Answer:
Was visiting a store he rarely went to just for a change of pace.
Explanation:
A jury hears a case in which a man was severely injured during a robbery at a grocery store. Given what you know about counterfactual thinking, the jury is likely to award the most money to compensate the man for his injuries when they learn that the man was visiting a store he rarely went to just for a change of pace.
Counterfactual thinking is the tendency to create alternatives to a life event that has already occurred. Based on this concept, the judge is likely to award the most money to compensate the man in a bid to want to undo the harm that has already been done even though that the man rarely visited the store is not the main trust or a fact in the case.
