Tracing Back Our Decisions: Fuzzy-trace Theory
Written by Vince Jasper Dizon
Decision-making and judgments are basic parts of our lives. From relatively harmless questions like “Should I try a new seasoning on this dish?” to weightier questions such as “What is morally just?”, decisions and judgments are everywhere. In the face of uncertainty, how do we make these judgments? Scholars have wrestled with this question for years. Numerous models attempt to shed light on the matter; one of them is known as the “fuzzy-trace theory” (FTT).
FTT considers how information is learned and recalled (Edelson & Reyna, 2021; Reyna, 2012a). FTT asserts that individuals represent information in terms of verbatim (detailed) representations and gist (essential) representations. When deciding between options, these representations might indicate an evaluation of risk and an evaluation of fundamental differences, respectively. For example, imagine you have a choice between getting one cookie for sure, or a 50% chance of getting three cookies. A verbatim representation of this choice would be as follows: a 100% chance of getting one cookie, or a 50% chance of getting either three cookies or zero cookies. The verbatim representation captures the details of the gamble. Meanwhile, a gist representation would be that you’re either getting something or nothing. A gist representation doesn’t capture the detail of a verbatim representation, but it does capture the “meaning” of the possible outcomes. Gist representations like these go on to fuel “fuzzy” but sophisticated intuition, and they draw from all manner of experience (Reyna, 2012a). As we grow older, we develop both, but, perhaps surprisingly, come to rely on gist-based intuition more than verbatim-based representations (Weldon et al., 2016).
When you think of intuition, you may assume it to be unreliable. After all, we often think of intuition as being based on little more than a gut feeling. However, according to FTT, gists aren’t low-level or mindless (Reyna, 2012a). Rather, they are based on the essence of the information. Indeed, experts have been shown to utilize this “fuzzy” thinking, demonstrating better decision-making than novices who might process more (but not necessarily relevant) information (Reyna & Lloyd, 2006). Gist-based representations capture what something means to us (Reyna, 2012a). We look at the people and world around us, try to understand them, and make decisions based on those understandings. Gists are subjective, and thus can be shaped by anything that can influence interpretation (Reyna, 2012b). Knowledge, culture, and life experience are just a handful of the many possible factors that influence interpretation. Whatever your gist representations might be based on, they go on to fuel your fuzzy but meaningful intuition (Reyna, 2012a). The application of this intuition is an important step in our decision-making (Edelson & Reyna, 2021), helping us understand the world around us. As a simple example, consider reading a story. Remembering the words isn’t the same as understanding the words—to understand a story, we need to draw on knowledge of what the words in the story mean (Reyna, 2012a). In the case of metaphors, we might even need to ignore the literal words and look for meaning beyond the pages (for example, “hitting the books” is a metaphor for studying). As important as gists might be, they have their pitfalls.
As people grow older, they become more susceptible to phenomena known as developmental reversals: cases in which the usual expectation of mental development takes a step backwards (Reyna, 2012a). Consider the following statements: “Paul is taller than Harry, and Harry is taller than Sam; is Paul taller than Sam?” (Reyna, 2012a, p. 347). It has been observed that young children can successfully solve these kinds of problems (Reyna & Brainerd, 1990; Reyna & Kiernan, 1994). In this case, Paul is, in fact, taller than Sam. If you swap out the adjectives for different statements though, your intuition might start to lead you astray. Consider the following: Paul is a friend of Harry’s, and Harry is a friend of Sam’s; is Paul a friend of Sam’s? (Reyna, 2012a). Even if you puzzled it out successfully, it might be that a part of you said “Yes, Paul is a friend of Sam’s.” This, of course, isn’t necessarily the case. Compared to younger children, older children are more likely to get that second question wrong. Younger children haven’t developed knowledge and life experience to interfere with their reasoning (Reyna, 2012a). This illustrates that gists, as helpful as they are, can contribute to distorted reasoning too. In the case of the above problems, a verbatim representation may have served better.
FTT is one of many models that try to explain the way we think, emphasizing two sides of mental processing: facts and meaning. Intuition, according to fuzzy-trace theory, cuts to the heart of a matter. It might be thanks to your intuition that you can think as quickly as you do, or come to a conclusion about questions to which there is no easy answer. However, as useful as your intuition might be, don’t forget that it may also lead you astray. Meaning is derived from our understanding of the facts, and if we don’t understand the facts, where does that leave the meaning? Whether you’re leaning on facts or listening to your intuition, make sure you’ve got a solid foundation of knowledge to begin with!
If you enjoyed this blog post, check out our other blog posts!
References
Edelson, S. M., & Reyna, V. F. (2021). How fuzzy-trace theory predicts development of risky decision making, with novel extensions to culture and reward sensitivity. Developmental Review, 62, 100986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2021.100986
Reyna, V. F. (2012a). A new intuitionism: Meaning, memory, and development in fuzzy-trace theory. Judgment and Decision Making, 7(3), 332-359.
Reyna, V. F. (2012b). Risk perception and communication in vaccination decisions: A fuzzy-trace theory approach. Vaccine, 30(25), 3790-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.11.070
Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (1990). Fuzzy processing in transitivity development. Annals of Operations Research, 23(1), 37-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02204838
Reyna, V. F., & Kiernan, B. (1994). Development of gist versus verbatim memory in sentence recognition: Effects of lexical familiarity, semantic content, encoding instructions, and retention interval. Developmental Psychology, 30(2), 178-191. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.30.2.178
Reyna, V. F., & Lloyd, F. J. (2006). Physician decision making and cardiac risk: Effects of knowledge, risk perception, risk tolerance, and fuzzy processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 12(3), 179-195. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.12.3.179
Weldon, R. B., Corbin, J. C., Garavito, D. M. N., & Reyna, V. F. (2016). Gist is sophisticated yet simple: Fuzzy-trace theory’s developmental approach to individual differences in judgment and decision making. In Toplak, M. E., & Weller, J. (Eds.), Individual differences in judgement and decision-making: A developmental perspective (1st ed., pp. 67-84). Routledge.
Disclaimer
The blog posts are for informational and educational purposes only. The posts should not be considered as any type of advice (medical, mental health, legal, and/or religious advice). All blog posts have been researched, written, and edited by the undergraduate students and alumni of the Lifespan Cognition Lab. As a teaching and research-based lab, we encourage all lab members to help make knowledge more accessible to all communities through these posts.
