Dữ liệu đại diện — không có cuộc khảo sát trực tiếp nào về sự hối tiếc cho quyết định này. Tỷ lệ được lấy từ điểm hài lòng và dữ liệu rào cản tiếp cận thay vì câu hỏi trực tiếp về sự hối tiếc. Xem cảnh báo bên dưới.
Hối hận vì hành động
Chủ động duy trì tình bạn
8,0%
Không có khảo sát nào đo lường trực tiếp hối tiếc của việc duy trì một tình bạn; con số ~8% được hiển thị là một đại lượng thay thế về hối-tiếc-thấp được suy diễn từ dữ liệu hài-lòng-với-bạn-bè (Survey Center on American Life 2021), không phải một tỷ lệ hối tiếc đo được
Người trưởng thành Mỹ báo cáo tích cực duy trì tình bạn thân thiết
hồi cứu, 12 tháng qua
Hối hận vì không hành động
Để tình bạn phai nhạt
47%
47% người Mỹ báo cáo đã mất liên lạc với ít nhất một vài người bạn trong năm qua — một tỷ lệ phổ biến về hành vi 'mất liên lạc' (Survey Center on American Life 2021), không phải một tỷ lệ hối tiếc đo được; chính khảo sát đó không hỏi câu hỏi hối tiếc nào
Người trưởng thành Mỹ, đại diện toàn quốc
12 tháng qua (khảo sát thực hiện 2021)
% hối tiếc về lựa chọn này
Chủ động duy trì tình bạnĐể tình bạn phai nhạt
8,0%47%
inaction dominates — Không hành động chiếm ưu thế — hầu hết hối tiếc vì đã không hành động.
Quyết định liên quan
Các quyết định tương tự về mặt ngữ nghĩa — cùng lĩnh vực, đánh đổi khác nhau.
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.
Nguồn: hành động
Sổ cái xác nhận
Mỗi con số dưới đây là những gì mỗi nguồn đã báo cáo, cùng với trích dẫn nguyên văn mà chúng tôi dựa vào và cách chúng tôi đưa ra con số của mình. Nhấp vào bất kỳ liên kết nào để xác minh trực tiếp.
[1]Survey Center on American Life / American Enterprise Institute — The State of American Friendship: Change, Challenges, and Loss↗ 1 other entry
Nghiên cứu chính
51% of Americans report being very or completely satisfied with their number of friends; only 17% are not too or not at all satisfied
Trích đoạn
“"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."
”
Dữ liệu nguồn từ
2021-10-05
Truy cập
2026-05-13
Tính toán
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).
Nguồn: không hành động
Sổ cái xác nhận
Mỗi con số dưới đây là những gì mỗi nguồn đã báo cáo, cùng với trích dẫn nguyên văn mà chúng tôi dựa vào và cách chúng tôi đưa ra con số của mình. Nhấp vào bất kỳ liên kết nào để xác minh trực tiếp.
2/3 nguồn được xác minh độc lập đúng từng chữ so với nguồn được trích dẫn
[1]Survey Center on American Life / American Enterprise Institute — The State of American Friendship: Change, Challenges, and Loss
Đã xác minh
↗ 1 other entry
Nghiên cứu chính
Nearly half (47%) of Americans report having lost touch with at least a few friends over the past 12 months
Trích đoạn
“"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."
”
Dữ liệu nguồn từ
2021-10-05
Truy cập
2026-05-13
Xác minh
Trích đoạn đã được tải lại độc lập và xác nhận đúng từng chữ so với nguồn được trích dẫn trong quá trình kiểm định căn cứ của chúng tôi.
Tính toán
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
Nghiên cứu chính
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)
Trích đoạn
“[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.]
”
Dữ liệu nguồn từ
2021-12-01
Truy cập
2026-05-13
Tính toán
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
Đã xác minh
Nguồn tham khảo
Allowing friendships to slip is a recurring theme among palliative care patients in their final weeks
Trích đoạn
“"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."
”
Dữ liệu nguồn từ
2012-01-01
Truy cập
2026-05-13
Xác minh
Trích đoạn đã được tải lại độc lập và xác nhận đúng từng chữ so với nguồn được trích dẫn trong quá trình kiểm định căn cứ của chúng tôi.
Tính toán
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.
Lưu ý
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.
