvec temporal pattern, the career/purpose regret literature, and workplace voice surveys, but the delta should be treated as a directional signal rather than a calibrated estimate.

出典: 行動

根拠台帳

以下の各数値は各出典が報告した内容であり、引用した原文の抜粋と算出方法を記載しています。リンクをクリックして直接確認できます。

  1. [1] Sociological survey of Euromaidan participants (Zelinska 2017, cited in Sociology Compass) — EuroMaidan Protest Participant Survey
    EuroMaidan Protest Participant Survey
    統計値
    Euromaidan protest participant survey of n = 1,225 respondents shows predominantly committed, ideologically motivated participants; the vast majority report positive civic identity formation from participation.
    抜粋
    “"The EuroMaidan Protest Participant Survey (n = 1,225) shows that participants were primarily young or middle-aged professionals, well informed, employed, and most had professional or higher education. Most citizens perceived the protests as a battle against the regime, and the social impact that Euromaidan had on Ukrainians was a stronger sense of national identity and unity." ”
    出典データ
    2017-06-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-09
    計算過程
    Zelinska (2017) cites the EuroMaidan Protest Participant Survey (n = 1,225) as the empirical basis for analyzing participant characteristics and motivations in Sociology Compass 11(4). The survey was conducted on-site during the Euromaidan protests. It measures participant demographics and civic/national identity formation ("a stronger sense of national identity and unity") — it does NOT include a question asking participants whether they regret protesting. It therefore cannot supply a protest-participation regret rate. It is retained here only as context that protest participation coincided with strong civic-identity formation; the displayed rate is NOT derived from this survey. The headline rate falls back to the general long-term action-regret figure from Gilovich & Medvec (1994) below, since no direct survey of protest-participation regret was found in the published literature.
  2. [2] Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (APA) — The temporal pattern to the experience of regret
    The temporal pattern to the experience of regret

    See all 3 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    In long-term retrospection, only 16% of people report greater regret over an action taken vs. 84% who report greater regret over an inaction; action regrets fade more quickly because people rationalize or behaviorally repair them.
    抜粋
    “"Whereas people tend to experience stronger regret for actions over inactions in the short term, they tend to experience stronger regret for things they did not do over things they did when reflecting back on their lives. In the long term, only 16% reported greater regret over an action taken and 84% reported greater regret over an inaction." ”
    出典データ
    1994-12-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-09
    計算過程
    Gilovich and Medvec (1994), JPSP 67(3), 357-370. Study 5 of their seminal paper asked a diverse sample about their biggest long-term regret: only 16% named an action and 84% named an inaction. This establishes the general principle that action regrets (including protest participation) fade with time, while inaction regrets (including staying silent during injustice) persist or compound. Used here as the theoretical anchor for why action-side regret is low for protest participation in particular. Protest, as a morally motivated action aligned with personal values, is a category where post-action rationalization and pride further suppress long-term regret.

出典: 不作為

根拠台帳

以下の各数値は各出典が報告した内容であり、引用した原文の抜粋と算出方法を記載しています。リンクをクリックして直接確認できます。

  1. [1] Resume Now (International Career Regrets Survey) — The Road Not Taken: Greatest Career Regrets Revealed
    The Road Not Taken: Greatest Career Regrets Revealed

    See all 8 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    53% of workers have regretted not speaking up in a meeting, compared to 38% who have regretted speaking up.
    抜粋
    “"53% have regretted not speaking up in a meeting, compared to 38% who have regretted speaking up in a meeting." ”
    出典データ
    2025-01-10
    アクセス日
    2026-05-09
    計算過程
    Resume Now International Career Regrets Survey of 1,000 workers across four countries (US, UK, France, Germany), fielded January 2024. The 53% figure represents regret about not voicing an opinion in a professional setting. This is used as the closest quantified analog for civic silence: both involve choosing not to speak up in a setting where one has something to say, at personal social cost. Civic protest silence is likely to generate even higher inaction regret than workplace silence, because the stakes (political outcomes, collective justice) are higher and the opportunity to correct the decision is more limited. The 53% is therefore a conservative lower-bound proxy for inaction regret in the civic protest context. No direct survey of "do you regret not protesting during [specific event]?" was identified in the published academic or survey literature.
  2. [2] Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin (APA) — What We Regret Most ... and Why
    What We Regret Most ... and Why

    See all 14 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    Education (32.2%), career (22.3%), and romance (14.8%) top lifetime regret domains; the common thread is missed opportunity for self-actualization in high-importance life areas.
    抜粋
    “"People's biggest regrets are a reflection of where in life they see their largest opportunities; that is, where they see tangible prospects for change, growth, and renewal." ”
    出典データ
    2005-09-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-09
    計算過程
    Roese and Summerville (2005) meta-analysis of 11 regret-ranking datasets. The finding that inaction regrets dominate in high- importance life domains (education, career, self-actualization) is directly applicable to civic silence. Choosing not to protest during a politically significant moment involves exactly the qualities Roese and Summerville identify as regret-generative: a window of opportunity that closes, stakes that matter to one's values and identity, and a choice that cannot easily be undone. The career and self-actualization domains map closely onto civic identity and moral self-concept, domains in which people report the most durable regrets.

注意事項

全体を通じて代理測定。本項目のどちらの側も、抗議参加者または非参加者にその選択を後悔しているか直接尋ねた調査を用いていない。抗議参加の後悔に関する直接的な調査は、公表された文献の中に見つからなかった。そのため行動側の率は、Gilovich-Medvec(1994)による一般的な長期の行動後悔の数値――人々の約16%が行動(何らかの行動)を人生最大の後悔として挙げる――に依拠しており、これは抗議に特化した測定ではなく一般的な基準値として用いている。ユーロマイダン参加者調査は文脈としてのみ引用されており(強固な市民的アイデンティティの形成を記録しているのであって、後悔ではない)、表示された数値の出典ではない。非行動側の53%は、Resume Nowの職場の発言に関する調査から、沈黙を守ることの後悔に関して入手可能な最も近い直接測定として採用したものである。この類推は構造的には妥当である(社会的コストによる発言の抑制)が、市民的な抗議と職場の会議は、賭けているもの、可逆性、アイデンティティ上の重要性の点で異なる。37ポイントの差は方向としてはおそらく正しいが、両側の絶対値は測定ではなく代理的な構築物である。Gilovich-Medvec の論文はこの領域における非行動の優位性を強く理論的に支持しているが、抗議参加に特化してではなく一般的な人生の後悔を測定している。道徳的勇気に関する文献には出版バイアスが影響している。発言することの肯定的な結果を記録した研究の方が出版されやすく、そのため行動の推定便益が過大評価される可能性がある。文脈が極めて重要である。抗議のコストは、安定した民主主義における軽度の社会的不快感から、権威主義国家における投獄や死に至るまで幅がある。本項目は主に民主主義国または民主化過程にある文脈(ウクライナのユーロマイダン、米国および欧州の職場)からの証拠に依拠しており、この分析は積極的な弾圧が苛烈な国での抗議にそのまま適用できるものではない。Chatham House の2020年の調査によれば、ベラルーシの都市部成人の5人に1人が2020年の危機の間に少なくとも1回の抗議に参加し、参加者の83.9%が継続の意向を示していた――抗議のコストが極めて高い文脈でありながら参加率は高いままで、弾圧下でも行動後悔が低いことと整合的である。ベラルーシの参加者に対する運動後の回顧的後悔調査は特定されなかった。

生データ: /api/decisions.json

このデバイスで最近見た項目