Working Paper: CEPR ID: DP17683
Authors: Thomas Graeber; Christopher Roth; Florian Zimmermann
Abstract: For most decisions, we rely on information encountered over the course of days, months or years. We consume this information in various forms, including abstract summaries of multiple data points -- statistics -- and contextualized anecdotes about individual instances -- stories. This paper proposes that we do not always have access to the full wealth of our accumulated information, and that the information type -- story versus statistic -- is a central determinant of selective memory. In controlled experiments we show that the effect of information on beliefs decays rapidly and exhibits a pronounced story-statistic gap: the average impact of stories on beliefs fades by 33% over the course of a day, but by 73% for statistics. Consistent with a model of similarity and interference in memory, prompting contextual associations with statistics improves recall. A series of mechanism experiments highlights that the lower similarity of stories to interfering information is the key driving force behind the story-statistic gap.
Keywords: memory; belief formation; stories; narratives; statistical information
JEL Codes: No JEL codes provided
Edges that are evidenced by causal inference methods are in orange, and the rest are in light blue.
| Cause | Effect |
|---|---|
| Higher crosssimilarity with irrelevant traces (C59) | Retrieval failure for statistics (C89) |
| Stories (Y60) | Stronger belief retention (C92) |
| Statistics (C89) | Weaker belief retention (C92) |
| Contextual associations with statistics (C10) | Improved recall (Y50) |
| Stories (Y60) | Higher recall accuracy (C52) |
| Statistics (C89) | Lower recall accuracy (C59) |