Resulting is a term coming from professional poker for a common cognitive bias. It refers to judging the value of a decision not on how reasoned or risky a play actually was, but on the results following from the decision. In any situation this can lead to poor future decision making, but in situations where you must make a number of risks spread out over a period of time, it has the potential to lead to exceptionally poor outcomes.
Poker is a good place to see this in action, as the game requires that one takes risks with monetary consequences every few minutes. If one were to determine that wise risks were too risky after a few unlucky (but critically, wisely chosen) losses, one would quickly become too risk averse. On the other hand, a few lucky wins, viewed uncritically, might cause one to take more risks, potentially to the point of bankruptcy.
Attending to outcomes is a good source of knowledge, and sometimes it is the best source you have. If you find a new type of berry growing in your yard, and eating it sends you to the hospital, you should not eat it again tomorrow. But sometimes our other sources of knowledge can and should overrule outcomes. Poker is a good example, as a string of bad luck obviously does not change the underlying odds; less certain fields, such as investment in the stock market, are presumably riper fields for resulting.
Resulting may lead to superstition and magical thinking, but it is also apparent in less obvious settings, such as avoiding a known food after it made you sick only once, avoiding risky plays in sports if they fail once, avoiding the flu vaccine because you did catch the flu last time you got it, or talking on the phone while driving because you haven't crashed yet.
It is also worth noting that resulting is something that is commonly rhetorically acceptable, and often encouraged. If someone asks you to think of the worst decision that you've made, you are expected to think of the one with the worst outcome, not the one with the worst reasoning behind it.
Resulting is arguably a specific application of the hindsight bias, wherein one assumes that the way things turned out was obvious and predictable. It is also closely related to the idea that correlation is not causation, although in this cause, we are talking about causes; resulting might be paraphrased as 'causation may be varied in correlation'.