The power of false remembering



Here is the explanation from Hall and Johansson:

explain the reasons behind their choices.

even offering “reasons” for their “choice”.


Importantly, the effects of choice blindness go beyond snap judgments.
Depending on what our volunteers say in response to the mismatched
could change their future preferences to the extent that they come to
prefer the previously rejected alternative. This gives us a rare
behind the formation of many everyday preferences.


might already be cured.



4 Responses to The power of false remembering

  1. Peltaire says:

    Parallel to this test is another study that shows that human beings almost always defend, or protect with reason, the structures they create, even when those structures are clearly ineffective in producing the result the creator intends.
    A person prefers one face over the other, and when shown the face again, they argue for their choice with reasons. The reasoning indicates that they actually did see a difference in the one they chose and the one handed and it triggered them into validating.
    The illusion in both tests is that a human “prefers” anything. Preference is not static. Any reason for choice is mostly based on past experience, however, this is not a choice. This is a decision, which differs from a choice. A decision broken down, DECIDE means to kill off the alternative.
    So, even when the individual picks one, they are most likely not picking the one they prefer, but the alternative to the one they do not prefer.
    Awesome study. THanks.

  2. Gary Wolf says:

    As a reader of Overcoming Bias and Less Wrong, I find studies like this interesting as pointers to a class of problems with attempts to become more rational. Reason is a set of tools, a means to an end; behind probability calculations are utility functions, to use the native language of OB/LW. But these types of studies show influence going the other direction: reason is not just a method of achieving aims, but a mode of acquiring aims.

  3. Annali Swanepoel says:

    Surely one of the biggest problems in counseling is for the counselee to find security/certainty/safety in his/her own faculties. This type of proof that ‘YOU DON’T KNOW YOUR OWN MIND’ defies the objective of counseling! How ethical can this possibly be?!!!

  4. Kudo Shinichi says:

    Choice blindness maybe a bit unfair to the volunteer in this research. Of course, we are imperfect in every way. How can they realize that the researchers did???

Leave a Reply



