本文へスキップ
Likelier

行動 vs. 不行動の後悔

壊れた関係を修復するために連絡を取る vs. そのまま疎遠にする

行動した場合

和解しようと歩み寄る

12%

行動しなかった場合

関係を自然消滅させる

40%

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 2026-05-13

証拠の質 4.0/5

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
4/5
D3 後悔率の正確性
2/5
D4 出典の比較可能性
3/5
D5 ギロヴィッチ・パターン
5/5
D6 文章の質
5/5
D7 注意事項の完全性
5/5
D8 サンプルの質
4/5
平均 4.0/5
A mobile phone on a table with an unsent draft message open on screen, a second chair visible in the background.
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

和解しようと歩み寄る

12%

連絡を取り始めた後に否定的な結果を報告する人は約12%(推定された代理指標であり、後悔を直接測定したものではない)

疎遠な友人または知人に連絡した成人;米国およびカナダの参加者

遡及的、横断的

不作為への後悔

関係を自然消滅させる

40%

友情の途絶の約40%は消極的な非行動(単に連絡を絶つこと)に起因するとされる。そのうち何人がそれを後悔しているかを直接測定した調査はない(代理指標であり、後悔を直接測定したものではない)

米国成人;全国代表およびオンラインパネル

遡及的、固定期間なし

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

友情を保つ vs. 疎遠になる

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が5.9倍高い

lifestyle

縁を切る vs. 友情を維持する

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

family

家族との断絶

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が3.4倍高い

lifestyle

許し

この選択を後悔した割合

不作為が優勢

不作為の後悔が3.3倍高い

lifestyle

オープン vs 一夫一婦制

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

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

宗教を離れる

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

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.

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。

1/2 件の出典が引用元と一字一句一致することを独立して検証済み

  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
    統計値
    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
    抜粋
    “"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." ”
    出典データ
    2024-04-23
    アクセス日
    2026-05-13
    計算過程
    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 検証済み
    What We Regret Most … and Why

    See all 14 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    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
    抜粋
    “"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." ”
    出典データ
    2005-09-01
    アクセス日
    2026-05-13
    検証
    グラウンディング監査の際、抜粋を引用元から独立して再取得し、原文と一字一句一致することを確認しました。
    計算過程
    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.

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。

1/3 件の出典が引用元と一字一句一致することを独立して検証済み

  1. [1] Talker Research — What causes friendships to fade?
    What causes friendships to fade?
    統計値
    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
    抜粋
    “"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." ”
    出典データ
    2025-08-21
    アクセス日
    2026-05-13
    計算過程
    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
    統計値
    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
    抜粋
    “"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." ”
    出典データ
    2024-04-23
    アクセス日
    2026-05-13
    計算過程
    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 検証済み
    What Is the Power of Regret? A Conversation with Daniel Pink

    See all 3 Likelier entries citing this source →

    統計値
    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.
    抜粋
    “"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." ”
    出典データ
    2022-12-13
    アクセス日
    2026-07-03
    検証
    グラウンディング監査の際、抜粋を引用元から独立して再取得し、原文と一字一句一致することを確認しました。
    計算過程
    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.
    独立性
    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.

注意事項

Both rates are proxies flagged in regret_display. No major survey has directly asked "Do you regret not reaching out to repair a broken relationship?" with a bilateral comparison to "Do you regret reaching out?" The action-side ~12% is inferred from Aknin & Sandstrom's (2024) finding that participants systematically overestimated negative outcomes before reaching out and undershot positive ones — actual negative outcomes after contact were rare and below anticipation. The inaction-side figure is NOT a direct regret measure: no survey found in the literature asks people with a lapsed relationship whether they regret not reaching out. The displayed ~40% is Talker Research's (2025) directly-measured share of friendship lapses caused by passive inaction ("someone stopped outreach"), used as a proxy for the scale of regrettable inaction; it is not a count of people who report regret. Supporting context — but not a regret rate — comes from the 90% prevalence of lapsed valued relationships (Aknin & Sandstrom 2024) and Roese & Summerville's (2005) finding that the friends domain is inaction-regret-dominated. This entry covers reaching out to repair a relationship that has been damaged or allowed to lapse — distinct from family estrangement (deliberate cutting off) and from the internal psychological act of forgiving (which can occur without behavioral contact). Because both sides are proxy-derived, the precise magnitudes should be held loosely; the directional finding — initiating contact is rarely regretted, not initiating is frequently regretted — is consistent across multiple independent literatures.

生データ: /api/decisions.json

このデバイスで最近見た項目