Choice-Supportive Misremembering: A New Taxonomy and Review

Abstract

Although the literature on the influence of memory on decisions is well developed, research on the effects of decision making on memory is rather sparse and scattered. Choice-supportive misremembering (i.e., misremembering choice-related information that boosts the chosen option and/or demotes the foregone options) has been observed in several studies and has the potential to affect future choices. Nonetheless, no attempt has been made to review the relevant literature, categorize the different types of choice-supportive misremembering observed, and critically appraise the existing evidence and proposed explanations. Thus, starting from a new theoretically motivated and empirically grounded taxonomy, we review the current research. Our taxonomy classifies choice-supportive misremembering into four conceptually distinct types: misattribution is when information is attributed to the wrong source, fact distortion when the facts are remembered in a distorted manner, false memory when items that were not part of the original decision scenarios are remembered as presented and, finally, selective forgetting is when information is selectively forgotten. After assessing the impact of various potentially moderating factors, we evaluate the evidence for each type of misremembering and conclude that the support for the phenomenon is solid in relation to misattribution when recognition memory is assessed, but significantly weaker for the other three types, and when other memory tests are used to assess memory. Finally, we review the cognitive and emotional explanations proposed for choice-supportive misremembering in the light of the available evidence and identify the main gaps in the current knowledge and the more promising avenues for future research.

Delivering genome sequencing for rapid genetic diagnosis in critically ill children: parent and professional views, experiences and challenges

“…Also the retrospective nature of data collection and the time that had passed since being offered RGS (1–4 years) may have created a recall bias for parents. In addition, the parents we interviewed all chose to have RGS and the positive views about the test may reflect “choice-supportive bias”, whereby a person recalls their choice more positively simply because it was the choice they had already made [ 38 ]. Combining the findings of the parent and professional interviews, as we have done in this study, could decrease the impact of the individual cognitive biases of the parents we interviewed as the professionals have provided a wider perspective on how parents view RGS.…”

Examining mechanisms for gender differences in admission to intensive care units

“…But it is difficult to imagine a practical and direct way to assess this potentially important mechanism. Choice‐supportive bias makes self‐report of triage personnel rationale unreliable . While seemingly attractive, direct evaluation of triage decisions is fraught with its own problems.…”

What Remains in Mind? Effectiveness and Efficiency of Explainers at Conveying Information

“…In general, the different emotions evoked by dissonant messages might affect processing of information partly in opposite directions. As anger seems to be a determining element of dissonance, it is conceivable that individuals confronted with dissonant messages may turn away from content during reception, or selectively recall or forget information in order to resolve the uncomfortable state as an expression of motivated reasoning (Lind, Visentini, Mäntylä, & Del Missier, 2017;Russell & Jones, 1980; see also Taber & Lodge, 2006). Therefore, I hypothesized: H5: Feelings of dissonance negatively moderate the relation between the medium and exposure time as well as between the medium and the recall of information.…”