Selective Memory Can Be Desirable

Christopher Nolan’s Memento (2000) dramatizes the problem of deciding in absence of or with very poor memory. Ease at which memory will be accessed, accuracy of memories, association of stimuli with memories they lead to, will all influence the information that a decision maker will use. Decision governance can to some extent influence what is recalled, how that is related to the choice at hand, and where attention is drawn.

This text is part of the series on the design of decision governance. Decision governance are guidelines, rules, processes designed to improve how people make decisions. It can help ensure that the right information is used, that that information is correctly analyzed, that participants in decision making understand it, and that they use it before they make a decision. Find all texts on decision governance here.

Information can be provided in a decision situation so as to influence what the decision maker may be recalling from memory. For example, we may want to highlight a specific type of risk that different options mitigate differently, and emphasize mitigation strategies which may work with analogous risks that we assume the decision maker faced in past decisions.

If the decision maker perceives similarity between current and past decision situations, they will more likely try to recall pros and cons of past choices. They will draw on experience. They will do so less if the decision situation seems new, that is, has few cues that relate to their past experience. Consequently, decision governance may be such as to help increase that similarity, or reduce perceived similarity if recall is not desirable. We may want to either make the decision situation appear more or less similar to experiences we assumed the decision maker had.

Different people are able to recall prior experiences to different levels of detail, and may need different time to do so (Dougherty et al., 2003). In other words, time given in a decision situation needs to account for desirable or undesirable effects of recall of past experiences on the quality of the decision.

Related to memory, emotional reactions to past decisions seem to be influencing future ones, perceived to be similar, or having cues that recall the memory of past emotional reactions.

“The [somatic marker] theory argues that affective somatic states associated with prior decision outcomes are used to guide future decisions. For example, when a choice followed by a bad outcome occurs, an affective reaction becomes associated with that choice. Once the affective reaction is sufficiently well established, the reaction occurs before a choice is made. Anticipation of a bad outcome before the bad choice is made prevents the bad choice and leads, instead, to a better choice. Thus, a somatic marker of good and bad options guides and sustains optimal deci- sion making. According to this theory, optimal decision making is not simply the result of rational, cognitive calculation of gains and losses but, rather, is based on the good or bad emotional reactions to prior outcomes of choices.” (Hinson et al., 2002)

For decision governance, one implication is that it is important to influence decision makers’ perception of outcomes, be it to make them appear as more positive, or negative than they may be, and thereby influence future choices they make in similar decision situations. The other implication is that the more we know about how they perceived similar outcomes to those that are likely in the current decision situation, the less difficult should be to anticipate their choices.

What is the role of memory in decision making?

Memory plays an essential role in decision-making by guiding the evaluation of alternatives, shaping future expectations, and influencing behavioral strategies. The following outlines key roles.

Retrieving Past Experiences to Guide Decisions: Memory provides a database of previous outcomes that individuals use to evaluate current options and predict future consequences. Value-based decision-making relies heavily on episodic memory to retrieve relevant experiences and form judgments (Duncan & Shohamy, 2016; Weber et al., 1995).
Facilitating Inferences and Generalizations: Memory supports the formation of general rules or patterns based on individual experiences, which are then applied to new situations. This ability to infer outcomes from previous events is crucial for decision-making under uncertainty (Addis et al., 2007).
Supporting Long-Term Planning via Episodic Future Thinking: Individuals mentally simulate future scenarios by projecting themselves into hypothetical situations based on past experiences. This cognitive mechanism—called episodic future thinking—enhances the ability to anticipate long-term outcomes and informs complex decision-making (Addis et al., 2007; Poldrack et al., 2001).
Learning and Adaptation from Feedback: Memory enables learning by recording the outcomes of past decisions, allowing individuals to adapt strategies over time. This feedback loop is critical in environments where decision rules must evolve in response to changing conditions (Poldrack et al., 2001; Weber et al., 1995).
Influencing Risk and Reward Evaluations: Episodic memory shapes the perception of risk and reward by associating current decisions with past emotional experiences. Positive memories may encourage risk-taking, while negative memories can lead to risk aversion (Duncan & Shohamy, 2016).

What strategies can be used to influence the role of memory in decision making?

Contextual Priming: Exposure to specific environmental cues triggers relevant memories, shaping decisions by activating associations with past experiences (Duncan & Shohamy, 2016; Weber et al., 1995).
Emotional State Influence: Emotional congruence (consistency between a person’s emotional state with the broader situations and circumstances being experienced by the persons at that time) influences memory retrieval, with individuals more likely to recall memories that align with their current emotional state, affecting decisions (Weber et al., 1995; Poldrack et al., 2001).
Cognitive Load Management: Reducing cognitive load allows for better episodic memory retrieval, while excessive load causes individuals to rely on heuristics or procedural knowledge (Poldrack et al., 2001; Addis et al., 2007).
Memory Reconsolidation and Reframing: Accessing and updating memories during retrieval enables reframing past events, influencing future decisions through modified interpretations (Addis et al., 2007).
Mental Simulation and Scenario Planning: Using episodic future thinking, individuals simulate potential outcomes by projecting themselves into future scenarios based on past experiences (Addis et al., 2007; Weber et al., 1995).
Social and Environmental Cues: Context-dependent memory retrieval occurs when specific settings or social interactions trigger memories, guiding decisions in similar future contexts (Weber et al., 1995).

More details on each are given below.

Contextual Priming
1. Priming involves activating specific memories through environmental cues. This strategy works by creating associations between stimuli and experiences, which influence decisions by triggering related memories without conscious awareness.
2. Example: When entering a store playing music associated with previous positive experiences, customers may feel inclined to make purchases. In financial markets, news headlines that mirror past events can prime traders to recall relevant patterns and make decisions based on those memories (Duncan & Shohamy, 2016; Weber et al., 1995).
Emotional State Influence
1. Emotions influence memory encoding and retrieval, with individuals more likely to recall events that match their current mood. This selective retrieval can shape decision-making by enhancing access to mood-congruent memories.
2. Example: A person considering whether to revisit a travel destination may focus on positive memories from a past trip if they are in a good mood. Conversely, in a negative emotional state, they may recall negative aspects and avoid the destination (Weber et al., 1995; Poldrack et al., 2001).
Cognitive Load Management
1. High cognitive load limits the availability of episodic memory, forcing individuals to rely on heuristics or procedural knowledge. Reducing cognitive load allows better retrieval of past experiences, improving decision quality.
2. Example: During strategic meetings, limiting the number of agenda items can enhance participants’ ability to retrieve relevant past experiences. When overwhelmed, individuals often rely on simpler rules, such as “buy low, sell high,” instead of nuanced judgments (Poldrack et al., 2001; Addis et al., 2007).
Memory Reconsolidation and Reframing
1. Memories are malleable during retrieval, allowing them to be updated through reconsolidation. This enables individuals to reframe negative experiences positively, influencing future decisions.
2. Example: After a failed project, a team may conduct a review where negative outcomes are reframed as learning opportunities. The modified memory encourages more adaptive behavior in future projects (Addis et al., 2007).
Mental Simulation and Scenario Planning
1. Episodic future thinking involves mentally simulating potential outcomes based on past experiences. This strategy strengthens memory-based inferences, enhancing planning and decision-making under uncertainty.
2. Example: Executives preparing for high-stakes negotiations may engage in role-playing scenarios, drawing on similar past experiences. These simulations improve their ability to anticipate responses and refine negotiation strategies (Addis et al., 2007; Weber et al., 1995).
Social and Environmental Cues
1. Context-dependent memory retrieval can be triggered by social or environmental cues, enhancing access to specific experiences relevant to decision-making.
2. Example: A manager reviewing a team’s performance might revisit the same conference room where key decisions were previously discussed. This setting activates relevant memories, shaping their evaluation and future decisions (Weber et al., 1995).

References and Further Reading

Weber, Elke U., and Eric J. Johnson. “Mindful judgment and decision making.” Annual review of psychology 60.1 (2009): 53-85.
Dougherty, Michael RP, and Jennifer Hunter. “Probability judgment and subadditivity: The role of working memory capacity and constraining retrieval.” Memory & cognition 31.6 (2003): 968-982.
Hinson, John M., Tina L. Jameson, and Paul Whitney. “Somatic markers, working memory, and decision making.” Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 2.4 (2002): 341-353.
Damasio, Antonio R. “The somatic marker hypothesis and the possible functions of the prefrontal cortex.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 351.1346 (1996): 1413-1420.
Mar, Raymond A., et al. “Memory and comprehension of narrative versus expository texts: A meta-analysis.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 28 (2021): 732-749.
Addis, D. R., Wong, A. T., & Schacter, D. L. (2007). Remembering the past and imagining the future: Common and distinct neural substrates during event construction. Neuropsychologia, 45(7), 1363–1377.
Duncan, K. D., & Shohamy, D. (2016). Memory states influence value-based decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(11), 1420–1426.
Poldrack, R. A., Clark, J., Paré-Blagoev, E. J., et al. (2001). Interactive memory systems in the human brain. Nature, 414(6863), 546–550.
Weber, E. U., Goldstein, W., & Barlas, S. (1995). And let us not forget memory: The role of memory processes in judgment and choice. In J. Busemeyer, R. Hastie, & D. L. Medin (Eds.), Decision Making from a Cognitive Perspective: Advances in Research and Theory (Vol. 32, pp. 33–82). San Diego: Academic Press.
Biderman, Natalie, Akram Bakkour, and Daphna Shohamy. “What are memories for? The hippocampus bridges past experience with future decisions.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences 24.7 (2020): 542-556.
Biderman, Natalie, and Daphna Shohamy. “Memory and decision making interact to shape the value of unchosen options.” Nature communications 12.1 (2021): 4648.